To Debunk or Not to Debunk

Caljust,

No caricature - current, and very sad, reality.

And that doctrine IS really as bad as it sounds.

Are you a Universalist / Unitarian of some type?
Do you think God will force everyone to be what they don't want to be forever or go where they do not WANT to go forever?

Do you argue that created beings that reject their Creator should have His blessing though they discard Him forever?

He presently brings His sun out on believer and unbeliever. He presently sends His rain on unbeliever and believer. He cares for the thankful and the unthankful.

Do you argue that God must, not only in this long period of His toleration, but forever do so ?

@sonship said

Are you a Universalist / Unitarian of some type?

Looks like it, doesn’t it? Especially of some type.

Your questions are all rhetorical questions to which you think you know the answer. Let me ask you one in return:

Do you think in the end God gets what He wants?

@CalJust

Do you think in the end God gets what He wants?

Good question.
I think one of the best arguments I have ever heard from a universalist is that according to His word somewhere God will fulfill ALL His will. But I cannot locate the passage right now.

I think I would have to answer both a Yes and a Not Quite.

He desires all men to be saved and to come to the full knowledge of the truth (1 Timothy 1:4 ). But unless there is a portion of the unraveled scroll in Revelation that we do not know about, it appears that not all men WILL be saved.

So it is not easy to answer your question for me.

Unless God forces His will upon those who are sure they do not want His will, it must be that FREEDOM necessitates that some will not be reconciled to God.

But He says He desires all to be saved and to come to the full knowledge of the truth.

Now if this is by this time too wordy for you, often I think of some other person who might be reading along and getting the benefit of a little more response.

Being too concise usually invites the other party to chime in - "But you FORGOT this .....".

Well, you understand that God's love does not cause Him to relinquish His everlasting righteousness?

Are you arguing that for the sake of His love for sinners like me, He should GIVE UP His everlasting and eternal perfect Rightness and Holiness, discarding them FOREVERMORE, because He cannot stand to bring sins into a just accounting ?

@ sonship

There are two arguments that proponents of eternal damnation mainly use.

The first of these is that God doesn’t send anybody to hell - you yourself CHOOSE to go by not recognising him as god and asking his forgiveness, in Jesus’ name. Pathetic, and not worth commenting on.

The second, and one used here by sonship, is that God’s JUSTICE and LOVE are two sides of his character, and are mutually exclusive. He MUST hate sin, so where there is unforgiven sin, He is FORCED to withdraw His love, and excercise His justice by giving his wrath full force.

This argument is flawed on so many levels, but I will touch here on only one.

The idea that justice DEMANDS that sin be punished.

Why? Who ever said so? Ever heard of grace? The Bible is full of references where God says that He will, unilaterally, without being asked, wipe away their sins. Probably as many, or more, than the verses which state that sin must be punished.

Even a human judge has a broad leeway to either hand down a harsh sentence or be lenient and let the accused off.

And even IF this premise were true, there is the fact that Jesus died for the sins of the whole world.

But grace is the clincher. In the book “If grace be true” ( the author’s name escapes me at present) he argues that a gift, or grace, that has to be asked for is no longer grace but merit.

The picture that poor god is standing there wringing his hands because they are tied - he so much wants to forgive the sinner, but unfortunately is totally unable to do so, because the wretch absolutely refuses to ASK him! - is such a pathetic picture of god that you are welcome to keep him.

@CalJust

There are two arguments that proponents of eternal damnation mainly use.

I don't know how many concepts have been proposed.

But before I would discuss where I am I would want to ask you if this statement about the attitude of Universlists / Unitarians would be fair of YOUR attitude towards the Bible.

"Human reason and experience should be the final authority in determining spiritual truth," is perhaps the most revealing of the character of Unitarian Universalists. Instead of God and his word being the final authority on truth and error, or right and wrong, Unitarian Universalists subject God and his word to their understanding, feeling, and reason. This is exemplified in the following quote obtain from the official Unitarian Universalist website at http://uua.org/. This was found under the heading Unitarian Universalists say:

From CARM (Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry)
https://carm.org/what-unitarianism

Would that paragraph be fair and accurate of your attitude as you examine these things in the Bible with me ?

@sonship said
@CalJust

Unless God forces His will upon those who are sure they do not want His will, it must be that FREEDOM necessitates that some will not be reconciled to God.

But He says He desires all to be saved and to come to the full knowledge of the truth.

Firstly, thanks for a manageable post - must have been difficult for you! But it helps to keep discussins focussed on one matter at a time.

Yes, I agree that some, even perhaps many, will not be reconciled to God. But that does not mean that God is compelled to torture them for ever. (I have, in the past, posted about the malicious doctrine of eternal punishment, and will not repeat it again.)

You have, I take it, read the scripture which says: “He that has the Son, has life and he that does not have the Son does not have eternal life, etc”. Surely this points to a situation where those that did not “accept” Jesus will not live forever, not in heaven but also not in any hell.

But I fear that our positions are too far apart to agree on anything relating to this subject. Mainly, because we have a different frame of reference, and I do not interpret the Bible like you do, i.e. literally. So there is no point in quoting verses to me that tend to prove your position.

So from my side I wish you well, and will quietly withdraw.

@CalJust

So from my side I wish you well, and will quietly withdraw.

I guess that that is the end of that.

Well, believe it or not, I am not eager to debate about it argumentatively.

But if you don't want to even get into the discussion, ok.

So you got your few arrows well aimed and shot. Good time to stop for you I guess.

I'll probably be getting back to the legitimate and illegitimate observations about the corrupting influence of paganism on the Christian church.

Is there anyone remaining who would like to hear how I would respond to Caljust's talk though the poster is withdrawn ?

@CalJust

To debunk or not to debunk. That is the question.
Well, ... having withdrawn quietly after getting his chops in, I think I will offer some reply.

The first of these is that God doesn’t send anybody to hell - you yourself CHOOSE to go by not recognising him as god and asking his forgiveness, in Jesus’ name. Pathetic, and not worth commenting on.

I would advise anyone to examine what was Jesus Christ's attitude in the Garden of Gethsemane as to whether He thought our need to be saved was frivolous or not.

My reading of His terrible last moments of His passion was that He took seriously to the uttermost, that He drink the awful cup of Gods wrath on our behalf that we be saved.

Caljust seems to think it wasn't worth Christ's time to be concerned about our need for salvation.

The second, and one used here by sonship, is that God’s JUSTICE and LOVE are two sides of his character, and are mutually exclusive. He MUST hate sin, so where there is unforgiven sin, He is FORCED to withdraw His love, and exercise His justice by giving his wrath full force.

I think that the soul continues to outpour sin in eternity being of the choice to remain in that state. And forever God lets that unceasing sinful one know what He thinks about unending sinning.

I don't think it is just a matter of offenses committed during one's lifetime only.

Some are frozen into a state of perpetual transgression. Under His patience they spurned God. Why should they not all the more hate Him when being separated from His mercy forever.

No one was able to demonstrate that physical death was non-existence in the thread that I dedicated for that argument to be proposed and defended.

This argument is flawed on so many levels, but I will touch here on only one.

The idea that justice DEMANDS that sin be punished.

Without the shedding of blood there is no remission.
God will only forgive as the offender understands that a price was paid to do so.

God forgives only as we comprehend that it cost someone to rebalance the scales of righteousness. It is not a sentimental forgiveness. It is a forgiveness because the debt is paid by Someone.

Why? Who ever said so?

God said that without the shedding of blood there is no remission.

And almost all things are by the law purged with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no remission. And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission. And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission. (Hebrews 9:22)

NIV Lev. 17:11

Leviticus 17:11 New International Version (NIV)
11 For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one’s life.[a]

King James Bible
For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.

Christian Standard Bible
For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have appointed it to you to make atonement on the altar for your lives, since it is the lifeblood that makes atonement.

Ever heard of grace?

I could write 60 posts this week on grace. We could discuss grace easily for the entire week and still have much to say about grace - both as God's power over man and God's power IN man.

By the grace of God He tasted death on behalf of everything ( Heb. 2:9 )

So it is exactly a part of His grace that He died for us.

But we see Jesus, who was made a little inferior to the angels because of the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honor, [b]so that by the grace of God He might taste death on behalf of everything. "

I've heard of grace and experience it too.
Has Caljust any understanding of grace?

The Bible is full of references where God says that He will, unilaterally, without being asked, wipe away their sins.

In anticipation of and in foreknowledge of Christ's redemption.
In His transcendence over time and eternal foreknowledge He forgave on the basis of Christs central act of redeeming us carried out at a particular point in time.

But it was in God's foreknowledge from before creation that this would happen.

He was slain from the foundation of the world (Rev. 13:8).

If he was here, I suppose right about here Caljust would be complaining that the Bible means little to him as to what it SAYS.

Well, the Bible means a lot to the church of Christ.

Probably as many, or more, than the verses which state that sin must be punished.

I don't argue that. However the Bible speaks of an eternal sin (Mark 3:28-30). And an eternal sin would require eternal redemption - (Hebrews 9:11,12).

Even a human judge has a broad leeway to either hand down a harsh sentence or be lenient and let the accused off.

This sounds like something I wrote once or twice here.
I wonder if unconsciously Caljust was influenced by what I said.

And even IF this premise were true, there is the fact that Jesus died for the sins of the whole world.

Yes, but something we call Substitution takes place with those who agree with the plan by believing in the Son of God.

The word substitution probably cannot be located in the Bible. The fact is there that being IN CHRIST ... allows His death for the sins of the whole world to be enacted on behalf of the believer who receives Christ as Lord.

Caljust may have a concept that substitution occurs to those who REJECT Christ. He have to show me this in the Bible.

But then again I think he has contempt for the Bible when it doesn't go along with his opinion.

None of this should be taken to assume that it is hopeless that billions be saved. The vision of John of the saved is of a number which no one could count from every tribe and tongue and people and nation.

And I expect that there will be suprises.

That's all I am going to reply right now.

@caljust said
In reality that ain’t possible??

Are you seriously suggesting Christianity (or any teaching, cultural movement, whatever) originated and exists in a vacuum?

Any teacher today cannot possibly discuss any subject without being influenced, even subjectively, by developments in society, such as feminism, human rights (as opposed to slavery), ecology etc, all of which were ...[text shortened]... is, of course, debatable. But to claim that such influence “ain’t possible” is factually incorrect.

Here's a fuller quote from what FMF said relating to James White following sonship's opening posts.

"He(James White)is in complete denial about how Christianity clearly links back to previous religions ~ in a quite calculated and pragmatic way,.."

Christianity does not "link back" to anything other than the Old Testament scriptures.

Christianity, regardless of the influences of other religions, cultures or political environments where it is found, has as its basis and fundamental roots the direct inspiration of God who is the foundation of all Truth.

Strip away all the rot that's been heaped on Israel and Christianity by men with no regard for The Truth and you have folks like yourself that have fallen prey to the deception that God's Word is anything less than 100% reliable and preserved by God.

Otherwise you got nothing but the ranting and ravings of a slew of disbelieving alleged scholars leading you by the nose down the path of deception.

Besides the clear account of creation, I wonder how much more of the scriptures you disbelieve.

If God's Word isn't preserved and not one jot or tittle will pass away, and you question its veracity, then you're calling God a liar, and you're just part of the conflagration started by Satan whose sole purpose is to destroy the Truth.

Deuteronomy was written during the Babylonian captivity by someone other than Moses indeed! Lying rubbish.

@CalJust

Caljust said erroneously of me:

The second, and one used here by sonship, is that God’s JUSTICE and LOVE are two sides of his character, and are mutually exclusive. He MUST hate sin, so where there is unforgiven sin, He is FORCED to withdraw His love, and excercise His justice by giving his wrath full force.

I am pretty sure that this is very much the OPPOSITE of what I have said.

His love and His justice coordinate together. He love was displayed by Christ dying for us. His justice was displayed in that the judgment of sin FELL ON CHRIST on behalf of all mankind.

He carried up our sins in His body onto the tree.
He who knew no sin became sin on our behalf that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.

Men do not take seriously the cursing of the Righteous Son of God on behalf of themselves.

God's love and God's justice worked together for our salvation from eternal separation from the eternal PERFECT - God.

" Him who did not know sin He made sin on our behalf, that we might become God's righteousness in Him. " (2 Cor. 5:21)

Don't be a fool woman. Don't be a fool O man.
Take the offer. Believe into Jesus the Son of God.