No, I’m not a Calvinist and Nooooo, God won’t save everyone otherwise He would violate their will and He does not violate anyone’s will. God gives you a choice in this life…choose Life or Death…choose life!
Oh. So God is impotent? He “can’t” save everyone. Man’s free will endlessly frustrates His free will.
I very much have difficulty understanding your theology Revival. Do you affirm that God graces and offers resistible salvation to all on earth according to the Bible (and Arminian teachings)? If so, you would know that Yahweh is not failing when humanity resists Him – here or in any Hell or Lake of Fire. You seem to have descended to a strange Calvinism that does not cohere with your already debatable Arminianism. To put it another way, Yeshua who was God incarnate was a terribly lousy evangelist, according to your 100% immediate conversion rate demands. At the end of His life, even his twelve closest friends were barely converted. It takes Yeshua as long as it takes to entice the wills of humanity on earth. And it will take as long as it takes to entice the wills of humanity anywhere else.
Not being able to make square circles is not impotency. And nor is forcing someone to love you.
How can you compare God using fallible human beings the best way that He is able to evangelize people in this world… to Himself evangelizing people who are being tormented in the flames of Hell? Are you kidding me? If God Himself without the hindrance of using fallible man to evangelize people in the flames of HELL cannot convert one person to avoid the LOF then He has failed! Forget the 100% conversion rate God doesn’t convert not one person because they are all thrown into the LOF in Rev 20:10-15. The fact is God doesn’t evangelize one unbeliever in Hell nor does He evangelize one unbeliever in the LOF!
There is nothing Calvinist that I have ever said nor will there ever be!
God’s will being superior to Man’s will, and Man’s will being unable to frustrate God’s will forever - is not comparable to square circles. It isn’t a logical contradiction, an “impossibility”, it is a sheer matter of basic nature. Man’s willpower, on his own, is finite, God’s is infinite. God’s perfect will ultimately must overwhelm the will of that has been sickened with insanity.
Rebellion against the All-loving God, is insanity. An insane will cannot go unhealed, an insane will cannot frustrate the perfect will of God into endlessness. That is the issue of impotency; if God “can’t” save the man, he is impotent (or incompetent). God will have failed.
The issue comes down to its very basic point. If the broken will of man defeats the very infinite, and perfect will of God; God is rendered impotent, or may as well be impotent. That is what I’m getting at.
To be clear WE ARE ALL BROTHERS, I am discussing the impotency issues from the “Traditional” Mainstream theological perspective; namely that of Original Sin infecting every aspect of Man, especially his will.
Perhaps I do not understand your posts. Could you answer the following to clear this up?
Q1. Do you believe Yeshua was a fallible human being?
Q2. Did Yeshua “fail” to convert everyone he evangelized to on earth?
If you answered Yes to Q1 then you are not within the Orthodoxy you claim to love. If you answered No to Q1 and Yes to Q2 then God is clearly not a “PERFECT Evangelist with a 100% conversion rate”.
Just a quick post on a complex subject. I think the difficulty is with your Calvinist premises. I think that Yahweh’s will is that all would love Him. Genuine love, an extroverted affection, therefore cannot be forced or “overwhelmed” from without. If Yahweh wants us to love Him (and not merely have Stockholm syndrome – which is a delusion) then He must entice us. In stronger words: the Bride has to be seduced, not raped.
As for the will and Original Sin, I do not disagree with you. The offer comes from Yahweh, the sufficient enablement to accept the offer comes from Yahweh, the ability to reject the offer comes from us.
So I think that it’s not about frustration or impotency, it’s about the impossibility of forcing someone to love you. But I do believe that Yeshua is a competent lover and therefore have faith that ultimately Yahweh will save most, if not all.
Q1 Was Jesus capable of making a mistake? Yes. Did He? No.
Q2. Jesus could not get anyone born again because he had not yet been crucified and resurrected.
Firstly; it isn’t Calvinistic - I think you misunderstand what I mean by “overwhelmed” - sin is consumed by God, in his presence people are “undone”, and pierced by the all knowing heart. Regarding free-will however, I do not consider free-will omnipotent unless the will behind it is omnipotent.
I feel it is only an exercised ability to reject, when the person is under the influence of falsehood/insanity. In the face of truth such things must be dissolved.
My argument, is that if he doesn’t win, he failed.
Sure, that’s just me being dense. I agree that falsehoods/insanity influence us to reject salvation, but I wonder whether yielding to these (to be dissolved) influences could set our will irreparably against Yahweh. The traditional Arminian teaching, as far as I understand, is that resisting prevenient grace hardens you against Yahweh. I’m not sure whether that has thoroughly conclusive Bibical merit (it has some) or is simply postulated to fit their theology. But if so, this would explain why some/many/most may increasingly resist Yahweh inside the Lake of Fire, despite His ongoing evangelistic, prevenient grace-filled efforts through Yeshua. Even despite the abolition of false influences.
I still don’t understand the winning/losing thing 
Destroying false influences will not determine the will. If Yahweh fails to save someone deterministically than it simply shows He is not a determinist. (Thanks for bearing with me Lefein!)
I like to follow a semi-common sense sort of path (not that you do not, its just a description of my leanings currently) - that when a man “becomes a danger to himself and others” it is usually at that point in which he is “committed” by loving family members; even if the man resists.
I apply the same sort of thought towards God and us. Not everything regarding God’s love is reduced to the “Bride/Husband” motif, if that makes sense.
It is generic language for “God must complete the mission he set out to do” - if he persists eternally, then he must ultimately win; he must surely complete the mission. If he gives up, then he has failed.
If all lies are dissolved, only the truth remains. To reject the truth would be to remain in a lie, which cannot be so if it has been dissolved.
You are welcome, I hope I’m not coming across as too stringent. There is room to grow, and change my view; but as of current…I have a hard time seeing any idea where God doesn’t save all, and not fail in his Salvific promise as well.
Nicely evaded 
But I find Yeshua being an evangelist (a sharer of the ***euangelion***2098) without any present meaning out of step with the statements of the scriptures. The way He proclaimed it (including the healing of the sick) seemed to imply it was already a reality (see Luke 17:21 and Mark 1:15 below). I don’t understand why Yeshua would preach a yet-to-be-fulfilled good news?
Matthew 4:23
Jesus was going throughout all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues and proclaiming the ***euangelion***2098 of the kingdom, and healing every kind of disease and every kind of sickness among the people.
Mark 1:14-15
14 Now after John had been taken into custody, Yeshua came into Galilee, preaching the ***euangelion***2098 of God, 15 and saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the ***euangelion***2098.”
Luke 4:43
43 But [Yeshua] said to them, “I must preach the kingdom of God to the other cities also, for I was sent for this purpose.” 44 So He kept on preaching in the synagogues of Judea.
(The Kingdom of God is the euangelion as it states in Matthew 4:23 and 9:35)
Luke 16:16
“The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John. Since that time, the ***euangelion***2098 of the kingdom of God is being preached, and everyone is forcing his way into it…"
(If people are forcing their way into the Kingdom of the God from John onwards, why did they have to wait for Yeshua to be crucified? Though I suppose this question is for another discussion.)
Luke 17:21
“…nor will they say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or, ‘There it is!’ For behold, the kingdom of God is within you.”
(See also: Matthew 9:35 and Luke 8:1). So if Yeshua proclaimed the euangelion and people were then pressing into the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16), He clearly was getting people into the Kingdom irrespective of His death and resurrection. Or perhaps I’m not understanding this passage correctly. But if Yeshua (God incarnate) could get people into the Kingdom why did He “fail” when some people did not enter?
Brothers
Lefein sees reconciliation as if God is battling Satan for souls and if God does not save all people Satan wins. Like its a game or something. Reconciliation has always been an act of mercy on God’s part to make provision for fallen humanity to partake of this reconciliation by faith and never was set up for God to save everyone. It makes provision for everyone to be saved but God knows not everyone will partake of this free gift of grace yet He still sacrificed His Son! If God wanted no one to perish He would of stopped Adam from eating the fruit. God honors peoples free-will choice.
Brothers, no one could be born again spiritually and get into the kingdom before Jesus was crucified and resurrected. It was impossible. Col 1:12-14
Lefein, sure I agree with you a lot here. And where I could potentially disagree with you, I don’t have any real answers to offer. I shall keep studying!
I agree with you, but I think this still allows for an eternal stalemate, as unlikely as that may be. Though I wonder if Yahweh would know when His beloved are irreparable and therefore opt for some sort of benevolent annihilationism.
No, not at all. Thanks for your thoughts!
This verse isn’t particularly convincing. It only supports your view if you presuppose Penal Substitution. And this interpretation seems to be in conflict with a significant amount of scripture elsewhere.
At Revival:
Actually, I see Reconciliation as God “keeping his promise, and being an honest God”, anything else regarding Satan winning is just a rabbit trail of inevitable (or interpretable) consequences.
On another note though, and though it is somewhat off tangent - I feel it needs to be said;
If there is one thing that has quite bothered me about your theology, Revival…Is that it (to put it poetically) really seems eerily close to presenting God as a “familiar”, summoned up by “bible based-necromancers”, using the Bible as a grimoire of spells, invoking the right names of power, and saying the right spell-prayer to puppet The Divine into giving the whispercrafter immortal life…Drawing from the infinite power source named “God” or “Grace”…in order to live for ever…
Those who don’t tap into this fount however are unfortunately, tortured endlessly for not invoking the right name, or doing the right ritual, or saying the right spell, or joining the right coven…
The grace of God is mercifully available!..for the sorcerer clever enough to invoke it…
At Allbros:
I might define that sort of benevolent annihilation as “not creating to begin with” 
lol.
Happy to provide Allbros.
In all of this I just want to make it known, that I do understand and uphold much of the free-will issue. My part with it however, is that I don’t view the free-will issue (“God provides, its up to the free-will agent to choose Salvation”) as being the sole governing factor, and certainly not regarding Salvation. It is only one thread-pattern within a diverse and complex tapestry that is the weaved work of God in the lives of Man.
Brothers, the born again experience or to receive the nature or life of God was not available before Jesus was crucified and resurrected to defeat sin and death. 