"Universalism makes the death and resurrection of Christ irrelevant"

[MacPherson]

I came across this article, which I found to be inspiring.

http://www.georgefox.edu/journalonline/fall06/manning.html

But as a sideline to it, Universalism is briefly addressed in the Q&A (1st question):

Journal: What is the primary objection you hear to your persistent message that God loves you as you are?

Manning: The number one objection is that this message promotes universalism. So I want to make this abundantly, luminously clear: I'm not a universalist. Universalism is a heresy that makes the death and resurrection of Christ irrelevant.

I'm sure this is a contender for the number one argument against UR.
So, what's the rebuttal?

[Beloved Servant]

Let the dead bury the dead.

[gregoryfl]

In a nutshell, God not only determines the end, but the means to that end. The end is the redemption of all, and the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus is the means to that end.

Ron

[MacPherson]

Let the dead bury the dead.

?

[Beloved Servant]

Sorry, it's not a rebuttal — just a gut reaction.

[Jerm]

First off, have them get their terms in order.  What we are talking about is Christian Universalism/Universal Reconciliation and NOT Pluralism.  CU/UR is the idea that all of mankind will one day be redeemed back to God THROUGH THE DEATH, BURIAL, AND RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST.  Everyone who ends up in Heaven will be there because of Christ and Christ alone, no exceptions.  Pluralism on the other hand teaches that all religions lead to God and in the end, God will let everyone in because He's nice.  These two ideas are world's apart. 

After your terms are defined, then it becomes clear that the statement "Universalism makes a mockery of the Cross" is completely and utterly absurd.  This is like saying that fireman who gives his life to save people from a burning building and ends up saving them ALL, that his sacrifice was in vain BECAUSE they saved them all.  This is illogical nonsense!  And as far as those who do not accept Christ in this life, Scripture itself testifies that one day EVERYONE will accept Christ as Lord. 

I'm sorry bout ranting, but it seems like people don't even want to give the idea a chance!  It's like they're indignant at the very idea that there won't be people burning forever.  They don't listen to arguments and instead keep rattling of the same cliche "problems" with universalism that have been answered time and time again.  I just don't understand it.  When I first began to even consider the mere possibility of UR, I was ecstatic beyond words!  I now find myself at times scared to death that I might find out it's not true, all the while there are people out there that seem scared to death at finding out that it IS true!   :BangHead: :

[MacPherson]

Sorry, it's not a rebuttal — just a gut reaction.

Either way, I don't get what you're conveying.

[WhiteWings]

First off, have them get their terms in order.  What we are talking about is Christian Universalism/Universal Reconciliation and NOT Pluralism.  CU/UR is the idea that all of mankind will one day be redeemed back to God THROUGH THE DEATH, BURIAL, AND RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST.  Everyone who ends up in Heaven will be there because of Christ and Christ alone, no exceptions.  Pluralism on the other hand teaches that all religions lead to God and in the end, God will let everyone in because He's nice.  These two ideas are world's apart.

Mmmm, I would say the idea's overlap.
Sure the Son is a major part of the plan. But the plan is also there because the Father "is nice".
Dare I say it?
:thinking:
Yep. :winkgrin:
For me pluralism may be closer to the truth than ET.
UR= Son is a succesful Savior + Father is merciful
Pluralism = Father is merciful
ET = Son is a failure + Father is a sadist

[MacPherson]

For me pluralism may be closer to the truth than ET.
UR= Son is a succesful Savior + Father is merciful
Pluralism = Father is merciful
ET = Son is a failure + Father is a sadist

But, those people want to go to hell-eternal-torment.
God is being merciful by not forcing them to spend eternity in heaven.  :HeartThrob:  :thumbsup: :bgdance:

[sven]

Universalism is a heresy that makes the death and resurrection of Christ irrelevant.

without Jesus' death and resurrection all mankind would have perished (i.e. everlasting extinction) as I understand Scripture, if now by Christ's ressurection ALL mankind have been saved from eternal death, how can this make Christ's work irrelevant?

Why don't see people the stupidity of this argument?

[Paul Hazelwood]

Universalism is a heresy that makes the death and resurrection of Christ irrelevant.

I'm sure this is a contender for the number one argument against UR.
So, what's the rebuttal?

I didn't read the article, does the article have an explanation for the comment, or does the guy just state that?

[WhiteWings]

Can he have an explanation?
I mean just goto YouTube and watch a random UR video.
Jesus is mentioned about 5 times every minute.
Then I find it pretty weird to state Jesus has no place in UR.

[Beloved Servant]

It is not my time yet to argue with the Sadducees — for they are very sad, you see!
And I've never been led by the Spirit to do so!
Proverbs 26:17; He who, passing by, stops to meddle with strife that is none of his business is like one who takes a dog by the ears.

[MacPherson]

Universalism is a heresy that makes the death and resurrection of Christ irrelevant.

I'm sure this is a contender for the number one argument against UR.
So, what's the rebuttal?

I didn't read the article, does the article have an explanation for the comment, or does the guy just state that?

It's an extremely uplifting article about how much God loves us, no matter what.
It's intended to circumvent self condemnation. I guess it's so well written, people are equating it to UR, and the author wants do separate himself from that stigma. Hence the patent rebuttal. So his reason isn't really what interested me, as much as opinion to this standard claim – which seems lame if you understand UR. As a matter of fact, I find the opposite to be essentially true. If 95% supposedly parish, THAT seems to make the death and resurrection of Christ nearly irrelevant/unsuccessful.

[chuckt]

Universalism is a heresy that makes the death and resurrection of Christ irrelevant

Same old same old, they make the sin of adam more powerful than the cross.

if the cross and resurrection wont eventually save all men, then it seems to me they have it backwards.

but hey?  :dontknow: im sure it makes em feel good.

peace
chuckt

[Shadow]

But, those people want to go to hell-eternal-torment.
God is being merciful by not forcing them to spend eternity in heaven.  :HeartThrob:  :thumbsup: :bgdance:

With that asinine and lame reasoning.............

My answer to that would be fine, Ok so God doesn't want to force them to spend eternity in heaven, so why did he force them to come into existence in the first place knowing they wouldn't want to spend eternity in heaven, why could he not just MERCIFULLY let them cease to exist then

[WhiteWings]

As a matter of fact, I find the opposite to be essentially true. If 95% supposedly parish, THAT seems to make the death and resurrection of Christ nearly irrelevant/unsuccessful.

Brain I told you 666 times before!  :laughing7:
Jesus came to save the elect that where already saved from the foundation of the world.
So now we agree on that we can discuss how many are the elect.... :happy3:

[WhiteWings]

But, those people want to go to hell-eternal-torment.
God is being merciful by not forcing them to spend eternity in heaven.  :HeartThrob:  :thumbsup: :bgdance:

With that asinine and lame reasoning.............

My answer to that would be fine, Ok so God doesn't want to force them to spend eternity in heaven, so why did he force them to come into existence in the first place knowing they wouldn't want to spend eternity in heaven, why could he not just MERCIFULLY let them cease to exist then

Ha! Shadow is back :thumbsup:

Another weird thing Shadow, is that they first state God gave us free will and allows us to choose.
So why would that automaticly mean if they reject God they are tortured forever?
If God cared about free will he would ask: Sadly you don't want to be with me. What do you want?
I think people would ask for riches, health, etc. Not a lava pool.
That would be like a Communist election. Freely choose between voting for the leader or  be shot in the head.

[willieH]

willieH: Hi Brian... :hithere:

I came across this article, which I found to be inspiring.

http://www.georgefox.edu/journalonline/fall06/manning.html

But as a sideline to it, Universalism is briefly addressed in the Q&A (1st question):

Journal: What is the primary objection you hear to your persistent message that God loves you as you are?

Manning: The number one objection is that this message promotes universalism. So I want to make this abundantly, luminously clear: I'm not a universalist. Universalism is a heresy that makes the death and resurrection of Christ irrelevant.

This is a really pathetic arguement, bro... and does nothing to prove itself, to be true... It is just the OPINION of the speaker, without Scriptural support. Which makes his words, that which is, ...IRRELEVANT!  :pointlaugh:

CHRIST noted that judgment is not to be done -- Matt 7:1 -- however, is not concluding the RESULT of SALVATION concerning another (ANYONE ELSE), ...the ULTIMATE JUDGMENT?  :mshock:

If one is teaching the condemnation of UNIVERSALISM (calling it a "heresy"), then THEY are deciding the final RESULT of God's SALVATION.

What does the number SAVED have to do with making death and resurrection "irrelevant"?  Please! :rolleye:  (I gurantee the "writer" does not find HIS own DEATH and HIS own RESURRECTION  as "irrelevant", as well as conveniently defining himSELF as amongst the "SAVED" :rolleye:)

The Bible is VERY clear that ALL shall be resurrected -- Rev 1:7 -- John 5:28 -- and that ALL shall die -- Heb 9:27  That the WORD notes these facts, MAKES them RELEVANT!

Theologians think WAY to highly of themselves, ...instead of exalting the WORD of God, ...they endeavor to exalt their OWN words -- which they fully expect others to swallow...  :sigh:

I'm sure this is a contender for the number one argument against UR.
So, what's the rebuttal?

The "rebuttal" is the WORD which notes OTHERWISE...

1 Tim 2:3-6 -- Rom 5:18-20 -- 2 Cor 5:19 -- 1 Tim 4:9-11 -- 1 John 2:2 -- John 1:29 -- 1 John 4:14 -- Luke 19:10

God sent His Son to SAVE the WORLD that HE so LOVED -- John 3:16-17 (and always WILL LOVE -- He doesn't change -- Mal 3:6)... either CHRIST succeeded in this mission or He failed... Universalists believe He succeeded!

...willieH  :HeartThrob:

[peacemaker]

I came across this article, which I found to be inspiring.

Journal: What is the primary objection you hear to your persistent message that God loves you as you are?

Manning: The number one objection is that this message promotes universalism. So I want to make this abundantly, luminously clear: I'm not a universalist. Universalism is a heresy that makes the death and resurrection of Christ irrelevant.

This is a really pathetic arguement, bro... and does nothing to prove itself, to be true... It is just the OPINION of the speaker, without Scriptural support. Which makes his words, that which is, ...IRRELEVANT!  :pointlaugh:

His affiliation with self preservation takes priority.

[eaglesway]

Having eyes to see they cannot perceive, having ears to hear they cannot understand.

[Beloved Servant]

Amen.
And never forgetting that it is the Lord, Himself, that opens the eyes and ears of one's understanding, and not ours to judge the who, where, when, why or how.

[Beloved Servant]

Matthew 20 (CLV)

12 saying, 'These last do one hour, and you make them equal to us who bear the burden of the day and the scorching heat.'
13 Yet he, answering one of them, said, 'Comrade, I am not injuring you! Did you not agree with me for a denarius?
14 Pick up what is yours and go away. Now I want to give to this last one even as to you.

[eaglesway]

Oh Amen and Amen