Is this a good response

[UniversalSceptic]

This is a response to someone who claims that just because Jesus is the saviour of the world doesn't mean everyone will be saved.
Note: This revelation came to me yesterday and I am aware their are some mistakes.
If anyone is interest here is the full article:
http://escapetoreality.org/2012/03/07/jesus-savior-of-the-world/

Personally I believe eventually everyone will be saved. Otherwise, more appropriate titles for Jesus will be: The saviour of the elect or the saviour of only those who believe. God wouldn't have made it ambiguous, he made it crystal clear: Jesus is the saviour of the world. Do we need to repent? Of course we do and we will, but right now God is only focused on the elect and then he will focus on saving everyone else. Will this the judgement against the unrighteous? absolutely. I don't deny that.

[UniversalSceptic]

Can someone please tell me whether it's a good answer or not and what else uncoils have added to support my answer.
Any feedback would be appreciated thanks.

[Cardinal]

 :cloud9: I read it and it looks like a good answer to me. Blessings....

[Seth]

I haven't gotten a chance to read it, but I agree with everything in your initial post.  :Peace2:

[Ross]

Jesus came to save the world;
Was He good at His job, or does He hope He got it right?

[marie glen]

I will read it too! as you have gotten me curious! but later.. so busy right now.. the only thing which I'm thinking after reading your post is, (imo) Jesus IS the savior only of those who believe.. but ALL will come to faith! I only mention that slight distinction, because I think that is the biggest obstacle as far as traditional Christianity is concerned, they believe UR is saved w/o or other than through Jesus, and "believing" (even tho there really is only one verse which could be taken to say after death, salvation is not possible and that's when Jesus told the pharisees unless they repent they would "die in their sins' - which to me simply means they would be in the 2nd resurrection instead of the first and would rise still in their sins, initially and for the duration of Judgment Day, not as joyful as the first one.. (weeping and wailing coming about instead?)


                     

[UniversalSceptic]

I will read it too! as you have gotten me curious! but later.. so busy right now.. the only thing which I'm thinking after reading your post is, (imo) Jesus IS the savior only of those who believe.. but ALL will come to faith! I only mention that slight distinction, because I think that is the biggest obstacle as far as traditional Christianity is concerned, they believe UR is saved w/o or other than through Jesus, and "believing" (even tho there really is only one verse which could be taken to say after death, salvation is not possible and that's when Jesus told the pharisees unless they repent they would "die in their sins' - which to me simply means they would be in the 2nd resurrection instead of the first and would rise still in their sins, initially and for the duration of Judgment Day, not as joyful as the first one.. (weeping and wailing coming about instead?)

Yeah I see what your saying. I didn't really make the distinction clear enough.
                   

[saintwalee]

From Paul Ellis Blogs:
"I may be wrong about this, but I lean towards the view that second death is not eternal suffering but eternal destruction – meaning, those in it are destroyed or "diminished" in some way and that's it forever. I appreciate there are scriptures that go either way on this point (click on the Table above if you're interested), but when Hebrews 10 describes the raging fire of judgment "that will consume the enemies of God," to me that suggests those who experience it are consumed, not tortured. God's wrath is finite. You may disagree with me on this, and that's fine. But I hope you agree that whatever hell is, it's a place to avoid. Happily..."

Paul Ellis is literally teaching TOD theory - Turn or Die, completely: Annihilation

Some of his other posts contend against universalism, that all are saved no matter what, that just as Adam's sin condemned all mankind, likewise Jesus atonement was for all mankind, and that their is no need to believe. He is to me commended for that, however, I think his view on annihilation is not scripturally sound.  :2c:

[eaglesway]

I went briefly into annihilation theology, and almost settled in it because of(the Spirit later showed me) personal reasons, but the word saved me :o)

How can God become all in all if many/most are annihilated?

How can all things be from Him through Him and to Him if many/most are annihilated?

How can all things be gathered into one in Christ if many/most are annihilated?

Why would God annihilate many/most AFTER every knee had bowed and every tongue confessed that Jesus Christ is Lord?

These questions and others like them delivered me from deception among some brothers and sisters I really loved a lot(and still do of course).

Some of them are now believers in the salvation of all :o)