Do you Believe that God is "PERFECTLY LOVING?

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by Sabellius

Crakjak:

You have just committed a logical fallacy. You said, "I believe exactly what this verse says. All God's creation will eventually "see" and experience His salvation."

Luke says, "And all flesh shall see the salvation of God." (Luke 3:6 NKJV)

I'll take the words of Luke. If you'll reread your self you will notice that your arguments are emotive.

I don't think Dr. Luke is making the point the that ALL MEN will just "see" God's salvation. As if God will just tease all men with sometime they will never have. No man will "see" the salvation of God and reject His love, and eventually all will see. I'll add Romans 5.18 to support Bro. Luke:

"Therefore JUST as one man's (ADAM) trespass led to condemnation [or doom] for ALL, so one man's (JESUS') act of righteousness leads to justification and LIFE FOR ALL".

This is one of the scriptures that you can see the greater hope, that is if you can let go of the traditional view of a vengeful god.

What is a just "recompense of reward" for someone "born and shapen in iniquity" with an adversary working to deceive that misses the "narrow gate" in his physical life? Some say a endless torment in fire? How about a purifying fire that destroys forever the old man, to save his soul "although by fire".

BTW: I didn't know Pentecostals had a problem with emotion?

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by Chan

Just because all flesh shall see the salvation of God doesn't mean that all flesh will be beneficiaries of that salvation.

Chan and Sab, you have to explain away allot of scripture to reach the point you posted above. I may post some of it in future post, but for now I want to introduce a quote by Thomas Talbott.

"The universalist perspective rests upon two theological assumptions for which we can find ample support in the NT: first, that God, being perfectly loving, wills or sincerely desires the redemption of all sinners, and second, that God, being almighty, has the power to achieve this end. If you accept both of these assumptions, then universalism follows as a deductive consequence. So if you reject universalism, then you must also reject at least one of these assumptions; that is you must either deny that God wills (or sincerely desires) the redemption of all sinners or deny that He has the power to achieve it. The Augustinians (Calvinists) deny the first assumption, and the Arminians deny the second. But St. Paul, I have argued, endores both assumptions; and in some of his most systematic theological discourses, such as Romans 5 and 11 and I Corinthians 15, he explicitly endorses the idea of universal reconciliation as well." Quoted from, "The Inescapable Love of God" by Thomas Talbott.

[JN Anderson]

Originally Posted by crakjak

I don't think Dr. Luke is making the point the that ALL MEN will just "see" God's salvation. As if God will just tease all men with sometime they will never have. No man will "see" the salvation of God and reject His love, and eventually all will see. I'll add Romans 5.18 to support Bro. Luke:

CJ:

You are adding to scripture. Luke said "see" not experience. Plain and simple. The Greek word for "see" literally means to "look at" or "behold." The experience is provided by those who express faith in Christ and partake of the Gospel.

Originally Posted by crakjak

"Therefore JUST as one man's (ADAM) trespass led to condemnation [or doom] for ALL, so one man's (JESUS') act of righteousness leads to justification and LIFE FOR ALL".

What translation are you using? The NKJV says, "Therefore, as through one man's offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man's righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life." (Romans 5:18 NKJV)

This is a LOT different than what you posted. Is adding to scripture becoming something of a habit for you or what?

Originally Posted by crakjak

BTW: I didn't know Pentecostals had a problem with emotion?

An emotive argument is one that usually relies upon the emotions to create and sustain certain postulations. It seems your is replete with this. It has nothing to do with one's religious acquaintance particularly.

[crakjak]

"Therefore, as through one man's offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man's righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life." (Romans 5:18 NKJV)



"Therefore JUST as one man's trespass led to condemnation [or doom] for ALL, so one man's act of righteousness leads to justification and LIFE FOR ALL".(Romans 5.18 NRSV)

Sabellius,

Both of these renderings tells that the very same group of folks that were condemned by Adam's sin, is the very same group that are justified by Jesus' blood. I believe you would agree that ALL were condemned, why is it so hard to believe that all WERE justified?

You can skirt around the point by accusing me of adding to scripture, but it is you that has not explained away the clear teaching of this scripture. This is only one of several scriptures that Paul clearly says this same thing.

BTW: Romans 5.18 supports my view of Luke 3.6!

[JN Anderson]

Originally Posted by crakjak

"Therefore, as through one man's offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man's righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life." (Romans 5:18 NKJV)



"Therefore JUST as one man's trespass led to condemnation [or doom] for ALL, so one man's act of righteousness leads to justification and LIFE FOR ALL".(Romans 5.18 NRSV)

Sabellius,

Both of these renderings tells that the very same group of folks that were condemned by Adam's sin, is the very same group that are justified by Jesus' blood. I believe you would agree that ALL were condemned, why is it so hard to believe that all WERE justified?

You can skirt around the point by accusing me of adding to scripture, but it is you that has not explained away the clear teaching of this scripture. This is only one of several scriptures that Paul clearly says this same thing.

BTW: Romans 5.18 supports my view of Luke 3.6!

You have no biblical support for Universalism. If heretical doctrine of universalism were being taught here, Paul would he contradicting himself, for he has already pictured men as perishing because of sin (2:12; cf. 1Cor 1:18).

Further, his entire presentation of salvation has emphasized the fact that justification is granted only on the basis of faith. Logically then we conclude that only as "the many" are found in Christ can they qualify as belonging to the righteous.

[JN Anderson]

Originally Posted by crakjak

Chan and Sab, you have to explain away allot of scripture to reach the point you posted above. I may post some of it in future post, but for now I want to introduce a quote by Thomas Talbott.

"The universalist perspective rests upon two theological assumptions for which we can find ample support in the NT: first, that God, being perfectly loving, wills or sincerely desires the redemption of all sinners, and second, that God, being almighty, has the power to achieve this end. If you accept both of these assumptions, then universalism follows as a deductive consequence. So if you reject universalism, then you must also reject at least one of these assumptions; that is you must either deny that God wills (or sincerely desires) the redemption of all sinners or deny that He has the power to achieve it. The Augustinians (Calvinists) deny the first assumption, and the Arminians deny the second. But St. Paul, I have argued, endores both assumptions; and in some of his most systematic theological discourses, such as Romans 5 and 11 and I Corinthians 15, he explicitly endorses the idea of universal reconciliation as well." Quoted from, "The Inescapable Love of God" by Thomas Talbott.

Talbott does not consider that God has given man free will to choose His salvation. Instead, he imagines a God that forces His acts and decisions, unilaterally, upon man. False. Again.

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by Sabellius

You have no biblical support for Universalism. If heretical doctrine of universalism were being taught here, Paul would he contradicting himself, for he has already pictured men as perishing because of sin (2:12; cf. 1Cor 1:18).

Further, his entire presentation of salvation has emphasized the fact that justification is granted only on the basis of faith. Logically then we conclude that only as "the many" are found in Christ can they qualify as belonging to the righteous.

The support for Universalism is pervasive, however it is in the background due to the traditional view that God is the creator and maintainer of a "hellhole" of endless torture. This view took hold during the dark ages as a means for Rome to manipulate and control the masses. Paul no where describes a place of endless punishment, don't you think that is strange since He was the apostle to the Gentiles?

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by Sabellius

Talbott does not consider that God has given man free will to choose His salvation. Instead, he imagines a God that forces His acts and decisions, unilaterally, upon man. False. Again.

I have expressed my view of freewill on Chan's thread, you can review it there if you are interested.

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by Sabellius

Talbott does not consider that God has given man free will to choose His salvation. Instead, he imagines a God that forces His acts and decisions, unilaterally, upon man. False. Again.

Neither do I, scripture tells us that nobody can come to God unless the Spirit draws (literally means "drag") one to Him. The natural man will in no way seek God, when someone comes to God, God has orchestrated the circumstance. We have free will ONLY with the perimeters of the path that has been set before us. Had you be born Hitler would you have handled your circumstances better than he?? Given the same circumstances you and I are potentially the "worse of sinners."

The Spirit calls or draws folks to enter into what Jesus has ALREADY completed, "while we were YET sinners Christ died for us."

God forces no one, except thru orchestrated circumstances that will eventually cause ALL to willfully enter in. Jesus came to seek and to save, so the worst of sinners is in a good position to enter in. All sin will be dealt with, no sin will enter heaven, all works will be tried by fire, and everything that is not pure will be removed.

Originally Posted by Sabellius

Talbott does not consider that God has given man free will to choose His salvation. Instead, he imagines a God that forces His acts and decisions, unilaterally, upon man. False. Again.

Are you sure it's FREE will? Is it the RIGHT to choose? If it's the RIGHT to choose then God has no right to punish anyone for exercising a right He gave them.