The Evangelical Universalist Forum

John 11:23-26?

Evangelical Universalism Arguments against Evangelical Universalism
#24

Hi OL, this is exactly what my post above brings out. Jesus was a Messiah to the Jewish nation, a Messiah that was ridiculed and crucified by his own people. Yes technically the Romans did the deed but the very spurn of the Jews was that they hated him and it could be said had him crucified. But the problem was with what Jesus knew was coming down the road.

Matt. 23:37 “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing.

So Jesus is talking about His bro’s from Israel. :wink:

The writer of Hebrews goes on…

Heb 8:6 But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, by as much as He is also the mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted on better promises.
Heb 8:7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion sought for a second.
Heb 8:8 For finding fault with them, He says, "BEHOLD, DAYS ARE COMING, SAYS THE LORD, WHEN I WILL EFFECT A NEW COVENANT WITH THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL AND WITH THE HOUSE OF JUDAH;
Heb 8:9 NOT LIKE THE COVENANT WHICH I MADE WITH THEIR FATHERS ON THE DAY WHEN I TOOK THEM BY THE HAND TO LEAD THEM OUT OF THE LAND OF EGYPT; FOR THEY DID NOT CONTINUE IN MY COVENANT, AND I DID NOT CARE FOR THEM, SAYS THE LORD.
Heb 8:10 "FOR THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL AFTER THOSE DAYS, SAYS THE LORD: I WILL PUT MY LAWS INTO THEIR MINDS, AND I WILL WRITE THEM ON THEIR HEARTS. AND I WILL BE THEIR GOD, AND THEY SHALL BE MY PEOPLE.
Heb 8:11 "AND THEY SHALL NOT TEACH EVERYONE HIS FELLOW CITIZEN, AND EVERYONE HIS BROTHER, SAYING, ‘KNOW THE LORD,’ FOR ALL WILL KNOW ME, FROM THE LEAST TO THE GREATEST OF THEM.
Heb 8:12 “FOR I WILL BE MERCIFUL TO THEIR INIQUITIES, AND I WILL REMEMBER THEIR SINS NO MORE.”
Heb 8:13 When He said, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear.

The Pantelist view of the story of Christ is a story of a covenant relationship with God and how God through His son, reconciled the nations to himself. But the rub of the story is about Christ and Israel. :smiley:

An interesting point to consider is :

Heb 8:11 "AND THEY SHALL NOT TEACH EVERYONE HIS FELLOW CITIZEN, AND EVERYONE HIS BROTHER, SAYING, ‘KNOW THE LORD,’ FOR ALL WILL KNOW ME, FROM THE LEAST TO THE GREATEST OF THEM.
Heb 8:12 “FOR I WILL BE MERCIFUL TO THEIR INIQUITIES, AND I WILL REMEMBER THEIR SINS NO MORE.”

Yepper that is my motto. We will all know from the least to the greatest of them. Lets cut each other some slack. Be merciful.

It seems to me that this correlates with Jesus’ command to Judge not… Just a thought.

#25

Exactly… it is primarily about the here and now as the there and then has ALREADY been taken care of. :sunglasses:

#26

Perhaps so. Although there appears to be the aspect of God’s wrath as well:

Jn.3:36 he who is believing in the Son, hath life age-during; and he who is not believing the Son, shall not see life, but the wrath of God doth remain upon him.’ YLT

#27

I visited a Preterist site and the way they would look at this is that the Jews who did not give up Mosaic Law for the New Covenant were going to have God’s wrath in terms of being destroyed (By Rome in 70 AD) so that Christianity could spread. It is an interesting viewpoint.

#28

I did very specifically account for that in what you quoted me. In fact, I added more detail from the verses than you did.

I was quoting (with some logical piecing together of the quotes) what Jesus says in John 5, including what Jesus says about the the goal/result of being raised to judgment, and what Jesus says about the results of that goal involve.

You’re welcome to point out where Jesus doesn’t say those things (in John’s report); but since you didn’t notice that I had accounted for Jesus saying what you quoted against me as though Jesus didn’t say what I referenced Him saying at all, then you’ll have to be more accurate.

I’m including way more detail than you did of what Jesus is reported saying in John 5, not less or other than you did.

I’m not allowed to make a contextual argument, though, even on immediate context, then we’re going to just be prooftexting snippets against each other. Which is not objective learning. (And also not something I care much about doing.)

#29

That’s one way of looking at John 3:36. Another would be in light of the yet future resurrection of Daniel 12:2.

#30

Chad, you’ve read my comments here for some time and you know me better than that (or you ought to). I’m a partial pretarist (insofar as I understand what that even is) but I’m not a pantelist. Sorry if you find that offensive. This is what I mean (and I speak of adults because that is who this passage is written to. The next verse to that is ([tag]qaz[/tag] are you listening? Because this bit is the answer to your question, too.)

Since this was written in Greek, it’s important to understand the Greek first (I hope I"m understanding it correctly, Paidion, Jason) According to the expanded versions, believe conveys the sense of “believe in, rely on, trust in, cling to”… so it’s not a matter of mental assent. And I do think people can do this who haven’t heard the name of Jesus although, just perusing history, not many of the “mighty ones” who get reported on in history books look like they’ve done anything like that. I suspect that the minions by and large haven’t, either, nor would have had they become mighty ones.

Now let’s talk about condemnation. When you stand before a judge, guilty of, let’s say… oh, not paying your parking tickets and owing the city a gazillion dollars… for the fifteenth time… what do you think the condemnation will be? Maybe to not do that any more? Maybe to pay up? Maybe even some jail time? I’m guessing the condemnation is NOT going to have anything to do with caning or flogging with a cat’o’nine. It’s going to be somewhere south of that by a lot. The focus of this condemnation is to teach you to obey the parking laws.

In your view (which makes NO sense to me, but that’s okay… I do not condemn you, even if I had the right/authority to do that, which I do not have; please return the favor) there is maybe no punishment/chastisement/remedial counselling/whatever for any reason whatsoever. I don’t know. Pantelism seems to have different meanings depending on who one talks to. Maybe you’re just kind of automatically made into a good loving person with no personal participation in that at all. Okay. I’m okay with you believing that. I believe that we, having free will (or at least the potential for having free will), NEED the Father to gently conform us to the image of Christ because if He doesn’t do that, we won’t be fit company for the rest of the sibs. I believe that we are becoming and will become GOOD as a result of what God does in parenting us and what we do in cooperating with His parenting. I believe that even as we rebel against Him, He knows how to gather us in to Himself and eventually train us up in the image of Christ. That’s what I believe. If you want to condemn me for that, well, okay.

Paidion, Gabriel told Joseph, “You shall call His name Jesus for He shall save His people from their sins.” That’s what Jesus saves us from.

#31

Cindy, to be honest, if I had to make that post again today, I would have made it different. Though my belief is the same, I would have qualified it in a different way, I apologize for the way I reacted. Please accept my apology.

I really do not want to talk about condemnation or preterist or anything else, with you at this time.

The way I said what I said was out of line.

I was in a particular interesting moment in my personal life when I happened upon your post. I had no right.

All I can ask is that you can forgive me…

So if we can move on, I would appreciate it.

#32

No problem, Chad. Forget about it.

#33

[size=150]EXACTLY![/size]

Cindy, I agree with absolutely everything you wrote in that post!—except your eschatological position. You are a partial preterist; I am a historic pre-millenialist.

#34

Alright, so let’s get to the chase.

You said:

I’m not sure if I have said this (and maybe I should go back in my history,) but what I like about your posts is that there are NO proof text’s.

What you say about God is interesting. To be honest, I have no problem with the Father gently nudging us to His will, that is in essence, is providence. And I well believe in it. But I believe in it within the context that A: Christ’s cross was totally sufficient to take care of the sin (sins) of the whole world (Israel and the nations) and B: No condemnation exists between God and man.

For some, that is a hard pill to swallow. :wink: We seem to be on different ends of the same boat, so to speak. :laughing:

#35

Chad,

I think really it’s a difference in the saying of things rather than in the believing of them. Of course Jesus’ blood is sufficient–not that God needed propitiating, but maybe we humans needed that. God isn’t holding our sins against us (by “us,” I mean the world–since God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself). (Oops! That may have been a proof text. :laughing: ) Anyway, if God was reconciling the world to Himself, I expect He succeeded and that He completely succeeded.

That said, we do need to stop sinning. God our Father loves us just as we are, yet He also loves us too much to allow us to REMAIN as we are insofar as we continue to be sinful. So… if we need to feel some hard consequences for our sins in order for us to learn to hate them as we ought and must (in order to be truly free of them), then I really believe we’ll experience those consequences to the full extent necessary to cure us of clinging to inequity and submitting our bodies as servants obedient to sin. I suspect that’s probably a matter of natural consequences. So if we hate to give up lust, we may get to experience the full effects of lust on ourselves and on any others we may have hurt by our fixation on lust. Or fits of rage. Or drinking to excess. Or gossip. Or slander. Or even timidity/fear. I don’t know. I always wondered about the timid being in the “LoF” outside the City, but I think this timidity probably refers to a lack of trust in God and perhaps cowardice–which keeps us from coming to Him, resulting in us standing at a distance, suffering, because we “have not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God” and we can’t experience His blessings until we find the courage to receive them willingly.

Meanwhile, the Spirit and the Bride are calling, “Come!” Let anyone who hears say, “Come!” and let anyone who is willing, come and take of the water of life freely. So God is coaxing not only the actively, willingly wicked to come and be made whole and pure and thus to become good and happy and noble sons and daughters, but also the timid fearful and untrusting wee birdies. But I think He will not force them. He will sit there with lovely millet and sunflower seeds and sorghum in His hands and wait for the little flutterers to get hungry enough to pluck up their courage and fly over and perch on His knees so He can feed them and comfort them and calm their painfully fluttering itty bitty hearts and show them how very much He truly loves them. I think He will wait for all of these as long as it takes, and that they may take as long as they choose to take–but that they can’t hold out forever. Eventually they will, all of them, surrender to love.

So… like I said, I much doubt we disagree all that much at least on this topic–maybe we do–if so, I don’t think it needs to divide any of us. We all believe that God’s love redeems all.

#36

#37

:slight_smile: Thanks, Don!

#38

Those that believe in God see life but those that don’t believe undergo the wrath and punishment of destruction. Faith is for this age. The second fruits are saved through fire. He is the Savior of all - especially of them that believe in the present age. When God’s children see Him face to face the faith of the elect pass away. The second fruits are grafted in but they are saved through fire not faith. They are baptized in the lake of fire. Only love is eternal. Faith and hope are future oriented. In God’s eternal presence of love there is only the now.

God’s holy hatred and wrath destroy those in the lake of fire but they will be made alive and grafted in. Just as the heavens and earth is destroyed by fire but there will be a new heaven and earth. This fits with the atonement. Aquinas held that at the cross Jesus suffered and bore the punishment for our sins. But this punishment was medicinal punishment. The Bible tells us that Christ learned obedience through what He suffered. Moreover, we know it was disciplinary is because of Isaiah 53:5 -

The Hebrew word here is musar

musar:

discipline, chastening, correction

The NASB Strongest Exhaustive Concordance

While Christ suffered and died He was resurrected. Given His substitution I must conclude that this is what happens to those in the lake of fire. It’s for disciplinary or corrective purposes. Musar is a masculine noun meaning instruction, discipline. Eternal means lasting correction.

#39

Cindy said:

Yepper. Thanks :laughing:

#40

Yeah!