The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Matthew 25:46

Evangelical Universalism Arguments against Evangelical Universalism
#34

This proves to be an awfully convenient MO whereby whatever does or does not meet your arbitrary measure does in fact so easily get dismissed and rejected… as you so regularly demonstrate. Consider… are the apostles Paul and John “BASICALLY true” in their reported and recorded accounts given here?

Paidion… do you believe these words of Paul are accurate, or as you would say… “BASICALLY true”? I.e., that God did “send a strong delusion” to bring “condemnation”?

Paidion… was John in good company with the likes of Paul, Peter, Mark and Moses, or any of the other OT prophets you have claimed to be in error, and “mistaken” in attributing said “wrath” to God?

Paidion… do you believe these words recorded by John and attributed to Jesus are also accurate, or as you would say… “BASICALLY true”? I.e., that Jesus did orchestrate sickness and death upon those in this text?

Given your firm conviction that key biblical writers reportedly recorded certain events/words of God/Jesus “in error”… how and on what basis are you having confidence that any reportedly recorded biblical words are accurate and to be trusted? The evidence so far suggests the only criteria used to distinguish these arbitrary judgements are your own suppositious dogmas brought to each particular text.

#35

Davo, you KNOW that that is an unrealistic statement. There’s nothing arbitrary about it. I have said over and over that the words of Jesus are my authority. You have brought up a single instance in which the recorded words of Jesus are false because the gospel writer was in error, never having been present to personally hear ANY of Jesus words. Then you seem to have tried to use that fact to indicate that I pick and choose according to my personal beliefs. GROSSLY UNFAIR!

Have I ever said or implied that God does not get angry or judge people? What I have affirmed all along is that God has a loving purpose in his wrath and judgment. That purpose is CORRECTION of the evil doer. He may try to correct them by sending them His representatives, but if all else fails, He must resort to a more severe correction.

Don’t quote Revelation to me. It was a disputed book in the early church. I do not dispute that the writer’s name was “John.” But there is no unequivocal evidence that he was the apostle John.

Also, to be absolutely clear, I have not claimed that Paul and Peter were in error, and not Mark either IN GENERAL. You pointed out Mark’s record of words of Jesus that were untrue. What do YOU have to say about that? Or do you claim that Mark recorded Jesus’ words correctly and that Jesus Himself was in error? I hope not. I rest on the one and only sure foundation, Jesus the Anointed One, who NEVER made a mistake!

#36

I am not certain just what you are asking. Would you please reword this question?
Are you asking whether modern Bibles are inerrant, and if so, should we exactly carry out all commands that we find therein?

#37

Don you said:

But are they TRUE or a persons opinion of what is true? In other words, the inerrancy seems to be dependent on the proclaimers version so to speak.
Our view of the bible (scripture) is predicated on our view as we have been taught, but I tend to think that ALL scripture is Historical, but God’s expanding revelation for humanity is outward evolving. And that is what we can dig our teeth into so to speak. :smiley:

#38

I hold the same view except that I see the change in revelation mostly in the area of God’s character. His character has never changed,but man’s understanding of it has developed.

However, I believe that basic moral principles have not changed, but yet again there are wide differences in the way people throughout the ages have understood the application of these principles.

#39

:laughing: yes and we all know why… BECAUSE to put it bluntly, John’s words in ‘Revelation’ make a total mockery of your doubtful dogma! :unamused:

You besmirch and dismiss John’s ‘Revelation’ account of Jesus’ words and yet are more than happy to claim John’s words in his epistles claiming “the words of Jesus are my authority” — the flexibility involved in your doctrinal positions is unbelievable and wholly inconsistent to say the least! It is ONLY because you CANNOT answer John’s account below that you are forced to run and hide from this…

Paidion… when will you deal with this text?

You HAVE made the claim repeatedly that these authors were “mistaken” and “in error” on given points for no other reason than these points fully contradict your shifting positions — everybody familiar with your posts can attest to this.

So please, feel free to answer Paul who LIKE JOHN was indeed instructed by the risen Lord…

Paidion… do you believe these words of Paul are accurate and true, i.e., that God was to indeed… “send a strong delusion” whereby bringing “condemnation”? Is this a truthful statement by the inspired Paul, or do you claim Paul, like John, bore false witness to Jesus’ words being likewise… “mistaken and in error”?

#40

Don said:

I would agree with this but you seem to be disengaged with how man’s understanding is developed. Will you explain?

#41

Yes. It occurred mainly because of the revelation of Jesus the Anointed. He revealed the Father as He had never been known before, for example, He said that the Father is kind to unthankful and evil people. Moses and the prophets described Yahweh as killing or bringing judgment through war on evil people.

#42

So, to clarify, you believe Jesus but not Moses and the prophets?

#43

Yes, Jesus was the ONLY-begotten Son of God, begotten before all ages and was just as divine as the Father. He was called “God” in John 1:1, not in the sense of being “the only true God” (as Jesus addressed the Father (John17:3) but “God” in the sense of being of the same essence as the Father prior to His birth. Though He was born fully human, He divested Himself of His divine attributes when He became human. (Philippians 2:7 NASB). Jesus never made a mistake and was never wrong.

Moses and the prophets were mere human beings, and they lived long before Jesus revealed God as He truly is—the personification of LOVE. So they had only a partial knowledge of the character of God.

#44

That seems to be a very suspect understanding seeing that Jesus continually quoted the prophets and the law. :exclamation: And his position was to ‘fulfill’ the law. He seemed to be pretty in tune with what ‘Dad’ was doing with his people. You seem to be very liberally dismissive of much all of the OT that God himself deemed so very important :open_mouth:

#45

We had a pretty good discussion here once. Chad you might want to read it. Maybe you’ll disagree, but there were some good points made.

#46

Thanks, always up for learning but when I clicked the link, I did not seem to be able to figure it out. Maybe it was my third grade education :laughing: Am I supposed to scroll way up from the link?

Thanks :smiley:

#47

Sorry - that linked to the bottom of the page; just scroll up to the opening post and continue as usual.

#48

Hmm well, would you look at that… CONTEXT!! :mrgreen:

#49

Amazin’ ain’t it??

#50

Chad - I"m not trying to teach you anything - just pointing to an interesting thread. :smiley:

#51

According to TDNT, ed Kittel, author Sasse, Vol 1, p.168, on AIDIOS, Sasse remarks concerning Jude 6 “in everlasting chains” & “Cf. for this expression Jos.Bell.,6,434…of the lifelong imprisonment of John…”, with “lifelong” being the Greek word aionios. This interpretation seems similar to that in the OT of a slave being his masters for olam, i.e. for life.

#52

But you did teach me something: scroll man scroll :laughing:

You quoted in your part 2:

I like that very much. Hope you had a good Thanksgiving :smiley:

#53

I did, thank you - food/fellowship was great -it was however not quiet! :laughing:

I liked that quote as well; I think it says quite a lot about our approach to the Bible.