Separation or Annihilation?

[PaulSacramento]

It is important to under stand the cultural context in which the NT was written and by that I mean to WHOM it was written and HOW THEY would understand it.
When Hades was mentioned to a Hellenistic crowd ( gentile or not), what did THEY think?
When Sheol was mentioned to a Hebrew crowd, what did they think? what about a Pharisee? what about an Essen? a Saudacee? Etc, etc.

There is also a view that torment in the lake of fire and Hell are somehow different, that Hell is simply another name for Sheol or Hades and is simply the resting place of the dead and that the Lake of Fire is another place altogether.
Now, there is SOME correctness to this in the sense that Hell and the Lake of fire are NOT the same things ( much as Hades and Tartarus were not the same) BUT what some fail to grasp is that the Lake of Fire is PART of Hell ( like Tartarus is part of Hades) and the fail to see that there is no way around the quite EXPLICIT testimony of Christ and the Apostles in regards to (eternal) torment in "hell".

[Silvertusk]

Simply put, if Universalism is true,

Jesus died in vain and Jesus coming into this world at all is completely unnecessary...

So LoneWolf, is Jesus unnecessary for you?
-
-
-

PS the article you quoted is flawed and disingenuous. The bible make many points about Hell and the Afterlife as being never ending and one does need need someone with long winded drivel to explain it. Jesus says to avoid it at all cost. Period.

Not so.

It could be said that Jesus's blood covered everyone regardless of whether they believed or not. Which is what I think the universalists believe

But I do not think the bible supports Universalism.

[Jac3510]

It could be said that Jesus's blood covered everyone regardless of whether they believed or not. Which is what I think the universalists believe

Some universalists believe that, but others don't. It depends on the mechanism they are employing to say that all are saved. But more to the point, I believe that, and I am not a universalist! But to your point, I think BWs is somewhat flawed, because Jesus' death is not in vain if He accomplished what He intended to accomplish and perfectly so, and I think by His universal atonement, He did exactly that.

http://www.faithalone.org/journal/2006i/4_hodges.pdf

Or if you prefer video:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hi0oDYeVrw4[/youtube]

[B. W.]

I would like to make seven points regarding my flawed comments

One - there is always a context...

Two - we are speaking of Universalism as defined by this article:

Universalism
by Matt Slick

http://carm.org/universalism-is

Universalism is the teaching that all people will be saved. Some say that it is through the atonement of Jesus that all will ultimately be reconciled to God. Others just say that all will go to heaven sooner or later whether or not they have trusted in or rejected Jesus as savior during their lifetime. This universal redemption will be realized in the future where God will bring all people to repentance. This repentance can happen while a person lives or after he has died and lived again in the millennium (as some "Christian universalists" claim) or some future state. Additionally, a few universalists even maintain that Satan and all demons will likewise be reconciled to God.

Nevertheless, both facets of universalistic belief are in serious error. People will suffer eternal damnation (Rev. 14:11), and the demonic forces have no redeemer. But, in my opinion, though universalism is a grave error, holding to the idea that all will be saved in itself does not automatically make someone a non-Christian. Please see Can a Christian be a Universalist?

However, there are those within the universalist camp (who claim to be Christian) who also deny the doctrine of the Trinity and, thereby, the incarnation of the Word of God as God the Son. They also deny the personhood and deity of the Holy Spirit. Usually, these denials are held by Unitarian Universalists though others who are not of the Universalist camp also deny the Trinity. Those who deny these essentials cannot be classified as Christians.

To deny the deity of Christ is to deny one of the essential doctrines of salvation. In this sense, those universalists who deny the deity of Christ are in a false religious belief system. Of course, when one essential doctrine is denied, many other historic biblical doctrines are also denied; and salvation is void because the object of faith is false.

There is no official "Universal Salvation Church" denomination, but there is a Unitarian Universalist Association (UUA). The UUA can be classified as non-Christian because it denies the deity of Christ, the personhood of the Holy Spirit, etc.

It is not possible to categorize all of universalists into one tidy doctrinal category. Its adherents vary in belief. Some are Arian (God is one person, Jesus is a creation). Some are Trinitarian. Others even lean toward new age concepts of man's divinity.

So, universalism is not really a doctrine that identifies a group. Rather, it is a doctrine of different, even contradictory groups, who all claim universalism.

The problem with words

The cults are particularly guilty of using biblical words with non-biblical definitions. This is absolutely necessary among them in order to maintain some sort of internal consistency of theology. So, too, with many universalists. Hell can mean non-existence, after-life consciousness, or this present life on earth. Some universalists believe that all punishment is accomplished here on earth while others believe it is future event with a loss of rewards and not a physical punishment. The punishment in both groups is corrective and limited. It will last only as long and only be as severe as it takes to accomplish its corrective purpose, which is to bring all mankind to a state of holiness and happiness in obedience to God. Of course, the problem with this is that it strongly suggests that a person is made worthy to be with God through his own sufferings and corrections in the afterlife.

In universalism, the word "eternal" means "without end" when it comes to salvation but not when referring to damnation even though the same word is used for both and in the same context (Matt. 25:46). Universalists divide history and the future into different "eons" or "ages" and assert that punishment is "age-lasting"--not eternal. The term "Son of God" is claimed by all groups as an accurate description of Jesus, yet to some it means a created being and to others it means God in flesh. Therefore, determining which belief is held by which universalist is often difficult, and it requires digging.

Misrepresentation

Universalists often use the most negative terms to represent historic positions they disagree with. For example, regarding the damnation of the unsaved, instead of saying that historic Christianity teaches that those who reject Christ will suffer eternal damnation, they frequently say that historic Christianity teaches that "God can't save everyone and wants to torture most of humanity forever." Or, it is often implied that God will not torture people forever because "God is not sadistic enough to send people to hell." Such emotionally slanted words reveal a hostile bias against historic doctrines and is an unfair description of those beliefs. It is a surprisingly common tactic among universalists which demonstrates their lack of objectivity and sheds an automatic cloud of doubt upon their observations.

Conclusion

As you can see, universalism covers a wide range of beliefs. Though belief in universalism in and of itself does not automatically void salvation, it has the potential danger of allowing false teachers to abide alongside true believers as well as deny basic Christian teaching such as eternal damnation. Therefore, to determine if a universalist is Christian, you must delve further into other areas of his belief system.

Three - we are not discussing the universal atonement of Christ in the sense of those who are born again by the cross but rather the Universalism defined in the above article as it appears that Lonewolf holds on to the the definition presented in the above article...

Four - I was addressing that line of thought being interpreted in my comment

Six - I apologize for for not not being clear enough

Seven - Forgive me
-
-
-

P.S. Back to the topical line I was attempting to reveal, therefore, the article below brings it back in line:

Scriptures that say not all are saved
by Matt Slick

http://carm.org/scriptures-say-not-all-are-saved

Universalists believe all people will be saved. They often complain against the contrary teaching that people go to hell by posing questions such as:

"Do you really believe that God is going to lose most of mankind in hell and that only a few are going to be saved?"

"If most go to hell, doesn't that mean that Satan wins since God only gets a few compared to the majority who are lost?"

Of course, these kinds of questions are the wrong ones to ask. What they are doing is using emotionalism to sway someone's beliefs. What they should be asking are questions like these:

"What does the Bible teach about damnation?"

"Does the Bible tell us if most will be lost or saved?"

"Does it tell us that all will be saved?"

The means to good biblical theology is to examine the whole of scriptures without bias so that proper and correct doctrines can be determined. Of course, no one is without bias. But, that does not mean that we should give up trying to be objective. We must endeavor to let God's word lead us rather than our emotionalism and personal preferences make decisions for us, especially about doctrine. At least, that should be the goal.

What matters is what God has revealed in His word. So, are there scriptures in the Bible that plainly state that not all are saved? Yes, there are.

"Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide, and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and many are those who enter by it. 14"For the gate is small, and the way is narrow that leads to life, and few are those who find it." (Matt. 7:13-14)
.
"For many are called, but few are chosen." (Matt. 22:14).

"And He was passing through from one city and village to another, teaching, and proceeding on His way to Jerusalem. 23 And someone said to Him, "Lord, are there just a few who are being saved?" And He said to them, 24"Strive to enter by the narrow door; for many, I tell you, will seek to enter and will not be able. 25"Once the head of the house gets up and shuts the door, and you begin to stand outside and knock on the door, saying, ‘Lord, open up to us!’ then He will answer and say to you, ‘I do not know where you are from.’ 26"Then you will begin to say, ‘We ate and drank in Your presence, and You taught in our streets’; 27and He will say, ‘I tell you, I do not know where you are from; depart from Me, all you evildoers.'" (Luke 13:22-27).

"And Isaiah cries out concerning Israel, "Though the number of the sons of Israel be as the sand of the sea, it is the remnant that will be saved; 28for the Lord will execute His word upon the earth, thoroughly and quickly." (Rom. 9:27).

These verses are plain and clear. Not all are saved; in fact, few are. Whether or not we think this makes God a failure or that it makes us sad or upsets us isn't really that important. If the Bible says it, that settles it. What is left is to make adjustments in our understanding and feelings in order to bring our thinking more in line with what God has stated.

After all, we do not know the mind of God. His ways are higher than our ways. I prefer to accept what it says than feel my way through theology.

[RickD]

Point eight-you skipped five.


So, I'll refer back to point six.

[Jac3510]

Point eight-you skipped five.


So, I'll refer back to point six.

[B. W.]

Point eight-you skipped five.


So, I'll refer back to point six.

err humm

Point Five - Always seek feedback from a Klown or else you'll have PIE !!!!



I learn't two kount from Jethro Bodine...

[RickD]

It could be said that Jesus's blood covered everyone regardless of whether they believed or not. Which is what I think the universalists believe

Some universalists believe that, but others don't. It depends on the mechanism they are employing to say that all are saved. But more to the point, I believe that, and I am not a universalist! But to your point, I think BWs is somewhat flawed, because Jesus' death is not in vain if He accomplished what He intended to accomplish and perfectly so, and I think by His universal atonement, He did exactly that.

http://www.faithalone.org/journal/2006i/4_hodges.pdf

Or if you prefer video:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hi0oDYeVrw4[/youtube]

Jac,

I read that link quickly, and it seems to make sense. But fwiw, the first time I read tulip, it didn't look so bad.

I'm gonna read it again when I can give it a thorough read.

[Sparrow]

Romans 6:23: For the wages of sin is death

Meaning that sin causes

The absence of Characteristic qualities proving that you are no longer who you once were after the effects of sin turn you into someone else, having known measures of Righteousness, Integrity and Good and now seeking to justify the weakened, diminished and corrupt character you present before your former self, soon to be dead to you for the shameful, lowly sham of a righteous Man He has made you out to be while you face his chastisement, and he presides over your fate, seeing you beaten and reformed into the image of a fallen Man, dead to his innocence, philosophy, glory and living now only as a hypocrite, struggling to obtain any small token valuable enough to gain good credit (moral leverage) and being continually recreated until there is no concern and nothing left of the Values, Guilt Ridding Discernment and Validity of the righteous man who torments you (repeat from the start).

We all have to live with ourselves, don’t live a lie and die forever suffering and living this truth, forever dead in the eyes of God.

Be Born again, a new creation in Christ, renewed and having a new life.

Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.