I can think of three fairly big christian boards which have banned all discussion of UR:
CARM
Worthyboards
Bibleforums.org
Currently, I am posting at bibleforums.org, where one of the head mods, "project peter" recently asserted that UR is a damnable doctrine and that Christian Universalists are not relly Christians. When I asked him to explain his reasoning, he basically said that he would not waste his time explaining himself to me. What is wrong with these people?
Veiled. Ask him if he has a revelation of what Colossians 1:20 is really saying, not what he's always been taught. If he blows you off, then he's yet to be revealed, and he is just unable to see it. Someday he will.
He's not going to answer any of my questions.
Then to me, the things he's said, that attitude and the way he's blown you off about this, IMO, does tell us something about him being veiled or revealed. At first I wrote 'blind', then figured I'd be nicer and say veiled :laughing7:.
http://www.christcenteredforums.com/forum/index.php
This site banned UR (at least temporarily) last year. When I asked about it they left my post but edited it to say "controversial topic" wherever I said "Universal Reconciliation" :dontknow:
B, I started to say "unbelievable", but then I remembered God's in control of this, He has a plan, so I guess we can believe it...although we just shake our heads...:pitiful:
I spent 6 months posting at bibleforums.org, trying to bring up UR any subtle way I could think of. Had several conversations with threebigrocks and some of the other mods over there... they weren't seeing it. Eventually I was fully banned, account deleted, at least they left some of my posts up though. Its funny - my main point for going there was to learn & discuss it, as I was looking for any holes in UR. All it did was strengthen my belief in UR, especially when they refuse to even talk about it. It is silly really.
You are right it is unbelievable (a miracle) that they don't see it, but God has blinded them so they won't see.
Think of it this way: when you are trying to open someone's eyes - you are running up against God's will. You are hoping to "will" them into seeing, yet it is God's will that they be blinded. Who do you think is going to win that battle of the wills? :winkgrin:
I try not to get frustrated by it because I know it is God's will - but it still does frustrate me.
Legoman
Apocatastasis, if you don't mind me asking, what's your username over on bibleforums?
Thanks,
Legoman
:cloud9: You know, for the life of me I don't understand why UR is such a big threatening deal to so many. So what if God saves all? Shouldn't that be a good thing, and if we could have any wish wouldn't WE want all men to be saved? Are we more righteous than God? Their reasoning is just so foreign to me and from what I've read about some of you all's posts about your battles with it/them, irrational too. My hats off to ya......Blessings....
There are some nice folks on biblefourms...but I was also harked down by the mods and practicly "suspended" til the mods "straightened me out". They accused me of trying to just start trouble and "play christian"...
Sadly, that is the type of judgemental attitude that pushes people away from church. When will people understand that THINKING about your belifs and examining them...is not bad. Nor is at least hearing another persons side..and letting them say it freely.
One can have strong belifs and still be able to listen in love and keep in mind that NO ONE can understand God and his ways fully...to play otherwise, is arrogant and not christ like
Quote from: NinjaWizards777 on January 23, 2009, 07:47:35 AM
There are some nice folks on biblefourms...but I was also harked down by the mods and practicly "suspended" til the mods "straightened me out". They accused me of trying to just start trouble and "play christian"...
Sadly, that is the type of judgemental attitude that pushes people away from church. When will people understand that THINKING about your belifs and examining them...is not bad. Nor is at least hearing another persons side..and letting them say it freely.
One can have strong belifs and still be able to listen in love and keep in mind that NO ONE can understand God and his ways fully...to play otherwise, is arrogant and not christ like
They asked me what church I belonged to and I replied, "the church of the Firstborn."
They didn't like that answer. Oh well...
Quote from: Apocatastasis on January 23, 2009, 03:21:46 AM
"project peter" recently asserted that UR is a damnable doctrine and that Christian Universalists are not relly Christians.
A ray of light. Usually we are called heretics. Now only a damnable doctrine :laughing7:
QuoteWhen I asked him to explain his reasoning, he basically said that he would not waste his time explaining himself to me. What is wrong with these people?
I don't know the person or the board but if PP usually is very active with long posts and now doesn't want to answer your posts he is clearly with his back to the wall. If UR is so simply wrong it's his
duty as a self proclaimed true believer to debunk all your questions so that 1000's of readers of his forum don't fall in teh UR trap.
But he knows he can't wriggle himself out of many UR verses and logic. So he attacks you instead or UR.
Overhere we call that playing on the person (instead of the ball) => sign of weakness
Quote from: Cardinal on January 23, 2009, 07:37:12 AM
:cloud9: You know, for the life of me I don't understand why UR is such a big threatening deal to so many. So what if God saves all? Shouldn't that be a good thing, and if we could have any wish wouldn't WE want all men to be saved? Are we more righteous than God? Their reasoning is just so foreign to me and from what I've read about some of you all's posts about your battles with it/them, irrational too. My hats off to ya......Blessings....
I think their reasoning is actully very normal. (normal behavior usally is bad)
- All non UR denominations have the 2 strong pillars of some sort of elect and hell. UR doesn't
- It proves they where wrong. Not only on some minor point but the whole message. -> makes them look stupid.
- It's unfair of God to give grace to all the bad guys.
- It's unfair the bad guys didn't work for it but still recieve the same grace as they do.
Basicly it's about greed.
They are the early workers in Matthew 20:1-16 UR people are those of the last hour.
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 23, 2009, 08:22:51 AM
Quote from: Cardinal on January 23, 2009, 07:37:12 AM
:cloud9: You know, for the life of me I don't understand why UR is such a big threatening deal to so many. So what if God saves all? Shouldn't that be a good thing, and if we could have any wish wouldn't WE want all men to be saved? Are we more righteous than God? Their reasoning is just so foreign to me and from what I've read about some of you all's posts about your battles with it/them, irrational too. My hats off to ya......Blessings....
I think their reasoning is actully very normal. (normal behavior usally is bad)
- All non UR denominations have the 2 strong pillars of some sort of elect and hell. UR doesn't
- It proves they where wrong. Not only on some minor point but the who message. -> makes them look stupid.
- It's unfair of God to give grace to all the bad guys.
- It's unfair the bad guys didn't work for it but still recieve the same grace as they do.
Basicly it's about greed.
They are the early workers in Matthew 20:1-16 UR people are those of the last hour.
A-M-E-N ! WhiteWings
legoman,
I post as Old Earther. I remember seeing you around.
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 23, 2009, 08:08:31 AM
A ray of light. Usually we are called heretics. Now only a damnable doctrine :laughing7:
:cloud9: :mrflo:
PS. And I was just getting used to, "heretic"...... :mshock:
Old Earther aka Apocatastasis...
Ah cool! I remember reading your posts and seeing the UR thoughts you were presenting. I know I added you on my "friend list" about a week before I was banned. Good to meet you again.
Unfortunately I was eventually not as subtle and took to pressing the UR topic directly with the mods, which they didn't like. They just didn't want UR discussed at all unless it was to bash it and "disprove" it. So it was bye bye account for me, even though I was polite and respectful in my discussions. I can't even see any of the posts I wrote in contro any more because they are no longer accessible to me. Oh well.
Cheers and good luck with your stealth mission :bigGrin:
Legoman
Folks,
Below is the exchange between Project Peter and I. It is a bit long, but very revealing and entertaining!
Me: My second question is to Project Peter. Sir, what is the reasoning behind your assertion that Christian Universalism is a damnable heresy? Are you suggesting that Christian Universalists are not really Christians?
Thanks and God bless!
PP: That is exactly what I am saying... thought I was pretty clear with that when I wrote words such as "damnable doctrine." Again... is that so hard to understand that you still can't grasp what I am thinking and saying? Not sure that I can make it any more clear for you than that eh?
Me: I asked you explain your reasoning. Can you do that?
So if a person believe all the essentials of the Christian and also believes that all people will eventually be saved by faith in Christ, that person is not a Christian. That is truly bewildering to hear you say that. Please explain if you can.
PP: No... I have seen what happens when folks explain their reasoning to you. It will consist of another twenty post back and forth which I honestly have no desire to do with you. That it bewilders you is not at all a surprise to me.
Me: I thought people go to hell because they reject Christ, not because they believe Christ will save all the sinners he came to save. Your assertion that Christian Universalists are not Christian is absurd. Perhaps you don't want to explain your reasoning because there is no reasoning behind your assertion?
PP: Actually... your reply is why I have no desire to discuss it with you. You don't have any desire to discuss it with me either... you simply want to go on and on and on to make your point. I don't honestly care to hear your point beyond what you have already said.
Me: My point is simply that a christian can believe that Christ will save all in due time and still be a christian. How can you reasonably dispute this? Please explain.
PP: You know... I'm not sure what part of "I have no desire to discuss this with you" is so hard to get ahold of... but let me put it this way. You have plenty of threads started in this forum and as folks explain things to you those explanations just lead to another twenty explanations until you finally bore of whatever it is that you are doing. I'm not going to go that round with you as others have done. If David would like to do this once again with you then he can certainly play along. I'm not inclined to do so because your track record at this sort of stinks.
You are Universalist as is obvious and you aren't nearly as slick as you appear to think you are. You push and poke and constantly stay on the line of UR even though we have the rules that we do in place. It really is getting tiring as is the constant threads we have in here with you. It is not that ammusing any longer and the moderators have been quite longsuffering with you.
Me: Aside from asking you to clarify something that you said on the subject, I merely noted the distinction between two types of universalism (Unitarian and Christian). The only other thing I said on the subject was that the universalists who insist that the Greek word aionios does not mean "eternal" are wrong. What's the problem?
PP: Let me rephrase it then. You are knocking on the universalist door.
The problem I have explained several times already. You are the problem as you have exhibited the whole time you have been here. You have been warned numerous times in your very short time here. You have more threads in here, during that time, than a lot of long time members have had in their long time here. We are not going to debate the rules with you in here. We are not going to spend countless post in here justifying those rules. You don't have to like the rules as liking them is not a requirement. However you do have to follow them. You understand that don't you?
Me: My question for you has nothing to do with the board rules. It has to do with your outrageous comment that a person can't be a christian and also believe that Christ will save all. You understand that, don't you?
PP: When someone says that they are not interested in discussing something with you... what does that mean?
A. They are not interested.
B. They are not interested.
C. They are not interested.
Pick one of those... I promise you that you won't be wrong. Do you undestand that?
Me: I can be sarcastic too.
So, is it a requirement for moderators here to lack the ability to give a reasoned response to simple questions?
PP: Yes... that is one of the leading indicators with us that a person will be a wonderful moderator.
Me: Alright, I'll let this go. It is disappointing though.
PP: Now you are understanding.
Me: Yes, I understand that you are unable to defend your beliefs and that you are unable to effectively counter the heresy of universal salvation. I understand that you feel intimidated by this doctrine and that you fear it being discussed on the open boads because of your inability to reason against it. You see, PP, I am able to argue efectively against UR. Unlike you, I am not afraid of confronting this particular heresy. This board's policy with resepct to this issue is downright pathetic and will only pique the curiosity of young Christians. Just use your common sense. If you tell someone that a doctrine is not permitted to be debated, don't you think that they will want to know what is so special about said doctrine?
PP: Last time that I checked... you were not the owner of the board nor a board administrator who determines the pathetic rules of the board. Until that time... those are the rules whether you like the rules or think them pathetic. You only have to abide by them.
Now that we have that settled let me make this clear to you. Your attitude is going to make your time here very short. Either begin to chill out and abide by the rules or find a forum that you find less pathetic.
"Make it known that you are right about everything, and you are just because you say you are...no need for discussion"....seems to be the creed of american christianity anymore
Pathetic Peter sounds like a cheerful and understanding guy :winkgrin:
Quote from: Apocatastasis on January 23, 2009, 05:48:08 PM
Me: I can be sarcastic too.
So, is it a requirement for moderators here to lack the ability to give a reasoned response to simple questions?
PP: Yes... that is one of the leading indicators with us that a person will be a wonderful moderator.
:cloud9: This part was REALLY funny..... :laughing7:
PS. I think he fits the classic definition of irrational = refusing to let your opinions interfere with the truth.
Cardinal, what's funnier is that judging from the way that the mods there routinely evade questions, you would think PP was being serious!
Quote from: jabcat on January 23, 2009, 03:32:52 AM
Veiled. Ask him if he has a revelation of what Colossians 1:20 is really saying, not what he's always been taught. If he blows you off, then he's yet to be revealed, and he is just unable to see it. Someday he will.
Col 1:20 and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.
2 Corinthians 5:19
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.
Well clearly these verses show that God is not going to reconcile all things or the world to himself, because you have to take into account the context of the rest of the bible that says we are going to hell if we don't accept Christ as our savior. See God only does 99% of the work, but if we don't do that 1% and accept Christ, God can't do anything about it. So actually its all really up to us cause God respects our choice to choose hell. Heaven would be like hell anyway if one didn't want to be there...
Oops there I go again being sarcastic. :laughing7: I'm sure God will work that out of me at some point...
Anyway jabcat I will ask your question over at worthychristianforums (since I have an account over there that still works) and report back with the answer.
Enjoy,
Legoman
A worthyboards!
Read through this thread: http://www.tentmaker.org/forum/index.php?topic=1997.msg20716#msg20716
What's your moniker over there?
Quote from: Apocatastasis on January 23, 2009, 06:08:48 PM
Cardinal, what's funnier is that judging from the way that the mods there routinely evade questions, you would think PP was being serious!
:cloud9: From the comments, I thought he WAS being serious, as his comments line up in content with that remark! :grin: Wow.......
Quote from: Apocatastasis on January 23, 2009, 06:15:54 PM
A worthyboards!
Read through this thread: http://www.tentmaker.org/forum/index.php?topic=1997.msg20716#msg20716
What's your moniker over there?
"legoman" of course :Sparkletooth:
Yeah I was somewhat aware that worthy wasn't too friendly to UR as will, but I honestly couldn't find a clear statement in their TOS. So far I have been flying under the radar over there, haven't even talked to a mod.
Legoman
Apocatastasis,
After reading through your dialog with PP, I would just say prepare yourself to receive the big BAN notice.
I was having similar discussions with Dave and TBR in contro over there and eventually they just decided to boot me. I thought the discussions were going relatively friendly and then kind of out of the blue I received the big BAN notice. It did shock me a bit as I had never been banned from anywhere before.
Ask yourself this: is it better to be banned there, or can you stay under the radar while possibly opening some eyes & making some others aware of alternative ideas.
I know sometimes I still wish I had an account there as I see people who are obviously lost and confused that could use some help. Other times I thank God I was banned there as I no longer have the frustation of trying to hold a discussion at that board.
Anyway something to think about before you press the topic too much more.
Cheers,
Legoman
Quote from: Apocatastasis on January 23, 2009, 06:15:54 PM
A worthyboards!
Read through this thread: http://www.tentmaker.org/forum/index.php?topic=1997.msg20716#msg20716
What's your moniker over there?
I think the crew show write a script with 666 approved sentances.
The user then can compile his/hers reply by selecting a few lines....
Xel'Naga seems the one around there with sound logic.
QuoteDoctrines are simply the systematic excogitation of scripture; when scripturally sound they are a good thing, when not, they are bad. We could try answering the question again. Instead of "What doctrines must one believe to be saved?" you could ask, "What does the Bible say one must believe to be saved?" It is the same question.
From the e-mails you quoted here it sound like you started many threads.
I searched the forum and I found just one thread started by you: What doctrines must we believe to be saved?
Are the other threads deleted?
I also don't understand your ban. UR is allowed on that forum accordig to the rules.
Unorthodox teachings or discussing specific doctrines (=non Protestant) of ANY of these religions will be moved to
the "World Religions" Forum:
.....
7. Universalism of any sort to include Universal Reconciliation
Then read:
4. ANY non-Christian religion, such as Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Wicca, etc.
No UR there. Sounds like they see it as Christian like Roman Catholism
I was under the impression that UR was permitted to be discussed too, but when I asked them about it, I got this response:
QuoteUniversalism is permitted to be discussed in the World Religions forum with the goal of showing how it is unbiblical.
It is not permitted to be advanced at all on any forums.
LOL that's rich!
LOL yes you can say anything about UR as long as you only present the board's viewpoint, and don't "advance" UR.
Unfortunately asking a question about UR and presenting scripture that seems to show UR is seen as "advancing" UR.
Just to clarify - that is at bibleforums.org. I didn't see any similar statements over at worthyboards, but it may be the case there too.
Legoman
David Taylor, another head mod over at bibleforums.org, had this to say:
QuotePeter's away right now, but here's the short answer.
UR has been debunked on this forum...it's been debunked a hundred times, maybe a thousand times.
The scriptures involving it have been presented, explained and reexplained.
The reason it has become a topic of non-Advancement, is because we as a Mainstream Protestant body agree with the historical stance the mainstream Christian church has held in regards to this view since the apostolic days, that it is a heresy, that could potential lead people to eternal hell....one of which UR proponents don't even believe in.
We do allow it to be debunked, we just do not allow it to be advanced and promoted, because this isn't a UR advancement Forum...just like it isn't a Pro-Koran or Pro-David Koresh forum either. Pretty simple.
If this were a Chevy website, our focus would be on promoting Chevys, not promoting Fords...so when a Ford guy wanted to show up and argue and debate against Chevys in favor of Fords, it wouldn't be beneficial to our membership.
This is a Mainstream Protestant Membership, which like historic Christianity before us, doesn't accept Universalism therefore, we don't allow it to be advanced and argued.
For those who want to debunk it, there are dozens and dozens of threads in our archives that do this. Using the [Search] feature isn't difficult.
Similarly, bringing up a new topic asking why it is a heresy and why it should be rejected is fine. That happens all the time in both the Bible-Chat forum, the Apologetics Forum, and the World Religions Forum.
Where the problem lies with topics like Universalism, is when folks want to come here and argue in favor of, and advance it or other unChristian doctrines that are against the rules because of all I've stated above.
If someone came here from another website and they reacted the way your quotes say, that tells me they weren't coming here to find out why UR is wrong and should be rejected, but rather to argue and debate UR. Otherwise, their attitude and reaction would have been completely different. They guy came here with the idea that this board couldn't argue away UR, therefore it must be right, and we dismiss the topic because we don't have an answer for it.
Wrong.
There are pages and pages and pages in the archives that do answer why it is a rejectable and damnable heresy.
Start searching if you want, but good grief cut out this carrying on about UR. Someone who wants the truth will seek it in a meek, humble, thoughtful, and understanding manner...not go out throwing around words and phrases like: "they refuse", "it is silly", "they accused me", "they're judgmental", there not "thinking", There not allowing speech "freely", "are arrogant", "can't wriggle", are "weak", etc...
Anyone coming here peddling comments like that are simply here to sew discord, not to search for truth and become a edifiable part of the fellowship here.
That's it.
My only question is, if Christ is truth, the bible is the truth...which I hope we can agree on in belief...why are people so afraid?
What is it with so many christians today that we think we need to seal ourselves in little boxed communities with our own "christian" music and "christian" movies and only "christian" friends, not discussing any belief we disagree with because "thinking too hard isnt good"? Like I seriously dont get it...maybe someone can explain it to me?
Is that what Jesus ever did? Did he take the disciples and hide in a cave? NO! He was out there, telling people the truth, eating and befriending and healing sinners and saints alike.
What are people so afraid of?
Quote from: NinjaWizards777 on January 23, 2009, 09:41:29 PM
My only question is, if Christ is truth, the bible is the truth...which I hope we can agree on in belief...why are people so afraid?
In a nutshell the fear comes from two things.
1.You cannot prove that Christ nor the bible is truth, as much as you or anyone else wants to maintain that it is true, you cannot prove it, you can only have faith and hope that it is.
2. It is the denial of #1 that will instill fear as you wish for your faith to have proof.
Hi Ninja,
Its called a "comfort zone". People are taught a certain thing, get in their own comfortable group, and then don't want anything to change because they are in their comfort zone. Any new idea that could challenge their ideas would break their comfort zone, thus they won't be comfortable anymore. Therefore the defences come up to maintain the comfort, even if their thought process is irrational. Comfort is a powerful motivator.
Consider what a pastor might go through if confronted with learning the truth of UR. He could possibly lose:
- his friends
- his family
- his congregration
- the status & prestige of being in that congregration
- his livelihood
- even his house & basic necessities of life
That is a lot of comfort to be lost for one new idea.
It even happens in UR circles. We cannot rest on our laurels. We should always be questioning. What is the truth? When we think we know the truth, we should question further. Any further questioning should also confirm or refute that truth.
There is an old axiom: if a "thing" is truely false, any study of that "thing" will only further confirm its "falseness". Likewise if a "thing" is truely the truth, any study of that "thing" will only further confirm its truth.
I don't think anyone will ever know the whole truth until the resurrection or later. But we should always be studying to learn more. The problems start when people stop studying and rest in their comfort zone.
Cheers,
Legoman
Quote from: Paul Hazelwood on January 23, 2009, 09:57:52 PM
1.You cannot prove that Christ nor the bible is truth, as much as you or anyone else wants to maintain that it is true, you cannot prove it, you can only have faith and hope that it is.
True, we can not absolutely prove the bible is true. But we can look at the evidence and approach it with sound logical reasoning.
This eventually comes down to the question: how did we get here? We can make up all the theories we want: we spontaneously generated, we evolved, etc.
But then we run up against a brick wall in the laws of thermodynamics. It is a fundamental law of the universe that a state of order will proceed to a state disorder. Things break down. Things decay. Stars explode. Rooms get messy. So then we have a problem: why is there order in the universe
at all? How did order arise from disorder, when we know
it is a scientific law that order always tends to state of disorder?
So from this one logical rational scientific law we have now proven that there must be an outside influence on the universe, and this outside influence brought about the order that we see. Otherwise the universe would be just a big chaotic mess of goo.
And there are hundreds of other things discovered in science, history, archaeology, that give us evidence that there is a creator, the bible was written by the men who we think wrote it, and it was inspired by God due to the things that are in that bible. It takes a lifetime to study all this stuff, but each step along the way will either confirm or refute what you know to be the truth.
It definitely makes life interesting. From what I've found, if you really want to proceed in understanding the truth, you have to verify it all for yourself. Don't rely on what other people say. And don't get too comfortable :winkgrin:
Cheers,
Legoman
Quote from: Apocatastasis on January 23, 2009, 09:06:52 PM
David Taylor, another head mod over at bibleforums.org, had this to say:
QuotePeter's away right now, but here's the short answer.
UR has been debunked on this forum...it's been debunked a hundred times, maybe a thousand times.
The scriptures involving it have been presented, explained and reexplained.
The reason it has become a topic of non-Advancement, is because we as a Mainstream Protestant body agree with the historical stance the mainstream Christian church has held in regards to this view since the apostolic days, that it is a heresy, that could potential lead people to eternal hell....one of which UR proponents don't even believe in.
We do allow it to be debunked, we just do not allow it to be advanced and promoted, because this isn't a UR advancement Forum...just like it isn't a Pro-Koran or Pro-David Koresh forum either. Pretty simple.
If this were a Chevy website, our focus would be on promoting Chevys, not promoting Fords...so when a Ford guy wanted to show up and argue and debate against Chevys in favor of Fords, it wouldn't be beneficial to our membership.
This is a Mainstream Protestant Membership, which like historic Christianity before us, doesn't accept Universalism therefore, we don't allow it to be advanced and argued.
For those who want to debunk it, there are dozens and dozens of threads in our archives that do this. Using the [Search] feature isn't difficult.
Similarly, bringing up a new topic asking why it is a heresy and why it should be rejected is fine. That happens all the time in both the Bible-Chat forum, the Apologetics Forum, and the World Religions Forum.
Where the problem lies with topics like Universalism, is when folks want to come here and argue in favor of, and advance it or other unChristian doctrines that are against the rules because of all I've stated above.
If someone came here from another website and they reacted the way your quotes say, that tells me they weren't coming here to find out why UR is wrong and should be rejected, but rather to argue and debate UR. Otherwise, their attitude and reaction would have been completely different. They guy came here with the idea that this board couldn't argue away UR, therefore it must be right, and we dismiss the topic because we don't have an answer for it.
Wrong.
There are pages and pages and pages in the archives that do answer why it is a rejectable and damnable heresy.
Start searching if you want, but good grief cut out this carrying on about UR. Someone who wants the truth will seek it in a meek, humble, thoughtful, and understanding manner...not go out throwing around words and phrases like: "they refuse", "it is silly", "they accused me", "they're judgmental", there not "thinking", There not allowing speech "freely", "are arrogant", "can't wriggle", are "weak", etc...
Anyone coming here peddling comments like that are simply here to sew discord, not to search for truth and become a edifiable part of the fellowship here.
That's it.
Unfortunately their board is named
bibleforums.org which is a bit misleading. It should be named
mainstreamprotestantforums.org instead...
Reading reply#30 it's even more clear to me.
QuoteIf this were a Chevy website, our focus would be on promoting Chevys, not promoting Fords...so when a Ford guy wanted to show up and argue and debate against Chevys in favor of Fords, it wouldn't be beneficial to our membership.
They don't want to discuss cars/Christianity but they only want to discuss a Chevy/Protestantism.
I can live with that. There are similar rules on this forum.
Gary, the owner of this forum, also asks from Martin that he keeps this forum on a UR track.
Bad for Calvinists, good for UR believers.
Perhaps TM is a bit more less strickt than that other board because it even has an "Arguments against UR" section.
Is that stupidity or a sign of strength of teh crew? I think the last because they are not scared to face debunkers head-on.
Quote from: Molly on January 23, 2009, 07:57:54 AMThey asked me what church I belonged to and I replied, "the church of the Firstborn."
They didn't like that answer. Oh well...
But I don't remember seeing you at my gathering last Sunday :sigh: :mshock:
:laughing7: :laughing7: :laughing7:
Quote from: firstbornWhen I asked about it they left my post but edited it to say "controversial topic" wherever I said "Universal Reconciliation"
Wow, pathetic. But funny. I guess UR is an expletive over there? What board is it?
In fairness to the rules of a forum I am not so sure it is unreasonable that it be respected.
However, there is a certain amount of knowledge that can be conveyed if they allow debunkers to post if you get my drift.
Stealth technology is a good example, it's there, it is perceived as nothing, but can pack a punch when you least expect something would appear.
In otherwords, if you come forth with an obvious intent to try to change the rules and debate the rules, they can see you coming from miles away.
Oh and just in case some might think it would be bad form to be sneaky.
2C 12:16 But be it so, I did not burden you: nevertheless, being crafty, I caught you with guile.
:laughing7:
Paul,
When you are a new member you can be stealthy. But a stealth fighter drops out of stealth if its fires the guns...
Say you pick out 5 verses and ask what they mean. Many 'groups of verses' (don't know the word for it) somehow always lean toward UR things like fire/all/forever.
So you get an answer like 'all that don't believe burn forever'
Try to be stealthy when saying they misunderstood all/fire/forever. You stealth fighter will be tagged and the attacks won't be stealthy anymore.
Matt Slicks CARM has similar rules; but at least he had a rather long debate with Scott/pneuma. A great chance for both sides to debunk the debunker. But did Matt change his opinion? Same for the board we are discussing now.
For the posted e-mails it sounds like the board crew (tried to) debunk UR many times. They obviously didn't see truth in UR. Then I can understand they get bored explaining/debunking the same over and over.
It's not just because UR is small compared to other forms of religion because they also only allow debunking Islam and Catholism. Both are big. Bigger that Protestantism I think.
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 24, 2009, 09:33:21 AM
Paul,
Many 'groups of verses' (don't know the word for it)
The word for it here in America WW is, "groups of verses" :laughing7:.
Jabcat,
Can I extrapolate that by saying groupies are Bible scholars? :laughing7:
Yeah, OK, but mainly it's that Bible scholars have groupies :thumbsup:.
QuoteUnfortunately their board is named bibleforums.org which is a bit misleading. It should be named mainstreamprotestantforums.org instead...
:laughing7:
I wonder what it would be like to go in their as myself right before I came to UR, voicing my confusion and frustration and bitterness.
Would that be lying?
Quote from: Sarah on January 24, 2009, 05:31:11 PM
QuoteUnfortunately their board is named bibleforums.org which is a bit misleading. It should be named mainstreamprotestantforums.org instead...
:laughing7:
I wonder what it would be like to go in their as myself right before I came to UR, voicing my confusion and frustration and bitterness.
Would that be lying?
I was kind of wondering along the same lines Sarah. Maybe if you were careful and didn't lie, but expressed some of those points of view...you wouldn't have to outright claim anything, maybe just express from personal experience, some of that stuff...sort of like role playing, but expressing things that had been real to you...It could be like "what if I felt like this", "I've had the thoughts and feelings at times of...." You may be just the one to do this, because you could draw from real stuff.
I was thinking about going in there in such a way as to question and "cast doubt" on UR to "disprove it" as is apparently allowed, but actually with the intent to expose some things to light...you know, like "How can they say in Col. 1:20 that God is reconciling all to himself? Does all really mean all, or doesn't it mean just those few that choose Jesus?" It would have to be really thought out, that's just an example, and it may have to be even more subtle than that...but it's a thought and a possibility...
God's blessing, James.
It would be interesting. I may pick up a few bites from you all posting me toward UR. Then you'd for sure be kicked off especially if I started biting; Evil Universalists leading the weak ones astray.
The danger is that deception in anyway is a huge discreditor. But I suppose if one goes in as a questioner, and not too revealing right away, it isn't deception. Sort of the Socratic method; let them find their own answers through questions.
What is the gospel?
What kind of God creates hell as the default destination for mankind?
What kind of God gives me the power to damn myself eternally?
I have heard that you go to hell if you don't believe in the trinity, is that the same as "I want to be in constant agony and mental torment for all eternity?"
Can you trust that kind of God?
If God had forknowledge, why did He create hell?
If God is Love, why did He create Hell?
If God is all powerful, why did He create Hell?
What's so great about heaven if my family is in hell?
These are little drops that will eat away at you later.
Good job, I like it...great questions...those are the ones :thumbsup:.
I tried that strategy for a few posts when I joined bibleforums initially. I also saw other people ask similar questions. ie. Asking questions about UR from a 'newbie' point of view.
Usually when the topic of UR (or something close to UR) comes up, someone will say something like the following:
"It sounds like you are talking about universalism which is not allowed to be discussed here. But suffice it to say universalism is NOT biblical." Then an attempt is made to show the newbie the "correct" thinking.
Any further discussion showing bible verses that support UR usually results in cries of "you are taking it out of context - this is what it really means in the whole context of the bible". At that point if you don't give in, your thread will probably be closed or moved to contro.
Take for example a simple statement like "God is Love". OH NO God is only love in context! He is also just and holy which of course equates with throwing people into fire for eternity (?!? I never could figure out how it was "just" and "holy" to provide a never ending punishment)...
Anyway if you press the matter and continue to post on the subject in other threads, you are quickly outed as a "heretic who is promoting universalism" which will eventually lead to being banned if you don't submit.
JMHO of what I saw there.
For example read this thread (warning this is at the bibleforums site):
http://bibleforums.org/forum/showthread.php?t=149772
and you will see how things get twisted... although there are a few funny comments on there.
Legoman
Hey Gang!
I have been banned from my share of forums as well, for talking about Universal Salvation and Reconcilliation through Christ Jesus, being the Will of God.
I have the distinct feeling however, that our place is to visit these forums never the less, because there are those who attend these forums who are predestined to hear and believe the Good News !
Do not ever feel bad about being banned from these Forums, the Pharisees stoned Stephen to death, because what Stephen had to say greived them.
The Christian Pharisee of today does not want to hear about how you should Love your enemies because God already does.
They want to hear how God is going to torture their enemies forever....
Grace and Peace to you all....always!
Quote from: SpiritDriven on January 25, 2009, 05:39:14 AM
The Christian Pharisee of today does not want to hear about how you should Love your enemies because God already does.
They want to hear how God is going to torture their enemies forever....
This is kindof a gross generalization.
Not everyone that believes in ET is like "OH YEAH PEOPLE GET TO BE SEPERATED FROM GOD FOREVER SERVES THEM RIGHT HA!!!!*points finger*. Ive been a christian 7 years and until recently didnt even KNOW of any alternitive view besides ET...and I wasnt like that.
I think people(including myself) have problems looking at the bible in diffrent ways than theyve been taught...they cant look past the filter of mainstream christianity not because their "bad" people or selfish christians...but because its uncomfortable
Quote from: Sarah on January 25, 2009, 12:08:06 AM
In my short and minimal religious/UR experience I've learned that the answers will likely be:
What is the gospel?
-> They cut and paste the Protestant view.
What kind of God creates hell as the default destination for mankind?
-> I was created for the devil but humankind choose to join the devil.
What kind of God gives me the power to damn myself eternally?
-> A loving God that respects the choice of His creation.
I have heard that you go to hell if you don't believe in the trinity, is that the same as "I want to be in constant agony and mental torment for all eternity?"
-> God justice/love/... is infinite therefore his wrath/justice has to be infinite too.
Can you trust that kind of God?
-> YES!
If God had forknowledge, why did He create hell?
-> Because people chose that path.
-> It will be reveiled later on.
-> Because he has every right to do with His creation what He wishes too.
-> You don't see because Satan blinded you.
If God is Love, why did He create Hell?
-> See above. Plus because part of His creation doesn't want to be with Him.
If God is all powerful, why did He create Hell?
-> That's not for us to question.
What's so great about heaven if my family is in hell?
-> You will enjoy knowing perfect justice has been done.
Sarah,
Don't get me wrong. You made a list with good questions. All I want to show is that its easy to turn and twist to whatever your denomination is.
Quote from: Apocatastasis on January 23, 2009, 09:06:52 PM
David Taylor, another head mod over at bibleforums.org, had this to say:
QuotePeter's away right now, but here's the short answer.
UR has been debunked on this forum...it's been debunked a hundred times, maybe a thousand times.
The scriptures involving it have been presented, explained and reexplained.
The reason it has become a topic of non-Advancement, is because we as a Mainstream Protestant body agree with the historical stance the mainstream Christian church has held in regards to this view since the apostolic days, that it is a heresy, that could potential lead people to eternal hell....one of which UR proponents don't even believe in.
We do allow it to be debunked, we just do not allow it to be advanced and promoted, because this isn't a UR advancement Forum...just like it isn't a Pro-Koran or Pro-David Koresh forum either. Pretty simple.
If this were a Chevy website, our focus would be on promoting Chevys, not promoting Fords...so when a Ford guy wanted to show up and argue and debate against Chevys in favor of Fords, it wouldn't be beneficial to our membership.
This is a Mainstream Protestant Membership, which like historic Christianity before us, doesn't accept Universalism therefore, we don't allow it to be advanced and argued.
For those who want to debunk it, there are dozens and dozens of threads in our archives that do this. Using the [Search] feature isn't difficult.
Similarly, bringing up a new topic asking why it is a heresy and why it should be rejected is fine. That happens all the time in both the Bible-Chat forum, the Apologetics Forum, and the World Religions Forum.
Where the problem lies with topics like Universalism, is when folks want to come here and argue in favor of, and advance it or other unChristian doctrines that are against the rules because of all I've stated above.
If someone came here from another website and they reacted the way your quotes say, that tells me they weren't coming here to find out why UR is wrong and should be rejected, but rather to argue and debate UR. Otherwise, their attitude and reaction would have been completely different. They guy came here with the idea that this board couldn't argue away UR, therefore it must be right, and we dismiss the topic because we don't have an answer for it.
Wrong.
There are pages and pages and pages in the archives that do answer why it is a rejectable and damnable heresy.
Start searching if you want, but good grief cut out this carrying on about UR. Someone who wants the truth will seek it in a meek, humble, thoughtful, and understanding manner...not go out throwing around words and phrases like: "they refuse", "it is silly", "they accused me", "they're judgmental", there not "thinking", There not allowing speech "freely", "are arrogant", "can't wriggle", are "weak", etc...
Anyone coming here peddling comments like that are simply here to sew discord, not to search for truth and become a edifiable part of the fellowship here.
That's it.
He's obviously not familiar with actual church history... :grin:
(emphsais mine)
QuoteThe Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, vol. 12, p. 96
The earliest system of Universalistic theology was by Clement of Alexandria (q.v.), who was the head of the theological school in that city until 202 A.D. His successor in the school was the great Origen (q.v.) who was the most distinguished advocate of this doctrine in all time. His mind has something of the largeness of Plato combined with Christian piety, and his influence was felt for many centuries throughout the East and to some extent in the West. The next great philosophical theologian in the East was Gregory of Nyssa (q.v.) Then came Theodore Mopsuestia (q.v.), distinguished as the promulgator of the grammatico-historical exegesis (see EXEGESIS OR HERMENEUTICS, III., 3; and ANTIOCH, SCHOOL OF), and of a Biblical scientific theology containing a portion of the theory of evolution applied to the history of mankind. His influence for some centuries was more extensive than that of Augustine. Johannes Cassianus (q.v.) should also be mentioned. He was the author of Semipelagianism (q.v.). Under the instruction of these great teachers many other theologians believed in universal salvation; and indeed the whole Eastern Church (q.v.) until after 500 A.D. was inclined to it.
In the West this doctrine had fewer adherents and was never accepted by the Church at large. In the first five or six centuries of Christianity there were six theological schools, of which four (Alexandria, Antioch, Caesarea, and Edessa, or Nisibis) were Universalist; one (Ephesus) accepted conditional mortality; one (Carthage or Rome) taught endless punishment of the wicked. Other theological schools are mentioned as founded by Universalists, but their actual doctrine on this subject is unknown.
Universalism was not considered/labeled "heresy" until after 500AD -AFTER- the move was made from Greek to Latin, particularly in the west, with the help of Augustine.
Quote from: NinjaWizards777 on January 25, 2009, 08:01:28 AM
Quote from: SpiritDriven on January 25, 2009, 05:39:14 AM
The Christian Pharisee of today does not want to hear about how you should Love your enemies because God already does.
They want to hear how God is going to torture their enemies forever....
This is kindof a gross generalization.
Not at all, the Christain Phrisees are a hard nosed lot high to low, because it is God hardening them....be assured when you encounter sombody God is hardening, you will know.
Not everyone that believes in ET is like "OH YEAH PEOPLE GET TO BE SEPERATED FROM GOD FOREVER SERVES THEM RIGHT HA!!!!*points finger*. Ive been a christian 7 years and until recently didnt even KNOW of any alternitive view besides ET...and I wasnt like that.
True....most believe God is going to be mercyless to their Enemies and then turn around and show mercy to them, because of false teaching, but the Holy Spirit still Guides those God is not hardening to Forums like Tent Maker
I think people(including myself) have problems looking at the bible in diffrent ways than theyve been taught...they cant look past the filter of mainstream christianity not because their "bad" people or selfish christians...but because its uncomfortable
Agreed Christianity has become a Cult in that regard....and is the worst offender by far when it comes to....programing.... cult members in what to believe.
Quote from: SpiritDriven on January 26, 2009, 12:18:43 AM
Quote from: NinjaWizards777 on January 25, 2009, 08:01:28 AM
Quote from: SpiritDriven on January 25, 2009, 05:39:14 AM
The Christian Pharisee of today does not want to hear about how you should Love your enemies because God already does.
They want to hear how God is going to torture their enemies forever....
This is kindof a gross generalization.
Not at all, the Christain Phrisees are a hard nosed lot high to low, because it is God hardening them....be assured when you encounter sombody God is hardening, you will know.
Not everyone that believes in ET is like "OH YEAH PEOPLE GET TO BE SEPERATED FROM GOD FOREVER SERVES THEM RIGHT HA!!!!*points finger*. Ive been a christian 7 years and until recently didnt even KNOW of any alternitive view besides ET...and I wasnt like that.
True....most believe God is going to be mercyless to their Enemies and then turn around and show mercy to them, because of false teaching, but the Holy Spirit still Guides those God is not hardening to Forums like Tent Maker
I think people(including myself) have problems looking at the bible in diffrent ways than theyve been taught...they cant look past the filter of mainstream christianity not because their "bad" people or selfish christians...but because its uncomfortable
Agreed Christianity has become a Cult in that regard....and is the worst offender by far when it comes to....programing.... cult members in what to believe.
ET being "false teaching" is an opinion, just as much as UR being damnable heresy is an opinion. Neither side has really convinced me of anything because both are full of pride in thinking they just "understand the scriptures because God has enlightend them more than most"
Quote from: ninjaNeither side has really convinced me of anything because both are full of pride in thinking they just "understand the scriptures because God has enlightend them more than most"
Indeed.
Quote from: Apocatastasis on January 23, 2009, 03:21:46 AM
Currently, I am posting at bibleforums.org, where one of the head mods, "project peter" recently asserted that UR is a damnable doctrine and that Christian Universalists are not relly Christians. When I asked him to explain his reasoning, he basically said that he would not waste his time explaining himself to me. What is wrong with these people?
What is wrong with these people? Depends on which people you're talking about. Many Christians aren't scared of how things will turn out, but are frightened of Christian Universalists that they've seen that aren't sound in other areas of Biblical doctrine. That's not universally the case, but the noisier ones on other forums tend to have a very sketchy understanding of other things that the Scriptures say and many times the areas of Biblical doctrine they know the least about are the areas that they decide to be as equally critical of as they are of ET to where they lose absolutely all of their credibility as people with a sound Scriptural perspective that's backed with a sound lifestyle that's Scripturally based and Holy Spirit POSSESSED.
I'm sincerely the only Christian Universalist that I know of right now that EMPHASIZES the Blood of Christ, repentance, what the Scriptures say about proving one's repentance by one's deeds, and being conformed to the image of God's dear Son NOW. A "someday they'll repent" message doesn't cut it either Scripturally or to any sound mind. Repentance is a NOW word that must be done in the NOW. I'm not saying that I'm the only Christian Universalist that believes these things. I'm saying that I'm the only one that I know of that's continuously vocal about it online whether on boards or via emails or on my own webpages.
Andrew Murray and Andrew Jukes are cherished by all segments of the Body of Christ because they focused on enriching the lives of everyone everywhere on more than just the restitution of all things. William Barclay was the same way, that although few might agree with all of his conclusions, you at least know that he devoted a fair amount of attention to the whole New Testament. Karl Barth ditto. George MacDonald ditto.
If I mentioned a couple dozen folks on Christian television that are as deeply persuaded [dogmatically persuaded] of the Universal Restoration as I am, for equally weighty Scriptural reasons, many people who visit these boards would be absolutely furious at them for not trumpeting the Universal Restoration from the rooftops rather than celebrating that they're leavening the Body of Christ on the areas that there's currently open doors into their hearts for. A Biblically maturing Christian would celebrate their soundness in faith in other areas beyond eschatology and a narrow focus on this one aspect of soteriology.
There's a gullible idea among many of us that presupposes that God doesn't want them to be effective in ministry or that somehow the only way they can be effective in ministry is by being outed about being voracious readers of a couple of UR websites and many UR books. Teaching people how to sow and reap effectively and how to inherit the blessing is as much of a part of St. Paul's Gospel as the Universal Restoration and in our own ranks there's the equal problem of teaching "another Gospel" because of not being sound in all of it.
Teaching people how to live in newness of life, daily presenting themselves to God as alive from the dead and their members as instruments of righteousness that are under grace and cleansed of all unrighteousness, is as much the Gospel of the New Testament as 1Corinthians 15:22. Being the express image of the invisible Christ is just as much St. Paul's focus as the reconciliation of all seen and unseen principalities and powers through the Blood of Christ. Show them over a broad enough period of time that we're actually Christians and sound in all areas of Scripture and they may actually someday invite us back to their websites in order to deal with the difference between ourselves and the UUA that's mostly pagan.
Show them that we can talk about all areas of Christian doctrine without just having a point to prove about Hell and they'll even GIVE US our own television and radio programs because their hearts really are [generally speaking] burning for the recovery of the sheep that have gone astray and are in the pigpens of life with broken relationships, broken dreams, broken minds, broken emotions, broken finances, broken bodies, etc.
Good post, martin. I have noticed the same things. A well-rounded Christian Universalist is hard to come by.
I'm curious about something you said:
QuoteA "someday they'll repent" message doesn't cut it either Scripturally or to any sound mind. Repentance is a NOW word that must be done in the NOW
.
Are you saying that post-mortem repentance is a false idea?
QuoteSarah,
Don't get me wrong. You made a list with good questions. All I want to show is that its easy to turn and twist to whatever your denomination is.
I would expect those answers,parroting doctrine, but the mental gymnastics is astounding!
ex;
If God had forknowledge, why did He create hell?
-> Because people chose that path.
This is circular reasoning, people chose hell because God chose it to be the
alternative option. -> It will be reveiled later on.
Cop out! In other words "I don't have the answer" -> Because he has every right to do with His creation what He wishes too.
Yes, but when He chose to create hell as heaven's default, my service to Him is out of fear and distrust if I'm honest.-> You don't see because Satan blinded you.
Just weird.Martin has some very good points. Show yourself a follower of Christ before trying to win them to UR.
Quote from: Apocatastasis on January 26, 2009, 02:13:18 AM
Are you saying that post-mortem repentance is a false idea?
No, I'm saying for us to let the New Testament be our example that although it's mentioned, it's not the focus. St. Paul who was perhaps the clearest writer in the New Testament about it was an "in your face" preacher about repenting NOW, having faith in our Lord Jesus NOW -- not because of what He'll someday do as His greatest achievement in abolishing anything/everything that's ever or will ever be called death, but because God raised Him from the dead so that at this point He alone rightly discerns the states and statuses of the living and the dead.
Thank God that there's a safety net and that if someone's last act in this life is to fall into sin that they're not thereby damned for all of eternity -- not because of eternal security, but because of the ransom for all that's ever-living to make intercession for all. Some of the ETers want to single out suicide as the only sin that one could possibly commit as a Christian as the last sin they commit that they can't repent of, but what if they lied to their spouse about their level of physical pain and discomfort because of a disease or a horrific accident in their dying moments? By the logic of the view of many Christians regarding suicide those Christians died in a sin of lying that was motivated by wanting to comfort those that would continue to live this life after they were gone are now irrevocably bound for an eternal death.
What if during war time someone's last act in some other part of the world is to steal a morsel of food while the bombs are falling and though they were sincere Christians all of their lives; perhaps holier than we'll ever be, yet in that last fateful moment they were overcome by their hunger and weighing it verses an immediate opportunity for something in an abandoned kitchen or home? On the mainstream paradigm of ET, then all hope is lost. Thankfully, we have something better to share with their bereaved families at the funeral and in the years following when their stomach's in knots as they're discovering the circumstances that their loved one died in.
But those aren't the issues related to most people's lives and the authors of the New Testament under the direction of THE AUTHOR of the New Covenant made passing comments along those lines while focusing on successful Christian living that's deeply rooted in thanksgiving, every care being cast upon Him without exception and without qualification, and any imaginations that are directly opposed to the promises being cast down and brought into obedience to Christ Jesus their High Priest.
The focus was on successfully overcoming their enemies with love and taking control of their minds, bodies, finances, and nations with the finished work of Christ rather than in spelling out every possible dealing of God with those that died unrepentant. They'd simply point us back to the Old Testament for the types and shadows to explore on any questions that they didn't have time to get into in their writings since the patterns of God dealing with sins to the third and fourth generation were already there, as well as all of the laws of restitution, and the different times and seasons when we could look with anticipation towards [in this life] for cleansing and the annihilation of all of our debts and other bondages.
The principle of Scripture is resurrection. As our lives are figuratively pulled out of the pit by the anointing of God that we're drawing upon Jesus's Priesthood and the Holy Spirit within us for, we ought to at the exact same time be expecting the anointing to flow from us to the ground beneath our feet in the emptying of Hell of more and more souls. It's not one or the other, either the practical or the metaphysical. The anointing corrodes and destroys EVERY yoke. But Romans 10 says not to look to the grave for a resurrection but to look within one's self for the resurrection of anointings of previous eras so that both the living and the dead in our lives can be dealt with because as Paul explains later in the New Testament, we're the Body of the Anointed One. Well, we can't be the Body of the Anointed One without being the Body of that Anointing which Isaiah 10:27 calls burden removing, yoke removing, and yoke destroying power.
Perhaps it's my Word of Faith heritage that's clarified this in my mind recently, but sowing and reaping happens here. The Biblical pattern is for the anointing to flow to and through the living to affect all things living and death. Our focus shouldn't be on God saving those that have died in their sin, but upon God's power flowing to us, in us, and through us until the gates of Hell can't prevail against us and our raising of the dead as His Body in the earth that are doing greater things than He did according to John 14:12. Our focus shouldn't be on debating whether or not the dead can remain in Hell, but upon whether or not we're going to leave 'em there:
LAZARUS, COME FORTH!!
Quote from: martincisneros on January 26, 2009, 02:46:18 AM
Our focus shouldn't be on debating whether or not the dead can remain in Hell, but upon whether or not we're going to leave 'em there: LAZARUS, COME FORTH!!
:cloud9: EXACTLY! :thumbsup: What good are all the doctrines we know if we can't get to a place in Him and by Him and through Him, that the POWER of those things we know are released? Might as well go back to reading the morning newspaper (only) as I used to do, if that is all there is, or ever gonna be. My :2c: Blessings...
The problem that I see with that Martin, is that those espousing ET, use the fear of hell first and foremost to get people to repent. So that's how they come at either getting someone to turn to Christ, or to spur their fellows on to good works. Their take on the good news message is that, we all deserve hell but hey, Jesus paid the price IF we accept what he did. So there's not a whole lot of agreement on the what and what Jesus actually saved us from. How can you have a legitimate conversation with them about sanctification?
I remember a series a former minister did on grace/works. The first 2 weeks he did a splendid job of speaking of how it was all God's work that brings us to salvation, then the third week he started in on the works but he could not see how that contradicted his first messages. It's just like how I read where they preach a back door salvation by works message. Calvinism is simpler in a way, but unless you have works it proves you weren't really saved.
I've been on many boards and just read and can't find much to share because their focus isn't on Christ doing the work in us it's more about what we do to either deserve or repay Him and make ourselves worthy of this great gift He offers us. Also, so many I've been to pretty much discuss the different doctrines--Trinity, consciousness after death, etc.
Obviously you've found someone willing to discuss deeper things but how effective is it when you're coming from different premises? If they accept that you're universalistic, and then want to discuss walking in a more intimate way with God, that could work some, but usually once they know where you're coming from, they don't trust anything you say, that's been my experience.
I agree with both Martin and Scarlet Wren. :sigh:
Martin, you're absolutely right. Scarlet Wren is also right, though. If you're coming from completely different POV's, there will probably be mistrust.
Unfortunately, there will always be resistance to the truth (well, at least in this age); particularly it seems, among those who should know better.
Quote from: NinjaWizards777 on January 26, 2009, 01:09:25 AM
Quote from: SpiritDriven on January 26, 2009, 12:18:43 AM
Quote from: NinjaWizards777 on January 25, 2009, 08:01:28 AM
Quote from: SpiritDriven on January 25, 2009, 05:39:14 AM
The Christian Pharisee of today does not want to hear about how you should Love your enemies because God already does.
They want to hear how God is going to torture their enemies forever....
This is kindof a gross generalization.
Not at all, the Christain Phrisees are a hard nosed lot high to low, because it is God hardening them....be assured when you encounter sombody God is hardening, you will know.
Not everyone that believes in ET is like "OH YEAH PEOPLE GET TO BE SEPERATED FROM GOD FOREVER SERVES THEM RIGHT HA!!!!*points finger*. Ive been a christian 7 years and until recently didnt even KNOW of any alternitive view besides ET...and I wasnt like that.
True....most believe God is going to be mercyless to their Enemies and then turn around and show mercy to them, because of false teaching, but the Holy Spirit still Guides those God is not hardening to Forums like Tent Maker
I think people(including myself) have problems looking at the bible in diffrent ways than theyve been taught...they cant look past the filter of mainstream christianity not because their "bad" people or selfish christians...but because its uncomfortable
Agreed Christianity has become a Cult in that regard....and is the worst offender by far when it comes to....programing.... cult members in what to believe.
ET being "false teaching" is an opinion, just as much as UR being damnable heresy is an opinion. Neither side has really convinced me of anything because both are full of pride in thinking they just "understand the scriptures because God has enlightend them more than most"
Et is a False teaching....full stop.
To be labelled as a Universalist is a tag.....we are actualy the especially of believers mentioned in I Timothy 4
That God is the saviour of all Man Kind especially of believers is declared as a fact in Gods word, Universalist theology as it is labelled, is the actual Good News of the Gospel.
Not only that, the labelled Universalist Theology is the only theology that can be prooven beyond doubt from declarations in Gods word that, first proceeded out of the mouth of God.
Any other teaching is based on Demonic and false teaching, forwarned about at the begining of I Timothy 4.
More importantly, it is not so much the theology it is more what God reveals to us personaly.
That we see backed up in his word.
We recognise the Sovereign Power and Will of God at all times in all things.
Peace
I think RaptureReady bans the subject as well. It stinks because my mom loves it on there.