Does Christian Universalism sidestep the justice of God?

[face2face]

I can only assume you have not heard ie, not understood my reply to your question, post #158

Can you see the irony in you making reference to a single post 142 posts ago, when you blatantly disregarded all of my posts on this subject? I went back and read your post out of respect for yours, and would you not agree its rather vague? Nail your colours to the mast and tell us what you truly believe. Do you believe all peoples will inherit eternal life regardless of their status before God, good or otherwise? We all know sin and death will be done away with in the end so that's no revelation and all Christians hold to that belief. What of the sheep and goats? What of the one who thinks he has Christ as a covering at the wedding feast only to find he is naked and shamed? What of the dogs, sexually immoral and false teachers who are outside the confines of New Jerusalem?

“Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city. Rev 22:14

Who has the right to enter?
Explain what it means to wash ones robes?
Why is there, at this time gates to this city?

Let's see if you can speak to the Word.

F2F

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

Yes, Jesus tortures people FOREVER and boy, do they deserve it! If I ask nicely, do you think Jesus would let me torture some of them? I sure hope so because I would love to watch Jesus, the master torturer, make them suffer!

View attachment 35760

"Vengeance is mine, says the Lord", but it is not eternal. It is age- during/ age- lasting. Destruction means to put an end to. You can't destroy some forever. That would be an indestructible destruction, a contradiction. Eternal suffering would not glorify God in any way. So if this one thing is your primary reason for believing in Universalism, remove it. Picture Gollum falling into the lava lake in The Lord of the Rings. How long did he suffer? Seconds maybe until he disintegrated.

 

[St. SteVen]

So if this one thing is your primary reason for believing in Universalism, remove it.

Ah, so you are an Annihilationist. Got it.

 

[Patrick1966]

"Vengeance is mine, says the Lord", but it is not eternal. It is age- during/ age- lasting. Destruction means to put an end to. You can't destroy some forever. That would be an indestructible destruction, a contradiction. Eternal suffering would not glorify God in any way. So if this one thing is your primary reason for believing in Universalism, remove it. Picture Gollum falling into the lava lake in The Lord of the Rings. How long did he suffer? Seconds maybe until he disintegrated.

So Jesus tortures untold billions of people and then kills them dead forever? I presume this happens BEFORE Jesus eliminates death in 1 Corinthians 15, right? So Jesus, incapable of persuading people to follow him, tortures and kills them. That is definitely a foundational teaching of mainstream Christianity.

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

How can God's justice be fulfilled in UR if everyone is saved in the end?

Is the wrath of God absent in Christian Universalism?

Let's discuss. Thanks.

Universalism focuses exclusively on God's love and mercy and ignores his holiness, justice, and wrath.

The Psalms teach (and most of the Bible) that without hell, what justice would there be for murderers of millions, such as Hitler, Stalin, and Mao? Universalists say Christ’s sacrifice on the cross met all the demands for God’s justice ... true, but for only for those who believe in Him _ in this life. The fact that often there is no justice in this life requires that a just God impose it in the next.
In Universalism, Sin is irrelevant, minimized and trivialized. And by refusing to call anything right or wrong, universalists not only cancel the need for Christ's redeeming sacrifice but also ignore the consequences of unrepented sin.

I think Universalists (not knowingly or intentionally) excuse all sinful ways, since everyone will eventually be forgiven, so it doesn't matter how sinful you are now, Christ died for all sins, right? It is easy to view God as loving everyone, all merciful and all forgiving. But if that were so, then Judgment Day would never really come, threats of imprisonment in Hades or destruction in the Lake of Fire, would just be empty threats, scare tactics to influence one to submit.

There wouldn't be numerous passages that are black and white, "Believe in Jesus" ... or else suffer the consequences.

This urgency to spread the gospel would not be necessary IF everyone gets saved. Righteous living and obedience to God's laws would be beneficial to abide by, but no worries_ if not _ you get saved anyways. With this mindset, the "born again" transformation from above will happen to all _ eventually and regardless of the religion you hold. Why did Jesus state that "you must born again to enter into the kingdom of heaven"? Why bother mentioing it if He intends to trnasform all? Even a relationship with God would be optional in this life _ not really crucial right now _ no worries _ we will all have eternity with Him. And this mindset of course nullifies the Bible. Everyone can just pass out the Quran, the Bhagavad Gita, Budha's Chinese proverbs, Dianetics or just any self help psychology book instead , whatever your fancy, whatever is available. How nice. So is it essential to "believe in Christ in this life?" To them, No, after you die you'll get another chance _ they presume. Of course at death, if one was ushered into a dark dungeon with an atmosphere of torment and misery, one would quickly change their minds. But the Bible speaks of a Rich caught in this very state. Abraham speaks to him and says that their is no hope for him, that he lived his life, made his choices and the consequences of his choices are fixed and a great gulf separates them and that no one can pass over to either side.
The wages of sin is death, which is the separation from all that is good and God. This is the message in Luke 16.

This is sort of the ecumenical movement that will combine all religions into one. It's an all roads lead to heaven religion. How nice, how safe ... it's a "get out of jail free" pass given to all.


In this modern era of moral relativism, judgments of any kind have been declared too harsh ... even bad grades in school are seen as negative, hurtful of our self esteem and so everyone gets a passing grade no matter what. Equality is forced, demanded. .
But God does not ordain "equality" in life. He can't when sin and evil exist. There are rich and there are poor, healthy and sick, some live long happy lives and others short miserable ones. There is no equality between men and women either, spiritually yes, but our roles in life are different. People applying for jobs aren't equal, they have different levels of education, intelligence, experience, etc.
It seems to me that this Universalism is an off shoot of moral relativism and leading towards an ecumenical movement, a one world religion.

 

[quietthinker]

Can you see the irony in you making reference to a single post 142 posts ago, when you blatantly disregarded all of my posts on this subject? I went back and read your post out of respect for yours, and would you not agree its rather vague? Nail your colours to the mast and tell us what you truly believe. Do you believe all peoples will inherit eternal life regardless of their status before God, good or otherwise? We all know sin and death will be done away with in the end so that's no revelation and all Christians hold to that belief. What of the sheep and goats? What of the one who thinks he has Christ as a covering at the wedding feast only to find he is naked and shamed? What of the dogs, sexually immoral and false teachers who are outside the confines of New Jerusalem?

“Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city. Rev 22:14

Who has the right to enter?
Explain what it means to wash ones robes?
Why is there, at this time gates to this city?

Let's see if you can speak to the Word.

F2F

Your status is that of a child of God, your condition miserable.

Take the story of the prodigal son, a story Jesus crafted. He was a child of the Father even while he was getting his rocks off with whores and feeding pigs. His decadent lifestyle stripped his belief in being a Son. He thought in terms of reward and punishment ie, what he deserved, not in terms of relationship. He came home wanting to be a servant but the father would have none of it.

The older brother had the same issue, he felt entitled, particularly to judge. He thought his inheritance was deserved and complained about the Father's generosity. How did the Father feel about that?

The Father was overjoyed that his lost/ profligate Son chose to return, negative judgement was not even on the table. What did the Father do? He chose the undignified action of running to meet his boy; out of duty? out of obligation?...surely it was out of the spontaneous affection he had nurtured as he looked daily in the distance in hope for his return. In hurried excitement he orders the finest clothing be brought, a ring, expensive footwear and a party to end all parties.....for what? Was it not to convince the Son of his status? The Father didn't need to be convinced.
Was the Father's attitude toward the older brother any different? I don't think so, he too was invited to the party and reminded of his inheritance.

The status of both was that of Sons; the condition of both miserable in how they saw their relationship to their Father and to each other. Both relationships as far as the Father was concerned hadn't changed, he deemed them both as Sons.

The older brother was quick to disown his brother in his statement 'this son of yours' as opposed to 'this brother of mine'. He back handedly blames the Father.....even though the Father reminds him of his inheritance.

Did the older brother come to the party? It appears not. He chose not to come in spite of being included....in spite of the privilege of enjoying his Father's wealth. All he could do was complain.

God is not alienated from humanity, it is humanity which is alienated from God.
God identifies with humanity while humanity murders the lover.

God's affection for his children is Universal (there we have that pesky word) while mans affection is for his own opinion and this opinion is evidenced by his speed to disown his brothers and sisters putting the responsibility on his siblings and God.
The older brother's choice was to deny, to blame and to attempt to control, ultimately choosing to not enter the party (eternal life)

Unfortunately many will choose not to come to God's party; they choose the broad road of which there are several descriptions (tares, goats, dogs etc)

 

[face2face]

Your status is that of a child of God, your condition miserable.

Yes, most miserable.

Take the story of the prodigal son, a story Jesus crafted. He was a child of the Father even while he was getting his rocks off with whores and feeding pigs. His decadent lifestyle stripped his belief in being a Son. He thought in terms of reward and punishment ie, what he deserved, not in terms of relationship. He came home wanting to be a servant but the father would have none of it.

Agree - love this parable!

The older brother had the same issue, he felt entitled, particularly to judge. He thought his inheritance was deserved and complained about the Father's generosity. How did the Father feel about that?

Thus he represented the Pharisees and their reluctance to celebrate with his sinful brother.

The Father was overjoyed that his lost/ profligate Son chose to return, negative judgement was not even on the table. What did the Father do? He chose the undignified action of running to meet his boy; out of duty? out of obligation?...surely it was out of the spontaneous affection he had nurtured as he looked daily in the distance in hope for his return. In hurried excitement he orders the finest clothing be brought, a ring, expensive footwear and a party to end all parties.....for what? Was it not to convince the Son of his status? The Father didn't need to be convinced.

He looked down the road every day awaiting his return!

Was the Father's attitude toward the older brother any different? I don't think so, he too was invited to the party and reminded of his inheritance.

No, different, however the Pharisee could not humble himself enough to see his need. He relied on his natural lineage to Abraham and failed to see the requirement of faith, which is why the record ends with him not entering in. The implication for all who reject the joy of forgiveness and the blessing of inheritance, is to remain without.

The status of both was that of Sons; the condition of both miserable in how they saw their relationship to their Father and to each other. Both relationships as far as the Father was concerned hadn't changed, he deemed them both as Sons.

One received embrace, inheritance and blessing while the other retain his hatred and inward envying of his brother, possibly because he wanted to do those things but lived in fear of his father (the same as doing them!) . (remember Jesus called them an adulterous generation!)

The older brother was quick to disown his brother in his statement 'this son of yours' as opposed to 'this brother of mine'. He back handedly blames the Father.....even though the Father reminds him of his inheritance.

Which he would lose if he retained these ill feelings.

Did the older brother come to the party? It appears not.

No, the New Covenant was extended to them but they did not embrace it.

He chose not to come in spite of being included....in spite of the privilege of enjoying his Father's wealth. All he could do was complain.

God is not alienated from humanity, it is humanity which is alienated from God.
God identifies with humanity while humanity murders the lover.

God's affection for his children is Universal (there we have that pesky word) while mans affection is for his own opinion and this opinion is evidenced by his speed to disown his brothers and sisters putting the responsibility on his siblings and God.
The older brother's choice was to deny, to blame and to attempt to control, ultimately choosing to not enter the party (eternal life)

Unfortunately many will choose not to come to God's party; they choose the broad road of which there are several descriptions (tares, goats, dogs etc)

True,

The elder = scribes and Pharisees;
younger = publicans and sinners Read verse 1-2 –
The wider application to Jew and Gentile as per Luke 14:23 And the lord said unto the servant, Go out into the highways and hedges, and compel them to come in, that my house may be filled. [24] For I say unto you, That none of those men which were bidden shall taste of my supper.

The implication is clear - the elder brother with that attitude would not taste of the supper or the feast put on by his Heavenly Father.

It's subtle, and there is no squeezing Universalism into either parables.

The question is this for both Sons?

What is the critical element of the story?

It must be the moment the younger son “came to himself” – he had allowed sin to take charge of his better self, and it had deceived the
real person. Read Rom 7:22-24

If a person does not come to himself and return to God in humility he cannot take part in any divine inheritance - yes they receive the earthly reward which is this life but they cannot take part in the next.

You cannot allow yourself to fail to discern the warning...detriment to ones health!

F2F

 

[face2face]

@quietthinker I enjoyed reading your post thank you. It's not often in this forum people take the time to explain one of Christs amazing parables.
F2F

 

[BlessedPeace]

How can God's justice be fulfilled in UR if everyone is saved in the end?

Is the wrath of God absent in Christian Universalism?

Let's discuss. Thanks.

Could be that God's justice happens during our lifetime.

 

[face2face]

Could be that God's justice happens during our lifetime.

This life is a probation after all...faith tested and tried.

 

[quietthinker]

Yes, most miserable.

Agree - love this parable!

Thus he represented the Pharisees and their reluctance to celebrate with his sinful brother.

He looked down the road every day awaiting his return!

No, different, however the Pharisee could not humble himself enough to see his need. He relied on his natural lineage to Abraham and failed to see the requirement of faith, which is why the record ends with him not entering in. The implication for all who reject the joy of forgiveness and the blessing of inheritance, is to remain without.


One received embrace, inheritance and blessing while the other retain his hatred and inward envying of his brother, possibly because he wanted to do those things but lived in fear of his father (the same as doing them!) . (remember Jesus called them an adulterous generation!)

Which he would lose if he retained these ill feelings.

No, the New Covenant was extended to them but they did not embrace it.

True,

The elder = scribes and Pharisees;
younger = publicans and sinners Read verse 1-2 –
The wider application to Jew and Gentile as per Luke 14:23 And the lord said unto the servant, Go out into the highways and hedges, and compel them to come in, that my house may be filled. [24] For I say unto you, That none of those men which were bidden shall taste of my supper.

The implication is clear - the elder brother with that attitude would not taste of the supper or the feast put on by his Heavenly Father.

It's subtle, and there is no squeezing Universalism into either parables.

The question is this for both Sons?

What is the critical element of the story?

It must be the moment the younger son “came to himself” – he had allowed sin to take charge of his better self, and it had deceived the
real person. Read Rom 7:22-24

If a person does not come to himself and return to God in humility he cannot take part in any divine inheritance - yes they receive the earthly reward which is this life but they cannot take part in the next.

You cannot allow yourself to fail to discern the warning...detriment to ones health!

F2F

The story has greater scope than just Jew and Gentile. It encompasses the gap between those who think they have it right over and above others. It also highlights the generosity of the Father to both not because of merit (what they deserved) but because of his affection.
The older brother is not only the Pharisee, the religious Jew but believers of every stripe, those who deem themselves in the fold, those who consider themselves as biblical and have 150 texts to prove their rightness, those who are sure others are heretics and make no bones telling them so. They resent the Fathers generosity to the profligate because he is obviously undeserving....while holding the view they are deserving because they are not unfaithful even studied and practiced diligently for 50 yrs.

The story knocks on our own front and back doors alarmingly loudly!

Disqualification is not done by God. To the shock horror of many it is done by ourselves .....even while we sing the old song........yet the book of Revelation informs us God's people sing a new song. Yes, a new song! I wonder what that new song is if it is not that of giving God glory for his boundless generosity to the profligates of the World.

 

[St. SteVen]

Could be that God's justice happens during our lifetime.

That's a great observation.
There are natural consequences that follow us and keep us in line.

Unfortunately, many Christians feel that this is not enough.
They want to see anyone outside their little tribe burn forever.
Forgetting that they were deserving of what they wish on others.

 

[St. SteVen]

Wow. You are an absolute well spring of misinformation about Universalism.
Perhaps you didn't know we were discussing Christian Universalism, not Unitarian Universalism?

Universalism focuses exclusively on God's love and mercy and ignores his holiness, justice, and wrath.

No, Christian Universalism recognizes that God's "holiness, justice, and wrath" are a manifestation of his love.
We don't believe in a two-faced god.

Universalists say Christ’s sacrifice on the cross met all the demands for God’s justice ... true,

No. Christian Universalism says that Christ’s sacrifice on the cross paid our death penalty for sin.
God's justice for the individual still needs to be addressed. This happens in the Age of Reconciliation.

In Universalism, Sin is irrelevant, minimized and trivialized.

Another over-reaction.
Every idle word and intentional deed will have consequences, in this life and the Age to come.

And by refusing to call anything right or wrong, universalists not only cancel the need for Christ's redeeming sacrifice but also ignore the consequences of unrepented sin.

Wrong again. You are speaking of moral relativism.
And "Christ's redeeming sacrifice" is at the center of UR doctrine.
Viewed as MUCH needed, not unneeded.

I think Universalists (not knowingly or intentionally) excuse all sinful ways, since everyone will eventually be forgiven

Wrong again.

But if that were so, then Judgment Day would never really come, threats of imprisonment in Hades or destruction in the Lake of Fire, would just be empty threats, scare tactics to influence one to submit.

So, you prefer the scare tactics to be real? The believe or burn gospel?
Which amounts to spiritual extortion. An offer you can't refuse.
What kind of "free gift" is that?

No. Judgment Day will definitely come. And religious people will be shocked at where they end up.
Jesus said: "Everyone will be salted with fire. " - Mark 9:49

Malachi 3:2
But who can endure the day of his coming? Who can stand when he appears?
For he will be like a refiner’s fire or a launderer’s soap.

This is sort of the ecumenical movement that will combine all religions into one. It's an all roads lead to heaven religion. How nice, how safe ... it's a "get out of jail free" pass given to all.

We are discussing Christian Universalism, not Unitarian Universalism.
I hope this post is clearing things up for you. In previous posts by you, it seemed you were supportive of UR.
Not sure if I misunderstood, or if you took a turn somewhere along the line. ???

It seems to me that this Universalism is an off shoot of moral relativism and leading towards an ecumenical movement, a one world religion.

Not true.
Christian Universalism has its roots in the early church in the east.

The main Patristic supporters of the apokatastasis theory, such as Bardaisan, Clement, Origin, Didymus, St. Anthony, St. Pamphilus Martyr, Methodius, St. Macrina, St. Gregory of Nyssa (and probably the two other Cappadocians), St. Evagrius Ponticus, Diodore of Tarsus, Theodore of Mopsuestia, St. John of Jerusalem, Rufinus, St. Jerome and St. Augustine (at least initially) … Cassian, St. Issac of Nineveh, St. John of Dalyatha, Ps. Dionysius the Areopagite, probably St. Maximus the Confessor, up to John the Scot Eriugena, and many others, grounded their Christian doctrine of apokatastasis first of all in the Bible.
— Ramelli, Christian Doctrine, 11.

"The Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge" by Schaff-Herzog, 1908, volume 12, page 96 German theologian- Philip Schaff, Editor: "In the first five or six centuries of Christianity there were six theological schools, of which four (Alexandria, Antioch, Caesarea, and Edessa, or Nisibis) were Universalist, one (Ephesus) accepted conditional immortality; one (Carthage or Rome) taught endless punishment of the wicked. Other theological schools are mentioned as founded by Universalists, but their actual doctrine on this subject is not known."

 

[St. SteVen]

Wow! Fantastic post.
This bit really captures the essence of it.

God is not alienated from humanity, it is humanity which is alienated from God.
God identifies with humanity while humanity murders the lover.

This is the view of the Father with his eyes searching for his lost children, and arms wide open when they return.
This is the God of love. That God is love. Full of mercy.

 

[Lizbeth]

So, you prefer the scare tactics to be real? The believe or burn gospel?
Which amounts to spiritual extortion. An offer you can't refuse.
What kind of "free gift" is that?

The bible says to save some by fear and others by compassion. Nevertheless how many believed and heeded Noah's fair warnings of the coming flood, given in love (whether through fear or compassion), and got on board the ark of salvation? The flood in Noah's time is a picture of the coming judgment day for this age (2 Peter 3). The book of Revelation has a lot to say about judgment also. I don't know what book some of you are reading.....it's deception and spiritual blindness to believe there is redemption for the unbelieving and devils, it's just not taught in scripture, rather we are taught and warned of the opposite and that is the reason why the gospel needs to be urgently preached. Saved means saved, and perish means perish.

 

[St. SteVen]

The bible says to save some by fear and others by compassion.

I'm not familiar with that. Is that actually in the Bible?
Or something a preacher said?

 

[St. SteVen]

The flood in Noah's time is a picture of the coming judgment day for this age (2 Peter 3).

Some would say that makes the coming judgement a fiction.
But nervertheless, I believe in the Judgement Day. (Age of Reconciliation)

I don't know what book some of you are reading.....it's deception and spiritual blindness to believe there is redemption for the unbelieving and devils, it's just not taught in scripture,

Have you heard of the Harrowing of Hell?
Where was Jesus for three days before his resurrection?

rather we are taught and warned of the opposite and that is the reason why the gospel needs to be urgently preached. Saved means saved, and perish means perish.

What about the countless billions that have never heard?

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

Perhaps you didn't know we were discussing Christian Universalism, not Unitarian Universalism?

The implications are the same, aren't they ... in the end everyone gets saved? You take the liberty of.distinquishing your religion from Unitarianism, but you both thino everyonebwill be saved. I mean that is the fundamental flaw that you both have.
It is an act of gross negligence for a church to use the word Christian and attach it to Univerisalism. This is truly a warped theology.
So you claim to be a Christian, yet you ignor the consequences of not believing in Jesus. You imply ( whether you are aware if it or not) that a Buddhist, a Hindu, a Muslim, or even an atheist will eventually get saved. The main implication is that no matter what you believe, or how much you sin, it will all be forgiven.
The Christian faith is the belief in Christ while we are living. We are saved by grace through faith. It is a gift tobthose who are chosen, the elect.
Were those who died in the Flood or Noah saved? NO! We're thise in Sodom and Gomorrah saved? No. Their punishment/ destruction was a sober example message to all to repent, turn to God in this life, or else.
The soul purpose of human life is to be reconciled with God _ at some point in your life. If you do not have a secure relationship with God before you die YOU DO NOT GET A SECOND CHANCE. Where in scripture do you see that there is a second chance after death?
You seem to identify with Christ, believe in Him, but only part of the Christian theology that has been taught since Christ. Yes Origen and others believed in this theology but it was considered heresy.
You don't seem to really understand what death means. There is a physical death and a spiritual death. A finite judgment and permanence of separation from God, all that is good and heaven is the nature of death. Only in this physical life, can someone be reconciled with God through Christ. Once you are dead, your state is fixed - you are either saved or not. The Bible teaches this Christianity. There is a worldwide acceptance of this theology, but your religion distorts these truths.
Luke 16 is not a parable. Jesus' parables never identify specific people by names, like Abraham and create somebl ficticious, abstract realm to mean something symbolic. He was describing Hades, a real place and the Rich man's state was fixed. He was asking for mercy and was given none. He asked for a drop of water, hoping to get more, but no water was given. When he realized that there was no hope for him ever, he pleaded to Abraham to send someone to inform his brothers of this horrible place so that they would not suffer the same fate as him. This answer again was no, tyabthey had tue prophets and didn't believe nor would they believe a Messiah who would rise from the dead.
Death and Hades and all who are in it get thrown into the Lake of Fire and are destroyed. (Rev. 20:14). This is the final judgment that will include the first heaven and first earth as well ( 2 Peter 3:10)
Btw, I never agreed with any form of universalism. What I don't agree with is eternal domination. But in damnation, yes. The damned are already judged. Gid will separate his sheep from the rest of the ungodly when He comes, the wheat from the tares. Didn't you know that tares can never become wheat. They may look similar, but they are not.
So at death, you are either "in Christ" or not. And with those who are not, their fate is sealed. That is there judgment.
You need to revise your definition of death.
In this life, we are given choices that have consequences, some are temporal but one choice is perminent that leads to eternal life or death. It really gives honor and value to salvation. We who are saved really are thankful for being saved from darkness and death.

 

[St. SteVen]

I don't know what book some of you are reading.....it's deception and spiritual blindness to believe there is redemption for the unbelieving and devils

Amazing to me that God's Elect are the most merciless people on the planet.
To whom much was given, they are quick to forget.

 

[St. SteVen]

St. SteVen said:
Perhaps you didn't know we were discussing Christian Universalism, not Unitarian Universalism?

The implications are the same, aren't they ... in the end everyone gets saved? You take the liberty of.distinquishing your religion from Unitarianism, but you both thino everyonebwill be saved. I mean that is the fundamental flaw that you both have.

On the contrary, my good fellow.
Is it not God's will that everyone would be saved? Why do you find that so offensive?
No one will enter heaven until they are right with God. Whether they are Christians or not.

Romans 2:16 NIV
This will take place on the day when God judges people’s secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares.