If God Will Reconcile All, What About Those Who Commit the Unpardonable Sin? (testimony, church)

[Phazelwood]

Originally Posted by Blueberry

Nice deflection, but I didn't say that. Nor can you find a post of mine that hints at it. I do, however, reject the doctrine of reconciliation for all.

It's no deflection, it is the reasonable conclusion based on the word context and how you used it. You can reject anything based on a context your willing to accept, simple as that.

[legoman]

Originally Posted by Phazelwood

It's no deflection, it is the reasonable conclusion based on the word context and how you used it. You can reject anything based on a context your willing to accept, simple as that.

The carnal mind will bend to extremes to believe what it wants.

[Phazelwood]

Originally Posted by legoman

The carnal mind will bend to extremes to believe what it wants.

Yes, something everyone contends with in their own walk. My point is that I do not accuse anyone of "being out of context" I simply say what context I will accept and perhaps consider others along the way.

[Blueberry]

Originally Posted by Phazelwood

It's no deflection, it is the reasonable conclusion based on the word context and how you used it.

Not, it's not reasonable. Lamentations 3 doesn't talk about eternal hell, and I did not mention it. You assumed that was my stance since I said the chapter doesn't support universal reconciliation.

Originally Posted by Phazelwood

You can reject anything based on a context your willing to accept, simple as that. . . .Yes, something everyone contends with in their own walk. My point is that I do not accuse anyone of "being out of context" I simply say what context I will accept and perhaps consider others along the way.

So, according to this line of thinking, one is free to make God's Word say anything he/she wants. Context is fluid, according to you.

Silly me! I didn't realize context was something I could accept or reject at my discretion. I guess Bible scholars have been wrong all along about the importance of correct exegesis.

[Blueberry]

Originally Posted by Thy Kingdom Come

Ezekiel 16 which I provided in my earlier post is an example of God collecting (not overlooking or forgiving) a debt that was finite. They paid the debt but not forever.

Ezekiel 16 is talking about Jerusalem, with whom God had a covenant relationship. It's also talking about a corporate entity, not individuals.

It's a far stretch to apply the same principles to unbelievers, with whom God does not have a covenant relationship.

[thrillobyte]

this is why I asked you to read that stuff and tell me your impression (this is a serious request,

I will sven, please give me a day or so--I want to really study it before I make a comment.

[Thy Kingdom Come]

Originally Posted by Blueberry

Ezekiel 16 is talking about Jerusalem, with whom God had a covenant relationship. It's also talking about a corporate entity, not individuals.

It's a far stretch to apply the same principles to unbelievers, with whom God does not have a covenant relationship.

I disagree with some of your points, but that is not really germane to my original point which was more about the meaning of "forgiving" vs "not forgiving" than it was about any principle. Lamentations 3 shows that not forgiving a sin does not imply an infinite debt. So does the parable in Matthew 18, specifically when the man said "Pay me that thou owest" he was not forgiving his servant right after his Lord had forgiven him by not collecting his debt. Forgiving and not forgiving are not determined by the size of the debt. They are determine by whether or not the debt is collected.

[HotinAZ]

This is getting almost rediculous. These verses are as plain as plain can be, written so that an infant can read them. Here they are for those who haven't actually read them.

Mat 12:31
"Therefore I say to you, any sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven people, but blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven. Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the to come.


Mar 3:28
Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme: But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation


Luk 12:8"
And I say to you, everyone who confesses Me before men, the Son of Man will confess him also before the angels of God but he who denies Me before men will be denied before the angels of God. And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him.


Could this be the same as:?

1Jo 5:16
If anyone sees his brother committing a sin not to death, he shall ask and will for him give life to those who commit sin not to death. There is a sin to death; I do not say that he should make request for this. All unrighteousness is sin, and there is a sin not to death.

We should know that this death John is talking about is NOT a physical death. For ALL know that the wages of sin is death in the physical realm. But John is telling us that there is a sin that leads to another type of death. What could this be? How about what our King warned us about.

When it says that it WILL NOT be forgiven, should we not just take this at His Word's of warning? Should we be careful on how we speak, especially to one another, because to blaspheme the Spirit, could be as simple as speaking ill of a person through whom the Spirit is speaking. At least this is how I took what Jesus said in Luke. But hey, that's just me.

[Thy Kingdom Come]

Originally Posted by HotinAZ

When it says that it WILL NOT be forgiven, should we not just take this at His Word's of warning?

Yes, it will not be forgiven, but we shouldn't read unlimited punishment into "not forgiven".

[HotinAZ]

Originally Posted by Thy Kingdom Come

Yes, it will not be forgiven, but we shouldn't read unlimited punishment into "not forgiven".

I don't as I do not believe in ET, or UR, but rather those who do not make it as just being 'gone'.