I appreciate the post and ask Saved from what?
No, I see no basis for assuming that everyone remains in rebellion. We all enter life finite and ignorant and remain far from perfection. But part of the Gospel’s invitation to repent and seek God’s kingdom is precisely about fundamentally turning from our rebellion to embrace the Lordship of Christ.
For Paul in Romans 8, this means God can enable in those who love that “the righteous requirement of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.”
This is an interesting view Bob Wilson ,
I found you said: We all enter life finite and ignorant and remain far from perfection.
That does ask a question.
So shouldn’t that then tell you that your continued assertion and self-assessment that… “I’m unconvinced that the promises of taking away “sin” meant only removing “the condemnatory guilt of Adam’s rebellious offense,…”” has been incorrect, inept and FALSE this entire time?
I’ve pointed to the fact that as I’ve noted, said… removal was the primary business, NOT “meant only” — what you’ve raised I see as its ongoing effect, i.e., we ONLY have the latter BECAUSE OF the former — how you guys can claim and tout either academic or grammatical knowhow but CANNOT (choose not to??) see this staggers me and leaves me wondering… is this just positional bias and myopathy on your part? — sorry for the bluntness.
What would pantelism say it means?
There is NOTHING in Phil 1:6 speaking of the ‘elimination of actual sinning” NOTHING! What Paul speaks to was their coming completion and fruition in the fellowship of the gospel… from the BEGINNING, which as it transpired, was the work, will and pleasure of God, i.e., chapter 1 verse 5 and chapter 2 verse 13 — context NOT theological pretext!!
As for Heb 9:26 your theology denies this verse claiming Jesus is STILL yet to accomplish this… thus your theology has an incomplete and thereby weak salvation.
And Tit 2:14 simply makes the case I have stated previously… that said requirements were pertinent to those called to His kingly and priestly service, i.e., believers, of whom the higher standard WAS indeed required — of whom much was given (ministry) much was required (fidelity).
And again… 1Pet 2:24 is in the context of Christ’s servants, i.e., believers, and NOT a general requirement that unless fulfilled has one in hell learning such until fit to get into heaven — which IS what you indicate elsewhere. Here is the CONTEXT of verse 24…
1Pet 2:21 For to this you were called, because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that you should follow His steps:
Adam’s SIN wrought the wholesale imposition of guilt / liability <ἔνοχος> enoxos and thus condemnation to all assigned as being “in Adam”… it was this imposition that God removed in Christ.
Now you guys here may be unique, BUT it has been my experience that universalists claim that… whoever was formerly placed in the first Adam was summarily placed in the last Adam and this was the work of God.
There is a difference between the collective AND THOSE called to serve it — and it is this that you guys seem not to understand.
Davo, I’m surprised you appear so unable to comprehend how confusing your rhetoric and MM’s has been! It appears you are so biased toward the pantelist system you developed that you cannot grasp how anyone else may read the Bible or hear your language.
Your view that God had to condemn us for another man, Adam’s mistake, makes little sense to me. So stating that you only declared that Jesus rescued us from the guilt of Adam’s offense is not an issue I found relevant.
I regret that you again can’t resist the “bluntness” of despising my own “academic knowhow” and my stubbornly “inept” intellect. But I’m glad that you do not challenge my affirmations that God’s condemnation or “His wrath toward our own ongoing transgressions that destroys his loving purpose for our lives” needs to be faced, and that " the cross leaves us still in need of seeking forgiveness for our transgressions."
Perhaps we then can unite on calling sinners to turn to faith in Christ and to repentance for the forgiveness of their sins and rebellion 
Qaz, You say that you can’t understand how one imperfect person could be deemed as “living a life of rebellion,” while another could be judged to have not demonstrated that same persistent pattern of rebellion. While I too would have a hard time doing that, I guess it’s hard for me not to believe that God would have the ability to make the right decisions on such things…
The problem with terse language, is that after the originator passes on - the system or interpretation may disappear. If this is the truth, then one needs to present it - as simply as possible. This is what the Theosophists have done, via the Liberal Catholic Church - for Esoteric Christianity. Or Mary Baker Eddy has done - with Christian Science. Both are alternative versions of scripture, that challenge the Orthodox perspective. Just as Pantelism tries to do.
Even Rev. Peter Popoff, presents his miracle spring water - in simple language. Not that I agree with that either.
qaz, consider a human family. The father of this family wants his children to live good lives and be helpful to others, and to avoid making evil choices that are harmful both to themselves and to other.
When he tries to reprove George the oldest for his behaviour, George shouts, “You and your rules can go to hell!” turns and stalks off in anger. And he continues in his wicked way of living. When the father does the same with his younger brother Peter, Peter replies, “I know I’ve been doing some wrong things, which I truly regret. I’ll do my best to follow your instructions more carefully in the future.”
Neither of the brothers have lived perfect lives. Which one do you think the father would deem as one who lives a life of rebellion against him? Was there any sense in which the other was a rebel? Which one do you think the father will reward?
1 Like
The innocent (e.g. aborted babies) would be in the latter group. Holy Spirit blasphemers & those of Heb.10:26-29 in the former group. See also Rom.2:4-16.
Luke 12:47-48
47 And that servant, which knew his lord’s will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. 48 But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.
An interpretation for seeing 'the end of the ages" in Heb.9:26 as yet future is detailed here:Hebrews 9:26 seems to say that the ages will end
As re an “incomplete & weak salvation” are you suggesting that the universe is now “completely” saved from the effects of sin (e.g. death, rebellion, sickness)? In Pantelism how many negative things such as that continue forever & are never erased from the earth? That’s what i would call a salvation that forever remains “incomplete & weak”. OTOH in universalism sometime after the creation of the new heavens & new earth Love Omnipotent will be “making all new” & death, the last enemy, shall be abolished. There will be no more tears, pain, dying, curse or disease.
Even in Pantelism the unbelievers are not experiencing salvation from the guilt/condemnation related to sin which you seem to think was fulfilled already as per Jn.1:29. So how is salvation in Pantelism not also a “incomplete & weak salvation”?
BTW even some/many universalists believe Jn.1:29 was fulfilled already (in some mystical sense as also Pantelism says) &/or Jesus IS the Savior of the world.
This sounds more like the Pantelist opinion than any Universalist viewpoint i’ve ever heard.
Typically Christians distinguish between believers (who are called to serve) & unbelievers.
1 Like
The new heavens and earth started in 70 A.D. after the lake of fire judgment. It hasn’t reached it’s full consummation yet though. Things are slowly improving with a few set backs. But the world we live in is a different and improved world now. We have not reached the full consummation of the new heaven and earth but the Bible states that it will happen. There’s even a scripture that speaks of death in the new heavens and earth at a particular stage in it’s development. Granted we haven’t reached this stage yet but the new heavens and earth will contain death until it’s final consummation as described in Revelation.
Isaiah 65:17-25
New Heavens and a New Earth
“See, I will create
new heavens and a new earth.
The former things will not be remembered,
nor will they come to mind.But be glad and rejoice forever
in what I will create,
for I will create Jerusalem to be a delight
and its people a joy.I will rejoice over Jerusalem
and take delight in my people;
the sound of weeping and of crying
will be heard in it no more.“Never again will there be in it
an infant who lives but a few days,
or an old man who does not live out his years;
the one who dies at a hundred
will be thought a mere child;
the one who fails to reach a hundred
will be considered accursed.
Notice at this future stage in the new heavens and earth there’s still death. When we reach the full consummation there will be no more death as it describes in Revelation.
1 Like
It must take a lot of “faith” to believe that! Virtually every indication is that the people of the world are waxing more and more evil. Even in my short life-time of 80 years, there have been dramatic changes. For example, during my youth, homosexuality was considered to be an aberration. Now little children in elementary school are being taught that it is normal human behaviour.
Consider the number of murders, rapes, tortures, etc. in our day. Their increase far exceeds the increase in population.
Consider also the power of ISIS, and organization that wreaks havoc in many countries throughout the earth.
If this is the promised new earth, who needs it!
Now you provide some examples of the people of the earth being BETTER than they were in previous centuries.
Let me share a couple of articles here - for reflection. That might have relevance here.
The first is from the Patheos Evangelical newsletter:
Let me quote a bit:
“God loves you.” That is no lie. But “God loves you” does not equal “God approves of all that you do.” Perhaps the folks who speak for this church (and I’m sure there are many other churches proclaiming an identical message) would agree with this caveat. But the entire immediate context of the message on the website that I have quoted here virtually demands to be understood in a simplistic way. God loves you, end of sentence, nothing to add.
Jesus would have taken a baseball bat to this truncated gospel.
So would the entire New Testament. Nowhere in the New Testament will we find such a truncated gospel. You won’t find it in the Synoptic Gospels, where following Jesus comes close to obscuring the glorious truth of God’s grace to which this Midwestern church appeals. Ask the Rich Young Ruler. Or see what the first word out of Jesus’ mouth in his ministry is: “Repent.” Or read the Sermon on the Mount, where Jesus sets the standard sky-high in places where humans have been lax with God’s law.
Here’s a bit more, on what the author is writing against:
And here’s one from today’s Patheos Catholic newsletter
Here’s what we “might” have, to look forward to…in the Holly Tree, 70 A.D. new earth:
qaz said : Bob, not everyone, just every imperfect person. I’m having a hard time understanding on what basis one imperfect person who dies gets deemed as someone who “lived a life of rebellion” while another imperfect person who dies does not."
Bob said: “Qaz, You say that you can’t understand how one imperfect person could be deemed as “living a life of rebellion,” while another could be judged to have not demonstrated that same persistent pattern of rebellion. While I too would have a hard time doing that, I guess it’s hard for me not to believe that God would have the ability to make the right decisions on such things…”
First of all Bob, you say “that God would have the right decisions on such things” And what would the end of that be? That is at the core of what you (and to be honest all of us) are continually being asked. What is the criteria for a decision God needs to make about a person. What does a person have to do, what does a person have to be, what does a person have to believe for God to “have the right decision about a person.” The Pantelist position, from my understanding starts to clear that dialog in understanding the realistic view of verses of scripture, putting them into the historical context they belong and comes up with some, to be honest, very appealing views about God and the world.
While your response to qaz is a bit of a cop out, he is asking pertinent questions. This is a bit of the problem with the evangelical mindset, they have no answers.
Many times. I’d suggest the only Christians who have never sinned are those who died or were martyred shortly after being saved (e.g. one of the criminals on a cross beside Jesus?). Though i’m not sure what this has to do with the topic.
As to the distinction between rebel & non rebel, are the only two choices 0% rebel & 100% rebel? Or is there also 10, 25, 50, & 75% rebels? The Lord knows the hearts & He’ll deal with humanity justly, fairly, righteously & lovingly when our postmortem times & judgement day arrives.
Another thing to consider on this subject, to be distinguished from how rebellious one’s life was, is what people refer to as dieing in a “state of grace”.
1 Like
I asked first 
:
All those things happened in Biblical times as well. Especially the OT. They happened more frequently and on a much larger and intense scale though. The wickedness in the Bible was more in quantity and intensity than it is now. This is why the punishments in the Bible were so harsh. The grave wickedness would be so bad that it’s defilement would spread not only to progeny but the possessions and physical environment. God would wipe out entire nations because of their evil. Even the Roman world (which was the whole world in the New Testament) had homosexuality, rape, murder, bestiality, and torture but was on a much larger scale. The worst sin in Biblical times was a hardening of the heart against God so much that it was called the eternal sin. Nobody in modern times has reached such wickedness. This is why those on judgment day in 70 A.D. were thrown into the eternal lake of fire where they are punished forever and ever. The new heavens and earth doesn’t contain the eternal sin. It does have sin and death but we haven’t reached the full consummation of the new heavens and earth yet.