The Evangelical Universalist Forum

2nd Thoughts On ChristianPUR (Purgatorial Universal Restoration)

Evangelical Universalism
#22

Well qaz, my friend, if one accepts the Bible at any length as true literally/historically, literarily, even with allowance for figurative language based upon context, one must accept that supernatural/paranormal events occurred, and upon that premise, the larger picture of the spirit realm is painted as the backdrop for even natural events that occurred. God, angels, demons, spirits/souls, Creation, the Incarnation, Resurrection, miracles, exorcisms, spiritual warfare, etc. are supernatural and many subnarratives in the Scriptures directly and unambiguously attest to this but also indirectly make inferences to this as well. My conviction is that evidence prophetically shows this to be no less, in fact more apparent in this day and age.

Of course, my understanding is that you’re a pantelist, correct? So I’m sure you may not agree with some or any of that affirmation as you are free to do.

#23

MTD - I just erased a longish response because, well - it was too long.

Let me just ask this: what is the POINT of what you say in that response to qaz? Is your point different from other viewpoints in a meaningful way? What viewpoints would you be disagreeing with?
It seems like you are wanting to enlarge our understanding of the ‘spirit world’, and that is a tricky bit of business. In the OT, we are still dealing with a rankly superstitious bunch of cultures, so I think we can wisely cast the hairy eyeball on some things.
And perhaps the ‘background’ is us in the world God made, and the strange events play out against our basic reality.
Anyway, why are you making a ‘thing’ about the spirit realm? I’m sure you have a good reason that we can interact with.
Thanks

#24

Well Dave my beloved, to answer as succintly as I can, my point was to answer qaz’s question by clarifying an excerpt from one of my statements that he lacked understanding on and by extension, a belief I was expressing, that I am not a lone proponent of.

It’s meaningful no more or less than anyone else’s thoughts on a matter though since it is my conviction, of course I feel compelled to promote it though it’s all but one’s choice to receive it or not, and rightfully so.

About the spirit realm, well, without belaboring it more than I have, even if us believers don’t agree on the exact nature surrounding that realm, we imo, should at the very least speculatively agree with the presuppsition of there being scriptural evidence for the supernatural based on our general faith in/acceptance of nonhuman/extradimensional concepts like the _existence of God for starters. From there on, deviation of thought, as with many philosophical/theological systems is inevitable. But that’s as best as I can neutrally answer without trying to ideologically bump heads with anyone.

#25

Ach, we be a bunch o’ hardheads here, don’t be worrying about that.
Thanks for the answer. Understood.
Cheers

1 Like
#26

No hard feelings Jack Sparrow (not entirely sure why I called you that, but you have permission to jack me up witta totally random nickname for no other reason than humor and summertime banter :laughing:) I hope you can kinda get a glimpse in-terw (yes it’s prounounced how its spelled lol) my mindset and why I deem it as vital to keep in mind though not to the exclusion or de-emphasis of Biblical narratives or concepts as they are presented at face value. It just enriches imo, our understanding of God’s ever-present activity behind-the-scenes through both direct and indirect agencies (as if pondering our human existence wasn’t mystical enough lol). I’ve recently tried being mindful of God’s omnipresence an active mental/emotional/spiritual exercise to help me remember he’s always there at every moment in my life even if I don’t “feel” him though the filling/baptism of the Holy Spirit is something I’m praying for and working towards. Cheers to you too Elder Dave.

#27

Cool beans.
Well ok then! I’m off to read the OP again.

1 Like
#28

Feel free to share any insights (even if you don’t agree w/em) that you may have not caught initially (due to the drudgery of its mountainous structure) but would like to be explained, justified, or addressed.

#29

Understanding seek I only, grasshopper.

1 Like
#30

Ok, I understand ‘where you are coming from’ now. Got no idea if in toto you are right/wrong but it is an interesting vision. :thinking:

1 Like
#31

Your reluctance is more than justified as we all see the veiled glory through dark stainglass, but I’m glad you see the somewhat coherent train/connection of my ideas and the reasoning behind them. My unorthodox eschatology is simply - recontexualized and synthesized to reconcile traditionalist/fundamentalist interpretations (normally seen as diametrically opposed to any UR tenants) within the larger, more diverse, workable, and dramatic framework of purgatorial universalism. Often forgotten is that justification for traditionalist/fundamentalist imagery of post-mortem punishment, abundantly has roots grounded in 2nd Temple Hebraic literature such as the Book of Enoch, Maccabees, Jubilees, 2 Esdras, etc.

#32

I received this message today…from a local, community church. It also applies to forum responses here:

Disagreement, conflict, and opposing preferences are all part of life – even in the local church. As Christians, we’d all like to agree on all things all the time and enjoy the ensuing harmony. But realistically, we will never agree on everything even on matters relating to faith, theology, and practice. If our hope for harmony rests in us always agreeing, we will be sorely disappointed.

A living growing church will have a certain quota of disagreements. God understands this and is neither surprised nor displeased when disparities arise among his people. For God, the issue is not will such things happen, but how will we handle them when they do. Evil works for anger and division. The Spirit of God works for humility, love, and unity.

In our secular culture, I believe a key to the Church’s future impact rests on Christians’ ability and willingness to sometimes agree to disagree on non-essentials. Humbly accepting some of our differences and joyfully rallying around those things that unite us - specifically around the One who unites us, Jesus - is critical. Given our sinful tendencies, Jesus recognized the challenge and prayed for us as his followers, the Church, “Father, I pray for those who will believe in me… that all of them may be one, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me.” Ray K summary? Unity and oneness was Jesus’ desire for his people.

True oneness, however, requires a realistic understanding that conflict occurs. It also requires we learn to humbly live with the tension of disagreement. As A.W. Tozer once wrote, “The dead have no differences of opinion.” Let’s face it, if you have an opinion it means you’re alive. But no living human being is infallible. So as long as we joyfully unite around the truth of Jesus and his Gospel of grace, our ability to impact the world remains strong. Perhaps this is one other thing we in the church can all agree on.

I ESPECIALLY like this quote:

As A.W. Tozer once wrote, “The dead have no differences of opinion.”

1 Like
#33

I am very much enjoying this discussion. Particularly appreciate the OP’s position.

1 Like
#34

Well thank you brother. Your thoughts on this are exceedingly welcomed and encouraged in all of their nuances, specificities, generalities, ambiguities, etc. (including all forms of agreement, disagreement, agnostic neutrality, etc.) :small_blue_diamond::small_orange_diamond:

#35

Although, I do believe in indulgences (good works) for those that die in mortal sin, etc., I do not believe that a purifying fire would be necessary.when salvation is by the power of God.

1 Corinthians 1:18. For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

Romans 1:16. For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

#37

Well qaz, to be fair, aren’t you a pantelist? So it sounds to me like you may not find the idea (let alone possible reality) of any form of direct or indirect, divine chastisement/correction/retribution/punishment (earthly, let alone post-mortem) appealing, but feel free to correct me where I’m wrong, or any misdirected assumptions I may have on your eschatological worldview.

#38

Hello brother. I think I’ve seen a few of your posts here before. Are you Roman Catholic? I think there may be some misapplication with the terminology of doctrine known as “indulgences” as you may intend it and how it has been used (or misused) historically by Roman Catholics, however we know misinterpretation is not a problem exclusive to Roman Catholic denominations, though it is, in my humble opinion, heavily relying on a systematic flaw. Forgive me, for I can be needlessly wordy and overcompensate in an attempt to understand as well as explain things where perception fails.

You refer to indulgences as good works though, to my digression, I fail to see the theological connection or denotation of such, at least in a non Roman Catholic context. I’m not merely suggesting that the fires of Hades’/Gehenna/the Lake of Fire save you any more than suggesting that God’s earthly judgments of nations, including Israel possess any inherent salvific nature. However, I am suggesting that the mechanism(s) that brings one to Christ, as both individual and corporate entities, will differ based on one’s relational/operational position towards God’s grace (i.e. from initial salvation - justification - sanctification - glorification)/relationship with God in general, repentance, willingness to be obedient to his natural/moral laws/commands, influence of the Holy Spirit (vs demonic/Satanic influence), etc.

#40

Due trust qaz, I empathize with you on the deepest level brother. I’m not entirely sure where folks born with or having developed any diverse plethora of involuntary neurological problems during their lifetime (including cognitive disability/psychological-mental illness) weigh in regards to this specific conversation, however I agree. The thought of any undue afterlife suffering is troubling and I think both you and I believe in a God who is more compassionate and reasonable than in the example you relayed using folks with Alzheimer’s/dementia.

However, a God who holds men who do have their brain in one piece accountable in judgment much more than those who don’t is another matter altogether, and I think it’s best we keep this discussion within those confines as originally intended to avoid tangents. Still, I think God’s response to neurological deficiencies is a topic worthy of its own contextual dialogue and it’s disingenuous to throw this monkey wrench in as an emotional diversion from the general argument being posed. Not saying that you did that on purpose of course, brother qaz.

To wit, I would essentially agree with brother @Paidion in the effect that correction, be it earthly or otherworldly can and should at least have some connotation with that concept. Where me and brother Paidion may somewhat charitably disagree is what the methodology or nature of that correction will consist of and to what degree for each individual. It is interesting to note that one of the punishments for the Israelites’ disobedience to the Mosaic covenant made at Sinai (hinging on divinely sanctioned/approved blessings and curses) is being “smitten with madness,” Deut 28:28. “Madness” as it can be translated is understood to mean “craziness” or plague of the mental faculties; a malfunction if its normal sensibilities. Yikes. https://biblehub.com/hebrew/7697.htm

#41

Spoken like a true voice of reason, Zombie. Thank you.

#43

Qaz, if you are offended, I think it would benefit you more than me to leave the thread. I’m not here to be politically correct, and I certainly don’t like politics. If you find yourself in some inconsolable distress over my statement about keeping this discussion in context, then I bid you adieu in grace, peace, and love that we may civilly agree to disagree and still fellowship, or not. Still, I’m lost on where I went wrong on you with my highlighted statement and would like to amend that, if possible.

About your analogy: The only problem with that is there are many different factors that may determine say cancer, for example. Without going blow for blow about the causes of benign vs malignant tumors, it’s safe to say that there are plenty of examples of folks who developed cancer from their own conscious, and sometimes careless decisions (i.e. smokers who get lung cancer regardless of genetics). Now I won’t equate that to say those who are born with genetics automatically predisposed to health complications from inflammatory cellular aggravations leading to cancer (in all of its various forms).

I think it comes down to the fact that we are all suffer the sting of sin and death to greater or lesser degrees in our mortal bodies on this ever-decaying Earth. With that in mind, God reigns on the just and the unjust. There’s a time under the sun for everything. The LORD gives and he takes away. Job 2:10 rhetorically asks what I believe should be the #1 response to theodicy, in all humility: “Shall we not accept good from the hand of God, and not evil?” 1 Peter 4:15 says that if any of us suffer, let us see to it that we don’t suffer as evildoers. See the distinction? Suffering is an integral part of this present wicked eon (Gal 1:4), of which Satan and his principalities rule, until Christ’s return. Following Christ is characterized by suffering persecution (Matt 5:10-12) as evidenced by the merciless, brutal, gory martyrdom of Christians for the past millenia. Surely that has not been just. But it is how it must be until Christ reigns and puts all authority under his feet (1 Cor. 15:25). Until then, man’s life as important as it is to God in value, is but a vapor in quantity (James 4:14). Nobody is solitary in their suffering though from our limited human perspective it may seem that way at times. Heck, all creation groans together for the earnest expectation of the revealing of the sons of God (Rom. 8:19-23). There’s always somebody who has it worse than someone else in relative perspective. I don’t think any of us would trade our present suffering with Christ’s 33 years of grief including his death characterized by one of the most humiliating, painful forms of sadistic torture known in the 1st century.

#45

:joy::joy::joy: Alright buddy. Lighten up. I think you’re projecting a bit here. Granted, I’m still not exactly sure what you find horrific about my statement that God (erhm Jesus Christ) will judge competent human beings by standards that he alone chooses. I love the stark contrast that you bring to this forum and your passion for dismissive statements but chill dude, I haven’t mischaracterized any of your positions with strawmans or ad hominem defense mechanisms.

To be quite honest, your distaste for a scriptural argument in place of a purely emotional one is just as entertaining as it is spineless, and baseless if I’m going to be horribly truthful in lieu of my hidden biases against your position. But that’s just if you’d like to trade insults in place of simple disagreement which I have no problem doing except violating forum rules to my knowledge. At least present a somewhat coherent, scriptural case to reason with or else you risk sounding just as bad as disgruntled, anti-theist athiests who claim God is a megalomaniac based on their lack of understanding and whining about God’s authoritative position as Creator and Judge of the Universe.

You seem to be giving those who would call themselves Biblical pantelists a bad rep. You might do better arguing for pantheism or New-Age. I would’ve at least met you halfway with partial preterism. And btw, this is my thread. So feel free to tarry your way outta here tough cookie. That’s some tough love for ya since you wanna provoke me with name calling rather than trying to reason with me. I’ve been nothing but polite to you up until now. Guess that’s what I get for answering a fool to his folly.