|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Will God allow anyone to go to hell?
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LynnMagdalenCollege:
You make some very good points in your post, and I agree with you about the error of thinking "making converts" and "making disciples" is the same thing, but I don't see where you get "we might as well be safe" from my "share with more passion" statement. I have *never* in my life said, "we might as well be safe! Accept Jesus now because better safe than sorry!" I have said, "I'm afraid that Hell is a real place and I'm afraid that you're headed there - you want to talk about it?!" and I get a variety of answers.
And I daresay we all have an inaccurate view of God - how could a finite human being have an accurate view of an infinite God?
First off, you're spot on in your last line. We're all far off from the truth.
You asked what's the harm of preaching a doctrine of hell since the chance that there is a hell exists. That it would be more dangerous to not preach hell and be wrong, than to preach hell and be wrong.
What I'm saying is that for you, sharing about hell is perfectly acceptable because it is what you believe to be true, NOT because it's the safest option. However, for ME to accept your premise that I should consider sharing about hell because it's less dangerous than sharing that hell doesn't exist, well, for me that'd be intellectually dishonest and amount to preaching a doctrine of "let's be safe."
So that's all my point was--hope that's a bit clearer.
-Digory
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
What would people think if God decided that none of us had fulfilled the requirements sufficiently for salvation, and that we through our pride and misunderstanding of his will all ended up in Hell?
Is this a possibility for you who believe in hell?
-Digory
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Niënna
Ship's Lotus Blossom
# 4652
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by professorkirke:
What would people think if God decided that none of us had fulfilled the requirements sufficiently for salvation, and that we through our pride and misunderstanding of his will all ended up in Hell?
Is this a possibility for you who believe in hell?
-Digory
1. (I may be unique in this - my word is not gospel) If I end in everlasting torment so be it. I know that I'm self-centered and I wouldn't want to fuck up heaven, too.
2. "Requirements for Salvation" sounds mighty peculiar to me. Mind explaining what exactly you mean by that? Please?
--------------------
[Nino points a gun at Chiki]
Nino: Now... tell me. Who started the war?
Chiki: [long pause] We did.
~No Man's Land
Posts: 2298 | From: Purgatory | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by professorkirke:
What would people think if God decided that none of us had fulfilled the requirements sufficiently for salvation, and that we through our pride and misunderstanding of his will all ended up in Hell?
Is this a possibility for you who believe in hell?
No.
No one can get to hell by misunderstanding.
But it is fine with me to say that there are "requirements."
As I understand it, everyone has, or develops, a ruling love. This is the person's primary chosen source of delight, to which everything else that they love is connected.
There are only four possibilities for ruling loves, which exist in unlimited combinations. Those four are:
- Love of God
- Love of the neighbor
- Love of worldly things
- Love of self
All of these loves are good and beautiful, but the love of worldly things and the love of self must be subordinated to the other two for a person to be truly happy.
So God's requirements for entering heaven are that the last two loves be subordinate to the first two.
There is no possibility of misunderstanding here, because everyone knows that this is true. Normal life everywhere on earth is critical of people who are self-centered and materialistic, and praises people who demonstrate the opposite.
Still, "requirements" is not really a good way to express this, since "the kingdom of God is within you." People have heaven or hell within them long before they leave this world - or so I have always believed.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Niënna
Ship's Lotus Blossom
# 4652
|
Posted
I like your take on the matter, Freddy.
--------------------
[Nino points a gun at Chiki]
Nino: Now... tell me. Who started the war?
Chiki: [long pause] We did.
~No Man's Land
Posts: 2298 | From: Purgatory | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Joyfulsoul:
quote:
Originally posted by professorkirke:
What would people think if God decided that none of us had fulfilled the requirements sufficiently for salvation, and that we through our pride and misunderstanding of his will all ended up in Hell?
Is this a possibility for you who believe in hell?
-Digory
1. (I may be unique in this - my word is not gospel) If I end in everlasting torment so be it. I know that I'm self-centered and I wouldn't want to fuck up heaven, too.
2. "Requirements for Salvation" sounds mighty peculiar to me. Mind explaining what exactly you mean by that? Please?
Well either you believe
a) We do nothing to effect our salvation, and God chooses that all, some or none of us are saved from the beginning. In THIS case, if you say God chooses that some are saved, it is God who decides which are and which aren't.
or
b) There is some requirement of us on our part which we must fulfill that will gain us salvation.
So if you disbelieve (a), which I think a lot of people do, then it's my understanding that you must believe some form of (b) (and I don't think this is a strawman, please let me know if there is some choice (c) I am forgetting). If you beileve in choice (b), then what if we all simply end up in hell due to not meeting the requirements for whatever reason, even though we believed that we had?
-Digory
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
Oh, and by the way, don't worry, Joyful.
You won't fuck up heaven any more than the rest of us would, so I would assume God must have one of his craaaaaaazy plans for not letting that happen. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
[/qb][/QUOTE]Well either you believe
a) We do nothing to effect our salvation, and God chooses that all, some or none of us are saved from the beginning. In THIS case, if you say God chooses that some are saved, it is God who decides which are and which aren't.
or
b) There is some requirement of us on our part which we must fulfill that will gain us salvation.
So if you disbelieve (a), which I think a lot of people do, then it's my understanding that you must believe some form of (b) (and I don't think this is a strawman, please let me know if there is some choice (c) I am forgetting). If you beileve in choice (b), then what if we all simply end up in hell due to not meeting the requirements for whatever reason, even though we believed that we had?
-Digory [/QB][/QUOTE]
Yes, there is a (c) We do nothing to effect our salvation, and God has chosen that all can saved through the cross. God doesn't choose who can and can't be saved but freely offers grace to those who believe.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
Dear Mudfrog
I don't have the slightest idea what Evangelicals mean by the phrase "in Christ" which is why I didn't respond to your specific question. But we are both proficient in English even when it is a 17th century translation of koine Greek. These verses speak for themselves:
"Therefore as by the offence of one judgement came upon ALL men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon ALL men unto justification of life" (Rom 5.18)
"Who gave himself a ransom for ALL , to be testified in due time". (I Tim 2.6)
Now if you understand the word "all" in a different way than I, please tell me what it means to you. To me it is simple. All humans are under judgement for Adam's sin. All humans are restored to righteousness imputed to us by Christ, just as death was imputed to us by Adam.
As regards to the dual nature of Christ, we are saved;
" not by the conversion of the Godhead into flesh, but by taking of the manhood into God". (Creed of St Athanasius BCP)
Christ has raised mortal man into the immortality of the Godhead. But I ask you again. How strait do you want the gate to be? Who do you want to find outside it? Thomas Aquinas said that one of the pleasures of heaven is to watch the damned squirming in their pains. To me such a view belongs to a psychotic.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Yes, there is a (c) We do nothing to effect our salvation, and God has chosen that all can saved through the cross. God doesn't choose who can and can't be saved but freely offers grace to those who believe.
So if God has chosen that all CAN be saved through the cross, but he doesn't choose who gets saved and who doesn't, how do you distinguish between those who get saved and those who don't? Is it not by some statement of belief? Or by some change of lifestyle? Or some belief you make in your heart? Or some other "x"?
In which case, you are back to choice (b).
-Digory
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lynn MagdalenCollege
Shipmate
# 10651
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by professorkirke:
What I'm saying is that for you, sharing about hell is perfectly acceptable because it is what you believe to be true, NOT because it's the safest option. However, for ME to accept your premise that I should consider sharing about hell because it's less dangerous than sharing that hell doesn't exist, well, for me that'd be intellectually dishonest and amount to preaching a doctrine of "let's be safe."
So that's all my point was--hope that's a bit clearer.
-Digory
Ah, yes, thank you. IOTW, it's appropriate for me because I believe it but by the same token inappropriate for you to argue that way because you DON'T believe it. Yeah. Now, let me challenge you further (gently ruffling your feathers but not trying to make you snap): when you talk & share, does the *possibility* of hell ever come up? And if you reassure them that you believe all will ultimately be saved (again, assuming that you're arguing from a universalist perspective here, although it may be a non-existance of hell position), do you point out that many Christians disagree with your perspective on the matter?
I'm actually pretty fast to point out that there are lots of people who believe differently than me. I've had this conversation many times in discussions with non-Christians (friends, usually), some of whom are now Christians, and nobody accepted Jesus out of the fear of damnation but rather because the Holy Spirit was drawing them "with cords of love" and I happened to be there at the birthing.
Which leads me to my second question: were you raised (or taught) to believe the way you do or did you find, in reading scripture, that you disagreed with that position and came to the one you hold now?
Just curious.
--------------------
Erin & Friend; Been there, done that; Ruth musical
Posts: 6263 | From: California | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by professorkirke:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Yes, there is a (c) We do nothing to effect our salvation, and God has chosen that all can saved through the cross. God doesn't choose who can and can't be saved but freely offers grace to those who believe.
So if God has chosen that all CAN be saved through the cross, but he doesn't choose who gets saved and who doesn't, how do you distinguish between those who get saved and those who don't? Is it not by some statement of belief? Or by some change of lifestyle? Or some belief you make in your heart? Or some other "x"?
In which case, you are back to choice (b).
-Digory
We have to repent, believe, be born again.
It's the means grace comes to us, but it doesn't actually contribute to the provision of salvation. It doesn't 'gain us salvation' because that would imply merit or an 'earning' of salvation. Salvation is completely available for everyone. It is a completed act of atonement for the whole world. There is indeed the small matter of choice left to us.
Jesus said, 'except ye be converted, (changed) ye shall never enter the kingdom of heaven.'
You have to believe.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lynn MagdalenCollege
Shipmate
# 10651
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
Christ has raised mortal man into the immortality of the Godhead. But I ask you again. How strait do you want the gate to be? Who do you want to find outside it? Thomas Aquinas said that one of the pleasures of heaven is to watch the damned squirming in their pains. To me such a view belongs to a psychotic.
Thomas Aquinas was much closer to the entertainment attitudes of the Roman Circus than we are: we cannot imagine going to a hanging and taking our kids with us, because it will be 'entertaining' - yet for many hundreds of years executions were rather like that. We cannot imagine (most of us, at least) that it would be entertaining to see someone of a faith we do not share torn limb from limb and consumed by lions in a public arena - but that's the age into which Christianity was birthed. From our perspective, taking pleasure in watching the damned squirm is sick & twisted; from a different cultural perspective, it makes perfect sense.
So how much of our debate reflects our culture? Western civilization at moment really doesn't want to call anyone "bad" (except those who disagree with our politics!) and we don't want to call any behavior "bad" - I mean, we debate whether a man who straps explosives to his body, walks into a public place, and blows himself up with the idea of taking as many souls with him as possible is a "terrorist" or a "freedom fighter" - we live in a time very leery of making judgements of any sort, so of course we're going to be uncomfortable with the possibility of damnation...
I've seen drawings of Heaven-Earth-Hell in the form of a figure 8 and Earth is the point at which the lines cross - yes, we are already starting to experience our eternity; the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is the God of the living and not the dead.
As to requirements for salvation: believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and accept His gift of life. *If* you do that, other things will follow - but that alone is sufficient to save, if the one thief on the cross was saved ("verily I say unto thee, today thou shalt be with Me in paradise"). And then you get into the parable of the soils - IF the things which *should* follow do not follow, what does that say about the life of the seed?
What *should* follow? repentance, baptism, forgiveness of others, gathering together with fellow believers for the purpose of worship, teaching and growth, good works, evidence of a transformed life, fruits of the spirit growing within you (Gal. 5:22). The *presence* of these things doesn't "save" you - Jesus did that on the cross - but the *absence* of these things may cast doubt on whether that seed of the gospel fell on good soil or not. There are people who respond to the gospel with joy and for a few weeks or a few months they're enthusiastic - and then they slip back into their old life. Are they saved? Were they ever? I don't know (and happily I don't have to know; God knows) - but it's important I look at my own life and "work out my salvation with fear and trembling" and "examine myself, to make sure I am in the faith."
Again, doing those things doesn't save me, but it may keep me on track and I'd rather run into heaven, embracing my Savior, than to back into heaven looking longingly at the world (and I spent a lot of years doing that).
Knowing all analogies are imperfect, I still wonder if this one might work: the polio vaccine will save everyone from polio - but you must receive the vaccination to be saved from polio; simply living in a world where the vaccine exists doesn't keep you healthy. I believe Jesus died for all (unlimited atonement, in that sense - can you tell I'm not a Calvinist?!) but it looks to me that not all will receive Him as Savior.
--------------------
Erin & Friend; Been there, done that; Ruth musical
Posts: 6263 | From: California | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
Originally posted by LynnMagdaleneCollege:
quote:
but it looks to me that not all will receive Him as Savior .
This needs some unpacking. What do you mean by "receive" Him as saviour? An intellectual assent to a creed? A life lived in imitation of Him? ie take up your cross and follow me. Membership of a "pure" Protestant, hell fire, Scripture only, loveless sect?
To me, receiving Christ as saviour means progressively learning to obey Him. To feed the widows and orphans, to visit those misplaced in jail. To turn the other cheek and forgive seventy times seven. Your "born again" cop out which means that you don't have to do anything because you are "saved" is shallow, convenient religion with no connection to the radical change Jesus requires of us.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
But I ask you again. How strait do you want the gate to be? Who do you want to find outside it? Thomas Aquinas said that one of the pleasures of heaven is to watch the damned squirming in their pains. To me such a view belongs to a psychotic.
Yes, that's pretty sick. It would, in fact, be a violation of the rules of heaven.
The thing is, heaven is not a place that you gain entrance to. It is a state of being that is internal to you. "The kingdom of God is within you."
So no one is actually held out. People simply can't come into the joyful state who don't have the elements of joy within them.
Those elements are love to God and to the neighbor. They are known to everyone, within reach of everyone, but impossible to force on anyone.
If people don't love God and the neighbor they can't truly be happy, since this is where happiness lies. Living out these loves is what heaven is.
Anyone at any time can reject self-centered and worldly loves and choose instead to love God and the neighbor. Experience tells me, however, that this is a hard transition to make, and not everyone is going to do it.
The important thing, though, is the realization that heaven and hell are not places but internal states of being - whether experienced in this life or the next.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Niënna
Ship's Lotus Blossom
# 4652
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LynnMagdalenCollege:
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
Thomas Aquinas said that one of the pleasures of heaven is to watch the damned squirming in their pains. To me such a view belongs to a psychotic.
Thomas Aquinas was much closer to the entertainment attitudes of the Roman Circus than we are: we cannot imagine going to a hanging and taking our kids with us, because it will be 'entertaining' - yet for many hundreds of years executions were rather like that. We cannot imagine (most of us, at least) that it would be entertaining to see someone of a faith we do not share torn limb from limb and consumed by lions in a public arena - but that's the age into which Christianity was birthed. From our perspective, taking pleasure in watching the damned squirm is sick & twisted; from a different cultural perspective, it makes perfect sense.
I think Thomas Aquinas's statement is as applicable now is at was then.
I'm curious as to how many of us watch R-rated movies (PG-17+ for UK folks)? Or the daily news?
It is a misrepresentation of current reality to suggest that our society is not sick & twisted if you haven't happened to notice the incline of horrifically violent movies churned out by (un)Hollywood. Kill Bill (practically anything done by Quentin Tarantino), any war movie, most current movies done by Spielburg...the horror movies...That's entertainment, folks and we pay to watch it. We pay to watch limbs being torn off, flesh being ripped apart, and bodies gruesomely mutilated. And we pay for our military, too. We pay for our military to torture others in really horrible ways. It takes real effort to avoid finding out the ways humanity has become inhumanity.
But obviously that's a tangent.
PaulTH*, I think it is misrepresentation and grave injustice to suggest that Mudfrog or me or anyone else who may consider the existence of hell as sadistic hedonists. I assure you that it fills me with grief and sadness and I'm sure that Mudfrog and anyone else feel the same way. We are not happy that the world does terrible things. We do not take pleasure in the death of the wicked and neither does God.
Can you not hear the grief and anquish in these scriptures?
quote:
Ezekiel 18:23
Do I take any pleasure in the death of the wicked? declares the Sovereign LORD. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live?
Ezekiel 18:32
For I take no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Sovereign LORD. Repent and live!
Ezekiel 33:11
Say to them, 'As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn from their ways and live. Turn! Turn from your evil ways! Why will you die, O house of Israel?'
I realize that you may interpret them differently and that's fine. But please don't try to say that the God we worship takes pleasure in sending people to hell.
--------------------
[Nino points a gun at Chiki]
Nino: Now... tell me. Who started the war?
Chiki: [long pause] We did.
~No Man's Land
Posts: 2298 | From: Purgatory | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Teufelchen
Shipmate
# 10158
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Joyfulsoul:
I'm curious as to how many of us watch R-rated movies (PG-17+ for UK folks)?
Pedant point: I'm not sure where 'PG-17' movies come from. UK ratings are Uc, U, PG, PG (with warning), 12, 15, 18, and the formerly-X-but-now-18 business for sex movies. I think '15' or '18' equates roughly with an 'R'.
T.
--------------------
Little devil
Posts: 3894 | From: London area | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Niënna
Ship's Lotus Blossom
# 4652
|
Posted
opps. I had put pg15 but I couldn't remember if it was equivalent to an "R" or not.
--------------------
[Nino points a gun at Chiki]
Nino: Now... tell me. Who started the war?
Chiki: [long pause] We did.
~No Man's Land
Posts: 2298 | From: Purgatory | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lynn MagdalenCollege
Shipmate
# 10651
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
To me, receiving Christ as saviour means progressively learning to obey Him. To feed the widows and orphans, to visit those misplaced in jail. To turn the other cheek and forgive seventy times seven. Your "born again" cop out which means that you don't have to do anything because you are "saved" is shallow, convenient religion with no connection to the radical change Jesus requires of us.
Did you actually *read* my post? How do you get here (looks above) from reading my post?! I am amazed...
--------------------
Erin & Friend; Been there, done that; Ruth musical
Posts: 6263 | From: California | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LynnMagdalenCollege:
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
To me, receiving Christ as saviour means progressively learning to obey Him. To feed the widows and orphans, to visit those misplaced in jail. To turn the other cheek and forgive seventy times seven. Your "born again" cop out which means that you don't have to do anything because you are "saved" is shallow, convenient religion with no connection to the radical change Jesus requires of us.
Did you actually *read* my post? How do you get here (looks above) from reading my post?! I am amazed...
You said:
quote:
As to requirements for salvation: believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and accept His gift of life. *If* you do that, other things will follow - but that alone is sufficient to save, if the one thief on the cross was saved
That by itself puts *born again sensitive* people like Paul and myself on alert. What you say here is *not* what Jesus said about salvation.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
quote:
Originally posted by professorkirke:
So if God has chosen that all CAN be saved through the cross, but he doesn't choose who gets saved and who doesn't, how do you distinguish between those who get saved and those who don't? Is it not by some statement of belief? Or by some change of lifestyle? Or some belief you make in your heart? Or some other "x"?
In which case, you are back to choice (b).
-Digory
We have to repent, believe, be born again.
It's the means grace comes to us, but it doesn't actually contribute to the provision of salvation. It doesn't 'gain us salvation' because that would imply merit or an 'earning' of salvation. Salvation is completely available for everyone. It is a completed act of atonement for the whole world. There is indeed the small matter of choice left to us.
Jesus said, 'except ye be converted, (changed) ye shall never enter the kingdom of heaven.'
You have to believe.
So, you have to believe.
Meaning, before you believe you are not saved.
In other words, you do not have salvation before you believe.
Once you believe, you have salvation.
Belief, then, gains you salvation. -- option (b)
I'm sorry, but this is important. You cannot paint it any other way.
-Digory
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LynnMagdalenCollege:
(gently ruffling your feathers but not trying to make you snap):
Whoa there! I'm a married man! ![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif) ![[Biased]](wink.gif) ![[Two face]](graemlins/scot_twoface.gif)
quote:
...when you talk & share, does the *possibility* of hell ever come up? And if you reassure them that you believe all will ultimately be saved, do you point out that many Christians disagree with your perspective on the matter?
<snip>
Which leads me to my second question: were you raised (or taught) to believe the way you do or did you find, in reading scripture, that you disagreed with that position and came to the one you hold now?
1) Well, no. I do not deny that other Christians believe in hell, but reminding them of this fact would seem quite like reminding them that Christians believe in Christ. I think the concept is quite well known and doesn't need much reinforcement.
2)I was raised as an American Northern Baptist and I believed passionately in a general American Protestant Evangelical theology that included the doctrine of hell and many other traditional Christian doctrines. Over the past five years I have experienced a slow transformation through readings, thought, meditation, conversations (esp here), and general inspiration. That's a brief intro to my story. If you want to get a little idea of some of my opinions, you can check out my blog--the link is in my sig. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
-Digory
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lynn MagdalenCollege
Shipmate
# 10651
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
That by itself puts *born again sensitive* people like Paul and myself on alert. What you say here is *not* what Jesus said about salvation.
John 3:3 - Jesus answered and said to him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God."
I don't know what you pack into the terminology (lots of people pack lots of weird stuff into it) but the whole concept and language of born again comes directly from the mouth of Jesus Christ. I believe all those good things (the growth, the works) follow coming into agreement with Jesus (first about being sinner who needs salvation and second to accept His gift of salvation - and if they don't follow, as with the previously referenced parable of the soils, one questions whether salvation actually has taken place) - but if it is good works and growth that follow which *save us* then the person who accepts Jesus as savior and is killed by a drunk-driver on the way home the following week is not saved. Jesus, in speaking to the one thief on the cross, seems to be saying "because you agree with Me and have trusted Me for your salvation, you are saved." The man had no opportunity to grow, 'to progressively learn to obey Him' - and thus in your book the man is not saved. Happily, you and I do not make those decisions - but if God chooses to say, "this one is accepted in the Beloved," I don't want to disagree with Him.
But, *if you read my post*, you saw that I am not dismissing any of the 'progressive elements of growth' and recognize that talk is cheap. Jesus says, "If you love Me, you will obey Me" and there's LOTS to obey! I do not disagree with any of that. But yeah, "born again" is a real thing. Does it happen in a moment? For some people, I'm sure it does. Does salvation happen progressively, yeah, I think for others they grow into it, that there is no single point at which they can say, "up until here I was a heathen but after that point I am God's child." (in fact, to a great degree that is my situation - I can give a number of profound interactions with the Lord but I cannot tell you at what point, bang! I was saved). It's just not that simple and I never suggested it was.
I think there's an element of "two sides of a coin" in all this and we argue "it's heads!" and "NO, it's tails!" but at the end of the day it's a coin and both aspects are irrevocably part of it.
--------------------
Erin & Friend; Been there, done that; Ruth musical
Posts: 6263 | From: California | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by professorkirke:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
quote:
Originally posted by professorkirke:
So if God has chosen that all CAN be saved through the cross, but he doesn't choose who gets saved and who doesn't, how do you distinguish between those who get saved and those who don't? Is it not by some statement of belief? Or by some change of lifestyle? Or some belief you make in your heart? Or some other "x"?
In which case, you are back to choice (b).
-Digory
We have to repent, believe, be born again.
It's the means grace comes to us, but it doesn't actually contribute to the provision of salvation. It doesn't 'gain us salvation' because that would imply merit or an 'earning' of salvation. Salvation is completely available for everyone. It is a completed act of atonement for the whole world. There is indeed the small matter of choice left to us.
Jesus said, 'except ye be converted, (changed) ye shall never enter the kingdom of heaven.'
You have to believe.
So, you have to believe.
Meaning, before you believe you are not saved.
In other words, you do not have salvation before you believe.
Once you believe, you have salvation.
Belief, then, gains you salvation. -- option (b)
I'm sorry, but this is important. You cannot paint it any other way.
-Digory
OK - to receive salvation you have to believe (as in have faith in Christ to save you).
But if b) means you can actually contribute anything to making salvation effective - religious observance, good works, merits etc, then no. Grace, through faith, alone.
[ 18. November 2005, 05:55: Message edited by: Mudfrog ]
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Demas
Ship's Deserter
# 24
|
Posted
We're rehashing the free will v. irresistable grace arguments of the Arminian v. Calvinist axis.
I'm sure it must be a universalist truism that you can never find a Calvinist when you need one.
--------------------
They did not appear very religious; that is, they were not melancholy; and I therefore suspected they had not much piety - Life of Rev John Murray
Posts: 1894 | From: Thessalonica | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LynnMagdalenCollege:
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
That by itself puts *born again sensitive* people like Paul and myself on alert. What you say here is *not* what Jesus said about salvation.
John 3:3 - Jesus answered and said to him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God."
I don't know what you pack into the terminology (lots of people pack lots of weird stuff into it) but the whole concept and language of born again comes directly from the mouth of Jesus Christ. I believe all those good things (the growth, the works) follow coming into agreement with Jesus (first about being sinner who needs salvation and second to accept His gift of salvation - and if they don't follow, as with the previously referenced parable of the soils, one questions whether salvation actually has taken place) - but if it is good works and growth that follow which *save us* then the person who accepts Jesus as savior and is killed by a drunk-driver on the way home the following week is not saved. Jesus, in speaking to the one thief on the cross, seems to be saying "because you agree with Me and have trusted Me for your salvation, you are saved." The man had no opportunity to grow, 'to progressively learn to obey Him' - and thus in your book the man is not saved. Happily, you and I do not make those decisions - but if God chooses to say, "this one is accepted in the Beloved," I don't want to disagree with Him.
But, *if you read my post*, you saw that I am not dismissing any of the 'progressive elements of growth' and recognize that talk is cheap. Jesus says, "If you love Me, you will obey Me" and there's LOTS to obey! I do not disagree with any of that. But yeah, "born again" is a real thing.
No question that "born again" is a real thing. The question is whether it happens by faith alone.
The "born again" that I am sensitive to is the one that comes with the assumption that it happens when a person accepts Jesus.
I would say that "born again" refers to the new will that God gives to those who both believe in and obey Him. This is formed over time.
The arguments about the thief on the cross, and the person who accepts Christ and is then somehow dies, as being evidence of salvation by faith are both spurious. Jesus knew the thief's heart, and this is what matters. That is, He knew how he would live if given the chance. Similarly, with the person who dies shortly after conversion, the question is what that person is actually like in their heart. Some people do make profound u-turns in their life, but most people progress more slowly over time. What counts is their actual quality, and whether they love themselves and the world or God and the neighbor.
Jesus' statements about salvation are almost all about obedience and turning away from "wickedness." Belief is also an essential element. I have a long list of passages if you are interested. But most of them are along the lines of "You are My friends if you do whatever I command you" (John 15.14).
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
The "born again" that I am sensitive to is the one that comes with the assumption that it happens when a person accepts Jesus.
I would say that "born again" refers to the new will that God gives to those who both believe in and obey Him. This is formed over time.
The arguments about the thief on the cross, and the person who accepts Christ and is then somehow dies, as being evidence of salvation by faith are both spurious. Jesus knew the thief's heart, and this is what matters. That is, He knew how he would live if given the chance. Similarly, with the person who dies shortly after conversion, the question is what that person is actually like in their heart. Some people do make profound u-turns in their life, but most people progress more slowly over time. What counts is their actual quality, and whether they love themselves and the world or God and the neighbor.
Jesus' statements about salvation are almost all about obedience and turning away from "wickedness." Belief is also an essential element. I have a long list of passages if you are interested. But most of them are along the lines of "You are My friends if you do whatever I command you" (John 15.14). [/QB]
So, when IS a person born again? At what point is the transaction done?
The scripture is full of the experience being decuisive - a moment of repentance, passing from death to life, being brought from the kingdom of darkness into the 'kingdom of the Son he loves'.#
Also, don't forget, most peoople Jesus was talking to were Jews - god-fearing, or at least in possession of knowledge about the Law. It's appropriate for them to be told to 'obey', leave wickedness behind and practice righteousness.
However, we are not Jews, we are gentiles. When the gentiles came into the church there had to be a lot more to the Gospel than simply obeying God and the Torah.
In any case, being born again is accurately described as being born of the Spirit or born from above. There is no action on our part here. It is entirely a work of the Holy Spirit in the one who believes in the only begotten Son of God.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evo1
Shipmate
# 10249
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Paul - Titus 3:3-8:
At one time we too were foolish, disobedient, deceived and enslaved by all kinds of passions and pleasures. We lived in malice and envy, being hated and hating one another. But when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life. This is a trustworthy saying. And I want you to stress these things, so that those who have trusted in God may be careful to devote themselves to doing what is good. These things are excellent and profitable for everyone.
Doesn't the imagery of "rebirth" conjure up ideas of the very point at the beginning of faith? Growth comes after. Birth is instantaneous (in comparison).
I don't think anyone here is advocating a life of sordid sin - though continuing to trust in God to save us anyway. But I only say that we are not saved because of all the good deeds we do - they will help us to grow no doubt - but the saving is 100% mercy driven
Love,
Evo1
--------------------
Just think how horrid I would be if I didn't have a Personal Relationship with Jesus
Posts: 1058 | From: Hull, England | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evo1:
I don't think anyone here is advocating a life of sordid sin - though continuing to trust in God to save us anyway. But I only say that we are not saved because of all the good deeds we do - they will help us to grow no doubt - but the saving is 100% mercy driven
Has to be one or the other, then? Can't be both?
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evo1
Shipmate
# 10249
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Evo1:
But I only say that we are not saved because of all the good deeds we do - they will help us to grow no doubt - but the saving is 100% mercy driven
Has to be one or the other, then? Can't be both?
Hang on, I'll just have another look what Paul said.
"he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy."
Yes, I'd still say 100% mercy.
Love,
Evo1
[ 18. November 2005, 14:06: Message edited by: Evo1 ]
--------------------
Just think how horrid I would be if I didn't have a Personal Relationship with Jesus
Posts: 1058 | From: Hull, England | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
Originally posted by Evo1:
quote:
but the saving is 100% mercy driven
I agree with this, which is why I believe that all will eventually be saved. Who can be left out of 100% mercy?
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evo1
Shipmate
# 10249
|
Posted
That's something quite different from what I said Paul. Can I duck out of discussing semantics just this once?
Love,
Evo1
--------------------
Just think how horrid I would be if I didn't have a Personal Relationship with Jesus
Posts: 1058 | From: Hull, England | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
So, when IS a person born again? At what point is the transaction done?
I would compare it to the moment of physical fitness. It is the moment you love God and the neighbor. Not a moment at all, but a relative state.
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
In any case, being born again is accurately described as being born of the Spirit or born from above. There is no action on our part here. It is entirely a work of the Holy Spirit in the one who believes in the only begotten Son of God.
It is absolutely the work of God's mercy and the work of the Holy Spirit. But so is the work of reforming the tax codes. So is doing your job.
Someone still has to do it.
They do it, however, from God's power, not their own.
Jesus says repeatedly that there is action on our part here. But He also says "without Me you can do nothing."
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
So, when IS a person born again? At what point is the transaction done?
At the eternal moment of God's creation.
But in time, during our lives on earth, we come to realise it perhaps gradually, or sometimes instantly, or sometimes not at all.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by universalist:
For some, maybe most, the opportunity to finally see God may not occur until the next life (who says God can't save then?)
Augustine. Don't it figure?
And where did he say that? References please...
And didn't the Orthodox church pronounce Origen a heretic for saying that there could be salvation in a future state after death?
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lynn MagdalenCollege
Shipmate
# 10651
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
No question that "born again" is a real thing. The question is whether it happens by faith alone.
The "born again" that I am sensitive to is the one that comes with the assumption that it happens when a person accepts Jesus.
I would say that "born again" refers to the new will that God gives to those who both believe in and obey Him. This is formed over time.
The arguments about the thief on the cross, and the person who accepts Christ and is then somehow dies, as being evidence of salvation by faith are both spurious. Jesus knew the thief's heart, and this is what matters. That is, He knew how he would live if given the chance. Similarly, with the person who dies shortly after conversion, the question is what that person is actually like in their heart. Some people do make profound u-turns in their life, but most people progress more slowly over time. What counts is their actual quality, and whether they love themselves and the world or God and the neighbor.
Jesus' statements about salvation are almost all about obedience and turning away from "wickedness." Belief is also an essential element. I have a long list of passages if you are interested. But most of them are along the lines of "You are My friends if you do whatever I command you" (John 15.14).
Thanks, Freddy - this clarifies your position better for me - there are things I agree with completely but also some things where I'm either continuing to misunderstand (a distinct possibility!) *or* we will simply disagree (and that's okay, too - God knows how it is and happily He knows our hearts, too!).
I guess the idea that the thief on the cross is a spurious example because Jesus knew his heart - Jesus knows ALL our hearts - He knows when my heart's desire is to follow Him but my flesh is dominating me. Because I indulge my flesh and eat half a bag of Reese's Peanut Butter Cups (*sigh* confession - it occasionally happens), am I not saved? I'm trying to understand how being "born again" is not faith alone and doesn't happen when one accepts Jesus... I'm not arguing that the work is finished* (in fact, it's just started - the person is "born again" and now the REAL work can begin - but they are saved).
As I said, I may just be misunderstanding and we may be using terminology in conflicting ways, too (ah! the joys of English! such a wonderful language! colorful, but not always precise).
*speaking of "finished," my Dad growing up in Iowa lived & worked with (farming) a group who believed they were fully sanctified when they accepted Jesus, which lead to the most complex double-think and twisting of behavior. Much easier to simply own that I am still a sinner, tho' saved by grace, and the "sinner" -while dying- still kicks up a ruckus now and then.
--------------------
Erin & Friend; Been there, done that; Ruth musical
Posts: 6263 | From: California | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lynn MagdalenCollege
Shipmate
# 10651
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
In any case, being born again is accurately described as being born of the Spirit or born from above. There is no action on our part here. It is entirely a work of the Holy Spirit in the one who believes in the only begotten Son of God.
It is absolutely the work of God's mercy and the work of the Holy Spirit. But so is the work of reforming the tax codes. So is doing your job.
You know, I thought I understood what you're saying and now I'm completely confused - are you saying the work of reforming the tax codes is the work of the Holy Spirit?! somehow I don't think that's what you mean but I'm having a very hard time parsing this differently... help? clarify, please?
--------------------
Erin & Friend; Been there, done that; Ruth musical
Posts: 6263 | From: California | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
Sorry. I'm not saying that it is God who reforms the tax code particularly. It may be the devil for all I know. ![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
My point is that all good things are done by God. Humans have no power to do anything that is good.
But just as we appear to ourselves to have the power to reform the tax code, or do anything else that we see as good, so we also appear to ourselves to have the power to reform our lives.
It is important that we act on that appearance, just as it is important that we try to do other good things in our life.
Still, all good things are from God, not human power.
Does that make it clearer?
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lynn MagdalenCollege
Shipmate
# 10651
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
Sorry. I'm not saying that it is God who reforms the tax code particularly. It may be the devil for all I know. <snip>
It is important that we act on that appearance, just as it is important that we try to do other good things in our life.
Still, all good things are from God, not human power.
Does that make it clearer?
YES, thank you!!! Although I am in a small prayer group with someone who does, indeed, reform the tax code here in the USA...! I take comfort in knowing there's at least one faithful praying soul working for the I.R.S.!
--------------------
Erin & Friend; Been there, done that; Ruth musical
Posts: 6263 | From: California | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LynnMagdalenCollege:
I am in a small prayer group with someone who does, indeed, reform the tax code here in the USA...! I take comfort in knowing there's at least one faithful praying soul working for the I.R.S.!
May God bless his/her efforts!
To my mind this is one of the big sticking points of Christianity. Everyone feels that their life is from themselves, and that they have the power to do good or to do evil.
But the Christian knows that we can't do the least good from ourselves.
Unfortunately, we then get into the quagmire of thinking that our efforts to keep the commandments are unimportant to our salvation. Or even that it is impossible to make efforts in that direction.
Yet everyone in the world knows that people are able, to some extent anyway, to control their behavior. Human society is based on this assumption.
How do we extract ourselves from this conundrum?
My opinion is that we get out of it by acknowledging that even though we seem to ourselves to produce effort to avoid evil and do good, the truth is that it is the Holy Spirit working in us that gives us this ability.
At the same time, in His mercy God attributes these things to us, and forms us in accordance with our thoughts and actions over our lifetime. This is our Book of Life (Revelation 20.12). This is our free choice at work - a gift from God.
We then remain to eternity in the form that we have chosen and God has made for us. This form is essentially the form of what we love, because we are what we love. It changes and develops to eternity, but its basic nature, once the physical body in which it was developed dies, remains stable forever.
It is too easy to get stuck back on the point that God does everything, we can do nothing, and therefore our efforts to keep the commandments are meaningless. ![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
I can see why this is a sticking point, but it is hard to understand why people find it so persuasive. Especially in the face of Jesus' many statements that would seem to contradict it. ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lynn MagdalenCollege
Shipmate
# 10651
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
To my mind this is one of the big sticking points of Christianity. Everyone feels that their life is from themselves, and that they have the power to do good or to do evil. <snip>
How do we extract ourselves from this conundrum?
It's a good question, Freddy - I think it goes to the place of our simplicity. Paul exhorts us to grow up in our faith and I think lots of people don't. Awhile back, God spent a whole year teaching me about tension - I kept resisting it, looking for a way to end up at one end or the other of a situation or an issue - looking for a way to resolve the conundrum, as it were! And what God showed me is that *tension* is an inherent part of our experience as humans and as Christians. As I resisted this (!! - I'm stubborn), God reminded me that, as a guitarist, I should appreciate tension - one can't play a guitar without the proper tension on the strings; not only that, but the proper tension on each string in relation to all the other strings!
So I've come to think a lot of this is about learning to live in the tension between two apparently contradictory points, and accepting that some people live closer to one end or the other. Many of the great debates in Christianity can, I think, be seen appropriately in these terms. So this "guitar string" attaches on one end to salvation by grace alone, through faith, and that not of ourselves - and runs down to the other extreme of "if you love Me, do My works!" Yes, I can do nothing good of myself - but if I sit on my butt, I do nothing good, period. There's another "guitar string" which attaches at "God is good and loving and doesn't want anyone to perish" and the other end attaches at "God is perfect and righteous and cannot look upon sin." Another huge point of tension, imho.
Personally, I don't like tension. But I'm trying to learn to live in it, with grace... *sigh*
--------------------
Erin & Friend; Been there, done that; Ruth musical
Posts: 6263 | From: California | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
Very nicely said, LMC. Tension certainly is an important ingredient in life.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LynnMagdalenCollege:
So this "guitar string" attaches on one end to salvation by grace alone, through faith, and that not of ourselves - and runs down to the other extreme of "if you love Me, do My works!" Yes, I can do nothing good of myself - but if I sit on my butt, I do nothing good, period. There's another "guitar string" which attaches at "God is good and loving and doesn't want anyone to perish" and the other end attaches at "God is perfect and righteous and cannot look upon sin."
And the music that emerges is more beautiful than any of us could have imagined.
-Digory
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
I'm enough of a semi-Pelagian to believe that God can only do His saving work in us when we co-operate with Him, but it seems to me that the question of free will is what divides us over this issue. Everyone seems to believe that God wills the salvation of all and has provided for it in the atoning work of Christ, but we differ on the extent to which human free will could prevent God from achieving what He wants and what was His plan for creation.
It is the multiplicity of wills within creation which is responsible for all sin and disorder, and all separation both of creatures from God and from one another. But if God allows that to continue into eternity He has failed to achieve His will which is the reconciliation of all. God cannot fail. So sooner or later, what we consider to be our free will is just the freedom God allows us, inorder to experience the pains of separation, which lead us to repentance. James put it thus:
"Go to now, ye that say, To day or to morrow we will go into such a city, and continue there a year, and buy and sell, and get gain: Wheras ye know not what shall be on the morrow. For what is your life?It is even a vapour, that appeareth for a little time, and then vanisheth away. For that ye ought to say, if the Lord will, we shall live, and do this, or that". (Jas 4.13-15)
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
It is the multiplicity of wills within creation which is responsible for all sin and disorder, and all separation both of creatures from God and from one another. But if God allows that to continue into eternity He has failed to achieve His will which is the reconciliation of all. God cannot fail. So sooner or later, what we consider to be our free will is just the freedom God allows us, inorder to experience the pains of separation, which lead us to repentance.
Amazingly, I agree with all of this. God cannot fail, and therefore humanity will be saved irregardless of human freedom.
But does the success of the long term goal mean that that every individual must have exactly the same long term outcome? How much differentiation is acceptable?
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
I got confused there, Freddy.
Success of the long-term goal = everyone is saved, right?
So what is the long-term outcome you speak of, if it's different than that?
-Digory
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Niënna
Ship's Lotus Blossom
# 4652
|
Posted
May I pose a question to Demas, Freddy, and PaulTh*, and Professor Kirke?
When you get to a scripture which may indicate a hell or a separation of the peoples of earth into two different destinies - how do you respond?
[ 21. November 2005, 03:52: Message edited by: Joyfulsoul ]
--------------------
[Nino points a gun at Chiki]
Nino: Now... tell me. Who started the war?
Chiki: [long pause] We did.
~No Man's Land
Posts: 2298 | From: Purgatory | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
That's a great question, JoyfulSoul.
First, not to be an ass, but I have to remind everyone that what I do with hell verses is the same thing that other people do with unitarian verses. You have to do some explaining away of the verses which don't line up with your own way of thinking because the Bible is *NOT* crystal clear as some like to think. (I know you're not one of those, Joyful, thank God.)
Next, in answer to your question:
I find that Hell verses tend to fall into two categories (probably more but these are the ones I notice often).
1) Speaking of punishments or separations or consequences of our actions that are temporary in this lifetime.
2) A hyperbole referring to the seriousness of Jesus' words, and referring to some sort of eternal afterlife of punishment.
The (2) verses are hard, and sometimes I just have to admit that I don't really know.
-Digory
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
Unitarian verses???
No. Universalist verses. Wow.
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Demas
Ship's Deserter
# 24
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Joyfulsoul:
May I pose a question to Demas, Freddy, and PaulTh*, and Professor Kirke?
When you get to a scripture which may indicate a hell or a separation of the peoples of earth into two different destinies - how do you respond?
Following on from professorkirke, an initial glib answer:
When you get to a scripture which may indicate the universal saving triumph of God - how do you respond?
Tom Talbott argues here that there are passages in the New Testament which have been used to show:
quote:
(1) It is God's redemptive purpose for the world (and therefore his will) to reconcile all sinners to himself;
(2) It is within God's power to achieve his redemptive purpose for the world;
(3) Some sinners will never be reconciled to God, and God will therefore either consign them to a place of eternal punishment, from which there will be no hope of escape, or put them out of existence altogether.
Obviously, these three points are not compatible with each other. Briefly, Calvinists deny (1), Arminians (2) and Universalists (3); but no matter what their theology, everyone has to confront difficult passages.
Which is the weakest proposition? I feel that the biblical witness is firm and clear on (1) and (2), and that the examples of (3) are "typically lifted from contexts of parable, hyperbole, and great symbolism" (Talbott).
In other words, I interpret scriptures speaking of endless punishment and separation of God in the light of the other scriptures stating that God loves us, is almighty, and that love doesn't fail.
--------------------
They did not appear very religious; that is, they were not melancholy; and I therefore suspected they had not much piety - Life of Rev John Murray
Posts: 1894 | From: Thessalonica | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
