Skepticism versus gullibility

[St. SteVen]

Just heard a sermon that came down pretty hard on skepticism.
Trying to process how I feel about that. Thanks for listening. (send help)

It appears that there is no room for healthy skepticism in the church.
But for some reason the skeptics weren't called gullible. No one was, actually.

We are offered apologetics to counteract skepticism. (unbelief)

I was raised evangelical Protestant.
I remember my state of shock when I found out where the Bible actually came from.
Not what the church told me.

I had never heard of the canon of scripture.
I thought a cannon was a war relic, not a religious relic. - Ha!

Same with the hell doctrine.
No one informed me that there were three biblical doctrines of the final judgment.
They did bad-mouth Universalism though.

I had no idea that Universalism was actually a Christian doctrine from the early church in the East.
Which is where the church came from, hello?

And what about inerrancy? Don't get me started... Grr...

Anyone else want to rant on either aspect? Thanks.

 

[Patrick1966]

They did bad-mouth Universalism though.

Of course. Jesus torturing people for all of eternity is the foundation of mainstream Christianity.

 

[St. SteVen]

Of course. Jesus torturing people for all of eternity is the foundation of mainstream Christianity.

Sad, but true.

It's such an embarrassment, they are trying to sweep it under the carpet.
They have softened it to "eternal separation from God" (whatever that means)
And they won't own the idea that they really believe that Jesus died to save us from God.

But, in reference to the topic, they keep a tight lid on critical thinking.
Skepticism is considered to be unbelief. An attack on "the faith".

You are either "in", or you are "out". Black and white. (no gray)
A rigid binary view. Like a light switch; on, or off.

I prefer a dimmer. - LOL
I'm at home on the range. I like some elbow room.

 

[Patrick1966]

Sad, but true.

It's such an embarrassment, they are trying to sweep it under the carpet.
They have softened it to "eternal separation from God" (whatever that means)
And they won't own the idea that they really believe that Jesus died to save us from God.

But, in reference to the topic, they keep a tight lid on critical thinking.
Skepticism is considered to be unbelief. An attack on "the faith".

You are either "in", or you are "out". Black and white. (no gray)
A rigid binary view. Like a light switch; on, or off.

I prefer a dimmer. - LOL
I'm at home on the range. I like some elbow room.

My impression is that most people who come to this community are CEMENTED to the doctrines that they bring with them and that no amount of scripture will change their understanding. As well, pride and vanity also disallow for one to acknowledge that they have a misunderstanding.

In the end, Jesus will take a blowtorch and remove the dross of self-pride and ego and make us humble like little children.

Matthew 18
English Standard Version
Who Is the Greatest?
18 At that time the disciples came to Jesus, saying, “Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?” 2 And calling to him a child, he put him in the midst of them 3 and said, “Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. 4 Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

 

[St. SteVen]

My impression is that most people who come to this community are CEMENTED to the doctrines that they bring with them and that no amount of scripture will change their understanding. As well, pride and vanity also disallow for one to acknowledge that they have a misunderstanding.

Yes.
Everyone (for the most part) is selling, and no one is buying.
A stagnant spiritual economy. The dead sea.

 

[Patrick1966]

Yes.
Everyone (for the most part) is selling, and no one is buying.
A stagnant spiritual economy. The dead sea.

Willing to persuade but unwilling to be persuaded.

 

[St. SteVen]

I heard a sermon that came down pretty hard on skepticism.
Trying to process how I feel about that.

It appears that there is no room for healthy skepticism in the church.
We are offered apologetics to counteract skepticism. (unbelief)

I was raised Protestant evangelical.
I remember my state of shock when I found out where the Bible actually came from.
Not what the church told me.

]

 

[Mr E]

I heard a sermon that came down pretty hard on skepticism.
Trying to process how I feel about that.

It appears that there is no room for healthy skepticism in the church.
We are offered apologetics to counteract skepticism. (unbelief)

I was raised Protestant evangelical.
I remember my state of shock when I found out where the Bible actually came from.
Not what the church told me.

]

You should be extremely skeptical of anyone who tells you not to be skeptical.

 

[St. SteVen]

You should be extremely skeptical of anyone who tells you not to be skeptical.

LOL

For some reason I'm NOT skeptical of anyone who tells me to be skeptical.

]

 

[amadeus]

Just heard a sermon that came down pretty hard on skepticism.
Trying to process how I feel about that. Thanks for listening. (send help)

It appears that there is no room for healthy skepticism in the church.
But for some reason the skeptics weren't called gullible. No one was, actually.

We are offered apologetics to counteract skepticism. (unbelief)

I was raised evangelical Protestant.
I remember my state of shock when I found out where the Bible actually came from.
Not what the church told me.

I had never heard of the canon of scripture.
I thought a cannon was a war relic, not a religious relic. - Ha!

Same with the hell doctrine.
No one informed me that there were three biblical doctrines of the final judgment.
They did bad-mouth Universalism though.

I had no idea that Universalism was actually a Christian doctrine from the early church in the East.
Which is where the church came from, hello?

And what about inerrancy? Don't get me started... Grr...

Anyone else want to rant on either aspect? Thanks.

No rants from me! In my own beginnings, I was certainly too ignorant to rant. Now I know enough to try to keep my mouth shut much of the time.

 

[Rightglory]

I had no idea that Universalism was actually a Christian doctrine from the early church in the East.
Which is where the church came from, hello?

Just a factual correction. Universalism was never a Christian doctrine. Origin (185 - 254) was the one who first wrote about Universalism. This teaching was declared heretical by the Fifth Ecumenical Council of 553 (Council of Constantinople II).

 

[St. SteVen]

Just a factual correction. Universalism was never a Christian doctrine. Origin (185 - 254) was the one who first wrote about Universalism. This teaching was declared heretical by the Fifth Ecumenical Council of 553 (Council of Constantinople II).

That's a good question. Thanks.
Better fact check that. A common misunderstanding. Origen
And...

"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."

Also wrote a couple of topics:

Apokatastasis in the early church

Apokatastasis in the Bible

/

 

[Rightglory]

That's a good question. Thanks.
Better fact check that. A common misunderstanding. Origen
And...

"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."

Also wrote a couple of topics:

Apokatastasis in the early church

Apokatastasis in the Bible

/

The schools were not schools as you and I think of them. Besides that, schools did not determine the doctrine of the Church. Doctrine was determined by what was believed from the beginning by the Church. Individual men, or schools never determined what the Church believed.
The first time in history that it became an established doctrine of a church was within Protestantism.

 

[St. SteVen]

The first time in history that it became an established doctrine of a church was within Protestantism.

On the contrary.

Universalism came from the early church in the east. (Jerusalem) It was an orthodox doctrine of the Greek speaking church.
The western Latin speaking church of Rome and their councils promoted their biased doctrines.
They also applied that bias to the Bible they gave us.

Jerusalem = east
Rome = west

Where did the church come from originally? Jerusalem or Rome?

Apokatastasis in the early church

/

 

[Stumpmaster]

Just heard a sermon that came down pretty hard on skepticism.
Trying to process how I feel about that. Thanks for listening. (send help)

Scepticism is not unbelief, nor cynicism, but doubt due to incomplete knowledge.

I could do a rant about cultism and the promotion of gullibility, but I've moved on.

 

[Zao is life]

Yes.
Everyone (for the most part) is selling, and no one is buying.
A stagnant spiritual economy. The dead sea.

Well, I buy when I believe the product works, i.e has been produced by the scriptures, i.e was the teaching of prophets, and especially of Jesus, and of the apostles whom He chose to establish His doctrine.

I'm open to the possibility that I take it too literally:

And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in gehenna.-- Mat.10:28

But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone: which is the second death. -- Rev.21:8

He that has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the Assemblies; He that overcomes shall not be hurt of the second death. -- Rev.2:11

Blessed and holy is he that has part in the first resurrection: on such the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years. -- Rev.20:6

And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire. -- Rev.20:15

So the lake of fire is a (the) second death. Adam's death was the first death. According to the scriptures that death spread to all mankind, because we are all the seed of Adam, and all sinned - i.e, universalism.

I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. -- John 14:6.

Christ is the resurrection from death and the life:

I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live -- John 11:25.

The life of Christ is everlasting. The second death appears to be everlasting, too:

He that believes on him is not condemned: but he that believes not is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. -- John 3:18

I do not seek to answer questions that cannot be answered from scripture regarding those who never ever heard, or those who 'heard about' but whose entire cultural and family heritage was in rejection of God's only salvation / Christ-ianity, causing them to reject Christ-ianity.

So in my opinion any accusation about there being "no scriptural reason" for 'non-unversalism' (or whatever the opposite of it is named or called), is unfair, and a false accusation.

I'm not interested in which ECF believed this and which believed that, or what the 2nd - 5th century post-apostolic early churches believed, and whether or not some believed this and some believed that. It's what Jesus believed and meant by the things He said, and what His apostles believed and meant that matters to me, because what Jesus believed and what He meant when He spoke is what God knows.

PS: How often have you bought in-between your selling lately? Or is the man who's always selling and never buying the man we all see when we all look in a mirror? ​

 

[Zao is life]

My impression is that most people who come to this community are CEMENTED to the doctrines that they bring with them and that no amount of scripture will change their understanding. As well, pride and vanity also disallow for one to acknowledge that they have a misunderstanding.

In the end, Jesus will take a blowtorch and remove the dross of self-pride and ego and make us humble like little children.

Matthew 18
English Standard Version
Who Is the Greatest?
18 At that time the disciples came to Jesus, saying, “Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?” 2 And calling to him a child, he put him in the midst of them 3 and said, “Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. 4 Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

I probably don't believe what you say about this thread's other subject (Christian Universalism) but it's because I prefer to be cemented in whatever Christ was cemented in, and whatever his apostles were cemented in, than what anyone else wants me to be cemented in, and I always do my utmost to make sure that it's scripture that is teaching me what Christ and His apostles were cemented in, and not my wrong understanding of scripture.

If I realize my understanding of a portion of scripture was wrong, no one on earth will be able to stop me from changing my mind to align it with scripture.

But I agree with what you say above, nonetheless - except that if it's true in one person's case, then it's true in everyone's case - including yours. The human brain avoids cognitive dissonance like the plague, so when it's produced by a realization that one portion of scripture is actually teaching something different (regarding God's message) to what was believed, and that realization affects what was previously believed to be 100% true and fundamental (and affects how other parts of scripture need to be interpreted), then it produces cognitive dissonance, and that cognitive dissonance makes the person have to choose between one and the other.

So all too often we see people applying a principle of "Yes well that's what it says, but that's not what it means". I think adherents to Christian Universalism may themselves (I said may) be doing this in the way they interpret a few scriptures (for example the scriptures I mention in Post #16, which appears above this post).​

 

[St. SteVen]

I'm not interested in which ECF believed this and which believed that, or what the 2nd - 5th century post-apostolic early churches believed, and whether or not some believed this and some believed that. It's what Jesus believed and meant by the things He said, and what His apostles believed and meant that matters to me, because what Jesus believed and what He meant when He spoke is what God knows.

What do you make of this?
It speaks of two men (Adams) and the results of their actions.

Romans 5:18-19 NIV
Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people,
so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people.
19 For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners,
so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.

PS: How often have you bought in-between your selling lately? Or is the man who's always selling and never buying the man we all see when we all look in a mirror?

I didn't understand or believe Universalism before I came to the forum. (previous)
I have been challenged on my eschatology and other things. And you?

]

 

[Augustin56]

A lot of the problems that we see today come from philosophical errors introduced some time back that "infected" the thinking of modern man.

The first was Rene Descartes. He started his entire philosophical endeavor on skepticism, and it was based on this. He said: if I take a stick and I stick it in the water, the stick looks like it's bent, but I know intellectually that it doesn't bend right, and so I can't trust my senses to tell me the truth. Now look at what he just did. He separated the criteria from truth, from reality and knowledge through your senses to purely what's in your own mind. That was the very beginning of that. Okay, that skepticism then gets passed on. What he missed, however, was that what he was seeing was the truth. It wasn't the stick that was bent. It was the light rays that were bent by the water.

Then came Emmanual Kant, who concluded from Descartes’ claim, that there is no way we can ultimately know reality. And because we can't know reality, ultimately all I can know is my experience of reality.

Then, we fell into Rationalism which is the philosophical view that reason should be the chief source of knowledge..

Rationalism basically began with Descartes, and it's fundamentally rooted in two things:

1. One is skepticism about the truth, of what our senses tell us, and so it cuts us off from reality as being the foundation for our knowledge of the truth.
2. The second component is founding the certitude of Truth in my own thoughts.

 

[Rightglory]

On the contrary.

Universalism came from the early church in the east. (Jerusalem) It was an orthodox doctrine of the Greek speaking church.
The western Latin speaking church of Rome and their councils promoted their biased doctrines.
They also applied that bias to the Bible they gave us.

Jerusalem = east
Rome = west

Where did the church come from originally? Jerusalem or Rome?

Apokatastasis in the early church

/

You are confused as to what is doctrine and what is a teaching. The idea was first spoken of by Origin of Alexandria. It never was an applied doctrine of the Church, either east or west. I might also mention that every false teaching came from some individual within the Church. But none of them were ever doctrines of the Church. Some may have lasted for several hundred years in parts of the empire, even after declarations of heresy. Here is a list of heresies all occurring before 500 AD.
Arianism, Nestorianism, Monotheletism, Millenarianism, Pelegianism, Apollenarianism, Macedonianism, Donotism, Photinianism, Novatianism, Marcionism, Docetism, Monophysitism, Montanism, Sebellianism, Modelism, Manichianism