No greater evil than Eternal Torment (tradition, churches, believing, scriptures)

[Nero777]

Originally Posted by trettep

Nero, if you believe in eternal torment then tell me how it is that the sinners in eternal torment are no longer sinning?

Paul

Because they are hurting; because now they know what it truly means to be without hope. To be without a loving God working to help them reject their sin and live a holy life with Him.

[Nero777]

Originally Posted by Phazelwood

Everyone has rejected at one point or another, so the whole human race is damned, this includes you.

Ja 2:10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one [point], he is guilty of all.

True, that's irrefutable; however, not everyone has accepted Christ into their lives. Some have heard the message and been exposed to the love of Christ and yet they still choose to reject Him and to continue on in their sin while others heard the message and embraced it in its entirety. Read the parable of the seed on good soil. We all are guilty, but we all respond to God's love differently.

[pcamps]

Originally Posted by Nero777

Because they are hurting; because now they know what it truly means to be without hope. To be without a loving God working to help them reject their sin and live a holy life with Him.

I am sorry Nero but how do you scriptually come to this conclusion ? Were in the scripture is there anything remotely like this said ?

[noland123]

Originally Posted by beloved57

There is no greater evil than sinning against God..

Not just sinning,but rejecting God with a hardening of the heart a turning away.

[Nero777]

Originally Posted by detmi7mile

Methinks exclusivists worship free will.

"Man's free will"..."Man's free will".

To think that God actually saving someone against their will from destruction is seen as heresy.

Well methinks universalists want a cop out for their sin. Oh how horrible it must be that a God who claims to be all loving must also be justice in its purest form and it is in this justice that He punishes creation. Tell me, how is justice given when God allows a man like Hitler, who killed over 8 million Jews and damaged the lives of millions more, who blatantly violated every form of human decency and even the will of God, will share the same end as men like Paul and Peter who devoted their lives to the message and died for the sake of Christ. How is this justice?

Originally Posted by detmi7mile

Point blank, humans are too ignorant to realize the destruction they're headed to to "make a decision for Christ"...just like little immature kids who have no idea what they're doing. So what does a parent do? They enforce rules against their children's will. They do everything in their power to stop them from getting hurt or killed because the little child is to ignorant to know any better.

Yes, stopping a child from being roadkill is the same thing as fully grown adults, who have been exposed to God's love time and time again, blatantly rejecting everything God has done for them in their lives and ultimately opting to choose to live a morally depraved life without any regard for the One who died for them. Tell you what, I'll give you a little homework. You show me in Scripture where the Word directly tells us about an eventual restoration. I've said it time and time again that I see no indication of universalism being true in Scripture, you got a problem then you got it with Scripture.

Originally Posted by detmi7mile

And it's offensive to people that God would actually save somebody against their will from eternal damnation...yeah God would leave the biggest decision of someones life up to them, an ignorant human being...what a crock

We can say the same thing about you.

[Nero777]

Originally Posted by pcamps

I am sorry Nero but how do you scriptually come to this conclusion ? Were in the scripture is there anything remotely like this said ?

How many times did Jesus' parables end with people entering into the darkness with the "weeping and gnashing of teeth"? Doesn't sound exactly pleasant to me.

[Phazelwood]

Originally Posted by Nero777

True, that's irrefutable; however, not everyone has accepted Christ into their lives.

Makes no difference to say this. The scripture says what it says. If you sin then you have rejected Christ in that moment and you are guilty of all. So the idea that rejecting Christ damns someone to hell forever may hold true (for the sake of argument), but then everyone is damned and has no hope under such a teaching.

Some have heard the message and been exposed to the love of Christ and yet they still choose to reject Him and to continue on in their sin while others heard the message and embraced it in its entirety.

This will not solve the problem you posed that I first responded to. The vast majority of people who say they believe at some point rejected a call to accept christ and then later responded to one at a different time. By the assertion you have made, anyone who has rejected it one time is eternally damned.

What actually is rejecting Christ? Is it once? Twice? Is it not doing as instructed?

In philippians the false unbiblical phrase "but then its too late for some" is applied to a passage that explains there is no one who can reject Christ for all eternity.

[thrillobyte]

Originally Posted by Nero777

[/b]

Okay, let you and me be honest. I don't want to be confrontational, but if you want the gloves to come off then let us do it. In regards to your question, the answer is no. While I do accept the fact that the Bible makes an indication that there is a place known as hell where the sinful and treacherous will reside, it isn't something I enjoy. I don't want people to go to hell, but Scripture has revealed to me that there is a hell and that we are going to be held accountable for our crimes against God, His perfect justice means He can't overlook our sins which is why we all deserve to burn. However, His Son bled and died so that He may save the world; however, the NT is filled with indications that not all people will be saved. Those who belong to Him are those that carry the Holy Spirit, those without the Spirit aren't identified as belonging to God and therefore cannot inherit the kingdom. Read Romans, and then read Revelations, it makes no indication whatsoever of an eventual restoration, which is weird considering it would probably have been the best place for the writers to put the notion right? I don't like the notion of hell, but Scripture, as revealed to me, shows that there is no other option; God gave you the choice, it's up to you to accept Him and His love or to reject everything He offers and take on the burden of your sin yourself.

Now, you want to be petty. Fine, I'll bite. Judging from the original post and your response that universalism is a doctrine that is based on some notion of a feel good theology. You don't want to be held accountable, you don't want to have to change certain parts of your life just because they seem sinful or inappropriate so you live by a theology that pretty much states that no matter what happens (regardless of your views, your actions, your beliefs) that you will obtain everlasting life. Judging from your post, it just seems like universalism is a cop out for people to not deal with their sin, or to try and make God out to be something more to their liking. They don't want a God who executes justice before love, they want a God who will love them and forget about bringing about judgement for their sin. You think I am being petty and that I just want to people to burn and I think you just want to have an excuse to keep on living with your sin.

I must strongly agree with Nero777 and I have highlighted the areas in his post I think are most important to consider. I have studied this issue for some time now (and continue to study it) from both sides and, while I find scripture that states God will draw all men, etc. I cannot find a scripture that irrefutably supports universalism. Most of the people who hold to UR use a combination of verses pulled from OT and NT and mix them together like a well-tossed salad, and then say that it must all be read "in context" --that is their 'catch-all phrase"-- for justification. But my spirit somehows rebels against the idea of a God who would let the very worst of mankind slide into heaven, even after being purified in the lake of fire. It's just the doctrine of purgatory in Catholicism with a different name. All the scripture I read about the Lake of Fire leans toward eternal damnation, no matter how you try to parse the Greek to English. Above all, are the near-death experiences which universalists try to dismiss out of hand if they speak of a hell experience. They can't all be phonies;not everyone who describes them is peddling a book or DVD; they have no reason to lie about it--indeed, the overwhelming evidence is that they are sincerely trying to pass on a warning to mankind that God will not tolerate sin and those who choose to sin without repentance will face everlasting wrath. I posted two videos by Bill Weiss and Bryan Melvin describing their experiences in vivid detail. I pointed out the striking similarities in their stories and how it was impossible for them to have conspired to rig the details. The only logical explanation was that their experiences were real. Not one person was interested in viewing them. Additionally, only 16 people even bothered to look at the thread. It demonstrates vividly how otherwise very "committed" Christians try to avoid this topic like the plague. Bad case of denial. At least I dilligently studied both sides of the issue before making my decision. I wonder how many UR'ers can make the same claim. Judging from my Weiss thread, not many. Sad, sad, sad!

[Nero777]

Originally Posted by Phazelwood

Makes no difference to say this. The scripture says what it says. If you sin then you have rejected Christ in that moment and you are guilty of all. So the idea that rejecting Christ damns someone to hell forever may hold true (for the sake of argument), but then everyone is damned and has no hope under such a teaching..

Now you are saying that if you sin once then all go to hell; while true, that isn't my assertion. We all sin, but we are given an opportunity to repent and make Jesus Christ the Lord of our life. Some take that opportunity, others don't. When one accepts Christ and the blood He sheds, then His perfect sacrifice, which the Bible declares must be paid in blood, covers all sin in that person's life. True, we all reject Christ, but, for some, that rejection is a lifetime rejection; for others, it is only temporary until their eyes are opened to the truth. Regardless of how many times one rejects, if one, at any point, acknowledges the lordship of the Christ and acknowledges His ability to forgive sin, then one has accepted Him and received His forgiveness. I honestly don't understand what you are trying to assert, but whatever it is it is misconception of the exclusivist doctrine.

Originally Posted by Phazelwood

This will not solve the problem you posed that I first responded to. The vast majority of people who say they believe at some point rejected a call to accept christ and then later responded to one at a different time. By the assertion you have made, anyone who has rejected it one time is eternally damned.

What actually is rejecting Christ? Is it once? Twice? Is it not doing as instructed? .

Again, I don't think you understand what was being said. The vast majority haven't rejected Christ, all have rejected Him in their lives. We all have turned from God to fulfill our own personal needs, thus is sin born in us. However, when one accepts Christ, at any point, then the blood he shedded for us cleanses them of their iniquity and He begins a new creation in the person; all the times the person rejected before is irrelevant to the fact now that they have seen the truth now and accept it.

What is rejecting Christ you asked? It's failing to recognize His lordship over our lives until you have come to the end of your life. Like Hebrews 9:27 said, we all die once and then face judgment. If a person died knowing the Word and the meaning behind the gospel and still rejected it, then God must reject him for he doesn't have the spirit of the lord within him. Read Romans 8, especially focus on verses 8-10. Even God claims that those without the spirit do not belong to Him. Why would He accept those He doesn't recongnize as His own? Look forward to hearing from you

[Phazelwood]

Originally Posted by thrillobyte

I must strongly agree with Nero777 and I have highlighted the areas in his post I think are most important to consider. I have studied this issue for some time now (and continue to study it) from both sides and, while I find scripture that states God will draw all men, etc. I cannot find a scripture that irrefutably supports universalism.

Your entitled to position yourself with these words, but I hope you know that none of those words provides an ounce of evidence that your correct and others are wrong. This isn't just about you, it goes with universalism too, the number of people you find that agree with you means absolutely nothing.

Most of the people who hold to UR use a combination of verses pulled from OT and NT and mix them together like a well-tossed salad, and then say that it must all be read "in context" --that is their 'catch-all phrase"-- for justification.

I agree, the term context is over used as a replacement for sound explanations, this goes for all points of view. However, there is context, it is a matter of what context you accept and what context you do not.

But my spirit somehows rebels against the idea of a God who would let the very worst of mankind slide into heaven, even after being purified in the lake of fire. It's just the doctrine of purgatory in Catholicism with a different name.

Well, my spirit rebels against a God who is depicted as incapable of accomplishing what he intends to simply because man makes a choice. It is far deeper than that spiritually and I do not believe it is spiritual when they inhibit God in such a manner. So now that both our spirits are bothered by the opposite thing, you cannot begin to argue that your right and I am wrong on that basis alone.

All the scripture I read about the Lake of Fire leans toward eternal damnation, no matter how you try to parse the Greek to English.

That is only because you accept it as such, there are translations of the bible that do not contain the words eternal or everlasting in parallel to judgment or punishment, so to say this is basically saying this.

"Using the words I accept, I find no other conclusion"

They can't all be phonies

YES they can. However, the real issue is not about being phony or lying it is whether they have actually described a real place of eternal torment or not. It cannot be proven and it is a fallacy to say that out of all the people that do this one of them must be correct. That is completely false.

indeed, the overwhelming evidence is that they are sincerely trying to pass on a warning to mankind that God will not tolerate sin and those who choose to sin without repentance will face everlasting wrath.

Doesn't mean they are correct.

I posted two videos by Bill Weiss and Bryan Melvin describing their experiences in vivid detail.

Hollywood comes up with all kinds of stuff all the time, so what?

The only logical explanation was that their experiences were real.

The issue is not about their "experience" it is whether their experience is a real place of eternal torment.

Not one person was interested in viewing them.

Doesn't mean anything, believers are supposed to be in the word not putting their faith in men, videos, or the latest sensation at the christian book store.

Additionally, only 16 people even bothered to look at the thread. It demonstrates vividly how otherwise very "committed" Christians try to avoid this topic like the plague.

Meaningless

Bad case of denial.

The issue of what they are denying means nothing.

At least I dilligently studied both sides of the issue before making my decision.

So you have already decided that you think you know whats right and absolutely know you cannot be wrong?

I wonder how many UR'ers can make the same claim.

The claim is irrelevant to someones faith. I study and consider all the time, but not responding to a Bill Weise thread means ZERO, NOTHING at all. I do not have to consider BILL or anything he says, He is not God, Jesus or the Holy spirit and the very fact Christians hold up men to be believed is not something anyone has to consider at all.