Have you seen this?

[Aleax]

http://www.ovrlnd.com/Universalism/allthealls.html

It's a pretty comprehensive rebuttal against UR. Wonder if you guys and girls have seen it? Any comments?

I gotta pray over this.

[WhiteWings]

Pitty it's almost bedtime for me. Looks like an entertaining read  :winkgrin:
I'll do a few and while I'm asleep other will hopefully finish it off :P

It is interesting to note that the doctrinal belief of universalism, the eventual salvation of all, agrees with and embraces the lie that Satan told Eve in the garden. Satan said unto Eve, "Ye shall not surely die" (Genesis 3:4b). This same lie, told by Satan, becomes the foundational belief in the doctrine of universalism. Investigation shows the how this lie came to be included in the beliefs of those whom call themselves Christians and whom also believe in the doctrine of universalism.

Note that hell in which ETs believe can be found in many pagan religions.

About Origen:

Origen declares that Gehenna is an analogue of the Valley of Hinnom and connotes a purifying
fire6 but intimates that it is not prudent to go further, showing that the idea of "reserve" controlled him
from saying what might not be judicious. That God's fire is not material, but spiritual remorse ending
in reformation, Origen teaches in many passages. He repeatedly speaks of punishment as aionion
(mistranslated in the New Testament "everlasting," "eternal") and then elaborately states and defends
as Christian doctrine universal salvation beyond all aionion suffering and sin. Says the candid
historian Robertson: "The great object of this eminent teacher was to harmonize Christianity with
philosophy. He sought to combine in a Christian scheme the fragmentary truths scattered throughout
other systems, to establish the Gospel in a form which should not present obstacles to the conversion
of Jews, of Gnostics, and of cultivated heathens; and his errors arose from a too eager pursuit of this
idea.7"

http://home.online.nl/spamfree/PrevailingUniversalism.pdf

1 Timothy 4:10 Revisited

However, because of the fact that the universalists are very fond of 1 Timothy 4:10 in support of universalism, I should point out that there is yet another way of refuting this verse in particular. Let's look at the verse again:

1 Timothy 4:10 For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

If we simply paraphrase the verse the universalist's argument fades: For God we will both work for and suffer rebuttal because we trust in Christ Jesus resurrected who is the savior of all men; all those that believe. The paraphrase holds true to the thought that the author meant to convey (see Overcoming "aionios" and "aion," fifth objection, second paragraph).

The question is: Did he paraphrase it right? Nope not at all.
^KJV2Ti 4:13 The cloke that I left at Troas with Carpus, when thou comest, bring with thee, and the books, but especially the parchments.

How should that be paraphrased?
^KJV2Ti 4:13 The cloke that I left at Troas with Carpus, when thou comest, bring with thee, and the books, all the books and cloke.
==> No parchments???

To refute this understanding, universalists are fond of reaching right past their Bibles to extra biblical works to support their refutation of the problem overcoming the Greek word for "eternal."

Scroll back to the top of teh page and there is a lenghty UR rebutal based on extra Biblical sources...

There is no need to be a scholar to understand the Hebrew concept of time,

That's true. All you have to do is read an article written by a Rabbi and you have learned according to Jews "hell" last less than a year.Under "The sixth objection" the author has a fantasy that he brings more proof on the table.
But the fact is that every "for ever" and "eternity" is from the same Greek word. Showing 1000 verses with that word doesn't prove of disprove anything.
I can show translation that have all those verses translated as "age". I don't fall for circular reasoning...

That's enough for a sleepy newbie  :icon_jokercolor:
Few links you will like:
http://tear.sinfree.net/Universalism/TomVSEric.html
http://www.ovrlnd.com/Universalism/ttvsel.html
http://community.beliefnet.com/go/thread/view/44061/24951169/OPPOSERS_OF_CHRISTIAN_UNIVERSALISM_REFUTED => many links. Halfway the first message for the article you posted.

[lookingup]

To me it is amazing how they change the wording to make it fit their belief. i have on occassion wrote in to these different places and asked what they believe concerning  these  pieces of scripture:

Isa 40:5 -
And the glory of the LORD shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together: for the mouth of the LORD hath spoken it.

Isa 66:23 -
And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD.


Lu 3:6 -
And all flesh shall see the salvation of God. 


i can't remember an exact count on the number of them i have asked (more than 10?) and i anticipated some fancy dancing around but i have only recieved two replys and they were "all doesn't mean all"

                    Go figure

[WhiteWings]

Or they answer similar to:

Isa 40:5 -> Everyone will see the glory but those in hell will not be able to enjoy it.
Isa 66:23 -> Even those in hell will worship Him but it's to late. It won't help them getting out of hell. Ever.
Lu 3:6 --> Everyone will see salvation but not everyone will be part of the salvation.

i can't remember an exact count on the number of them i have asked (more than 10?) and i anticipated some fancy dancing around but i have only recieved two replys and they were "all doesn't mean all"

Try the 3 verses from my signature. Especially (there's that word again  :happygrin:) the third verse I find very powerful.

[Quaesitor]

Nice work WW.

When I look at these UR rebutals, I always have a little sense of fear that maybe this time there will be good material, good arguments.

And everytime I realize that these are always the same bad arguements and biased reasonning.

What a shame for them. :thumbdown:

[WhiteWings]

I think this thread belongs in the "Rebuttals to CARM" because the author is part of CARM: "Eric Landstrom began working with CARM in the mid 90s.  Eric currently serves as a director on CARM's Board of Directors."

You may like this thread. A debate with Matt Slick the owner/founder of HARM.
I assume his views are (almost) indentical as that of Eric.

[Aleax]

You may like this thread. A debate with Matt Slick the owner/founder of HARM.
I assume his views are (almost) indentical as that of Eric.

Good stuff in there. I especially (that is, not exclusively  :laughing7: ) liked this

pneuma wrote:

"But lets just suppose there is a sin that NEVER can be forgiven as Matt says, what would happen?

Jesus Christ is then being eternally tormented for if we do not forgive men their trespasses then neither will the Father forgive us.Mt.6:15

Therefore if Jesus does not forgive us then He is not forgiven Himself and must be then eternally tormented.

But the good news is Jesus forgave even those who crucified Him saying Father forgive them as they no not what they do.Lk.23:34    "

[shawn]

Yeah I must say this was a lame attempt at a rebuttal.  Do they realize UR doesn't believe "you won't surely die"?  I believe most who believe in UR believe in the second death. 

I mean since we are speaking about the garden of eden why not extrapolate a bit further.  I believe it was Zender who said the garden of eden would have been a great place to introduce the concept of eternal torture if it were true.  Since that seems bigger than physical death why not include that in the dialogue about consequences of sin?

[CHB]

shawn, was thinking of something while reading your post.

I don't believe we will find anyone who wouldn't agree that Jesus died for the sins of the world. Ok, if that is true what is God using eternal punishment, or eternal death for? If our sins have been paid for by Jesus what pray tell me is ET and ED all about?

The way I see it, those who believe in ET or ED would have to think like this.  Someone goes to the bank and pays off a debt for me so they won't take my house but I don't think they will except someone elses money, so I try to pay it myself. Or, after my debt is paid, the bank is going to take my house anyway because I wasn't the one who paid the debt. 

One who thinks like this has to believe salvation is dependent upon themselves and not Jesus. Because if Jesus paid for all sins we of ourselves owe nothing.

CHB

[shawn]

shawn, was thinking of something while reading your post.

I don't believe we will find anyone who wouldn't agree that Jesus died for the sins of the world. Ok, if that is true what is God using eternal punishment, or eternal death for? If our sins have been paid for by Jesus what pray tell me is ET and ED all about?

The way I see it, those who believe in ET or ED would have to think like this.  Someone goes to the bank and pays off a debt for me so they won't take my house but I don't think they will except someone elses money, so I try to pay it myself. Or, after my debt is paid, the bank is going to take my house anyway because I wasn't the one who paid the debt. 

One who thinks like this has to believe salvation is dependent upon themselves and not Jesus. Because if Jesus paid for all sins we of ourselves owe nothing.

CHB

You won't see me disagree with ANY of that.  I have said since reading about UR it makes WAY more sense than ED and ET.  It makes more sense in nearly every way.  Through the UR glass my Bible AND relationship to Christ comes to life in an amazing way.  There is something significant to be said about that.  But, I also pray the same prayer that Van Assen prayed, because I am too a stickler for seeing it in scripture.  I want scripture to support that belief.  I am still studying, praying and I am still undecided between UR and ED.  What I will say though is that I hope beyond hope that UR is indeed true.  I want to know I will live in heaven with my unsaved friend.  I don't want the salvation of mankind to hinge on the choice of a broken and carnal creature.

[WhiteWings]

Yeah I must say this was a lame attempt at a rebuttal.  Do they realize UR doesn't believe "you won't surely die"?  I believe most who believe in UR believe in the second death.

They usually preach in front of their own church. (is that a saying in English?)
So they like to setup a strawman they base their refutation on.

[micah7:9]

shawn, was thinking of something while reading your post.

I don't believe we will find anyone who wouldn't agree that Jesus died for the sins of the world. Ok, if that is true what is God using eternal punishment, or eternal death for? If our sins have been paid for by Jesus what pray tell me is ET and ED all about?

The way I see it, those who believe in ET or ED would have to think like this.  Someone goes to the bank and pays off a debt for me so they won't take my house but I don't think they will except someone elses money, so I try to pay it myself. Or, after my debt is paid, the bank is going to take my house anyway because I wasn't the one who paid the debt. 

One who thinks like this has to believe salvation is dependent upon themselves and not Jesus. Because if Jesus paid for all sins we of ourselves owe nothing.

CHB

:thumbsup:

[CHB]

shawn, there is just too much evidence in the Bible for the salvation of all not to be true. Of course someone new to this belief may have a hard time with it but God will prevail. I have believed this for a very long time but when I was first introduced to it I had many doubts also. One must ask God for understanding of this, for it is he who gives us our understanding also. Paul said "what do we have that wasn't given to us"? God will surely take the blinders off in his own time.

CHB

[shawn]

shawn, there is just too much evidence in the Bible for the salvation of all not to be true. Of course someone new to this belief may have a hard time with it but God will prevail. I have believed this for a very long time but when I was first introduced to it I had many doubts also. One must ask God for understanding of this, for it is he who gives us our understanding also. Paul said "what do we have that wasn't given to us"? God will surely take the blinders off in his own time.

CHB

We can certainly agree to disagree here.  I think there is many many verses supporting the perishing of sinners.  I really don't want this thread to turn into a UR vs ED debate but it's not as cut and dry as you make it out to be. 

[willieH]

willieH: Hi Aleax...  :winkgrin:

http://www.ovrlnd.com/Universalism/allthealls.html

It's a pretty comprehensive rebuttal against UR. Wonder if you guys and girls have seen it? Any comments?

I gotta pray over this.

As well you should!  :thumbsup:  And while you do... if you will, think this over:

The biggest arguement that I can propose against THIS arguement, is that "ALL" of those who write such articles, NEVER consider them SELVES as numbered with those who might be LOST... as well as PURPOSELY  IGNORING the TEN VERSES in Scripture which note (PERFECT) IMPARTIALITY of YHVH toward MEN, beginning with ---> Prov 28:21 -- which states PARTIALITY is NOT "GOOD" ---> Acts 10:34 -- 2 Sam 14:14 -- 2 Chron 19:7 -- Job 34:19 -- Mark 12:15 -- Eph 6:9 -- Col 3:25 -- Gal 2:6 -- Rom 2:11

Their "teaching" includes the following (just to name a few - after all, we dont have "ALL DAY"  :laughing7:):

(1) -- The "teaching" is ALWAYS - WITHOUT EXCEPTION... INCLUSIVE of SELF (the one "teaching" the "teaching"), and NEVER considers SELF as potentially ...of the "LOST" which they note...

(2) -- Is INCOMPLETE (which opposes perfection)... due to the number which remain LOST and unrecovered by the One who SENT the Son to SAVE THE WORLD. And the WORD (which was SENT to recover the WORLD), is described RETURNING VOID to the degree and number that were NOT RECOVERED by IT -- Isaiah 55:11

(3) -- Ignores and transfers the meaning of the word ALL wherever it suits their (SELF-oriented) doctrine.

(4) -- Means the SHEPHERD which was SENT... but FAILED in His mission to SAVE the WORLD... (how BLASPHEMOUS can a "teaching" be?)

(5) -- Notes that "CONDEMNATION" indeed was part of the "agenda" of the WORD to which ALL judgment has been committed -- John 5:22 -- and which was sent NOT to CONDEMN -- John 3:17 -- which also displays an  INCONTINUITY in the WORD as well as It's SOURCE (YHVH God, the Father) which the Scriptures claim are UNCHANGING... Mal 3:6 -- Heb 13:8 -- James 1:17

(6) Fails to note these within their conclusion (either ED or ET) of those which are "LOST" -- (naming just a few cuz, like I said, we don't have "ALL" day -- depending upon what "ALL" means, that is...  :laugh:):

• what "GLORY" is found in the teaching (concerning the LOST)
• what "LOVE" is found in the teaching (concerning the LOST)
• what "MERCY" is found in the teaching (concerning the LOST)
• what "JOY" is found in the teaching (concerning the LOST)
• in what way is "ED" or "ET", different than the acts of Hitler? (not to mention the "JEWS" which did not "accept CHRIST", get to experience this HEINOUS "act" TWICE!  :mshock:)
• in what way is "ED" or "ET", ..."JUST" ...when both crime and punishment are compared?  YHVH God indicates we must come to Him and within REASON find Him -- Isaiah 1:18
• what REASON is found in a punishment of ETERNAL duration, for a few pidly years of "sin"?  That is like sentencing a child to DEATH by FIRE for getting one wrong answer on a test in school. :rolleye:
• How can DEATH be said to have "passed away" -- Rev 21:4 -- if "ED" is true?
• How can PAIN be said to have "passed away"?
• TEARS?

Hey...   I could go on "ALL" DAY about this, but what's the point?  :laughing7:  Foolishness (which is the state of DARKNESS) is EASILY and SIMPLY indicated for what it IS, by LIGHT...

...willieH  :cloud9:

[micah7:9]

HALLELUJAH! :grin:

[CHB]

shawn, there is just too much evidence in the Bible for the salvation of all not to be true. Of course someone new to this belief may have a hard time with it but God will prevail. I have believed this for a very long time but when I was first introduced to it I had many doubts also. One must ask God for understanding of this, for it is he who gives us our understanding also. Paul said "what do we have that wasn't given to us"? God will surely take the blinders off in his own time.

CHB

We can certainly agree to disagree here.  I think there is many many verses supporting the perishing of sinners.  I really don't want this thread to turn into a UR vs ED debate but it's not as cut and dry as you make it out to be. 

Hi shawn,

Whatever you prefer. I understand, I use to believe in ED myself. I was a member of the World Wide Church of God, this is what they believed. I thought the ED doctrine was pretty cut and dried for a while but when I learned about the words eternal, forever, and what Jesus sacrifice really accomplished, I had to start looking at the salvation of all.  When you think about it, everlasting punishment sounds like it has an end, {and it does} but everlasting punishing sounds like it goes on and on. This is the argument I use to use to defend ED.

CHB