Funny how firedup2000 posts the topic and then it’s only Aaron37 who has responded to the Universalists - seems firedup2000 (I shan’t descend to the level of calling him FU2 for shorthand convenience) isn’t interested in the replies to his own thread.
Firedup2000 isn’t your alter ego is he Aaron37?
Of course we know nothing about you firedup - perhaps you’d like to tell us about yourself over in the Introductions section.
Tom, you are a typical rude, arrogant Universalist that has nothing to offer other than erroneous comments. Your behavior is very disappointing and immature, but what do you care. 
Nope, not me.
Seems we’ve all been rather jaded by our experience with Aaron37… Firedup may well be genuinely interested in these questions, and simply had the misfortune to arrive here on the heels of A37’s travesty of a ‘discussion’ on the same questions. Perhaps he will reply once he’s read through the previous discussions which I referred him to–or perhaps he’ll find those discussions sufficient in themselves.
In spite of Aaron37’s mocking accusations that we have not provided scriptural support for our position, I think we did cover the issues fairly thoroughly. 
An intro from firedup would be welcome!
Sonia
Travesty? Maybe for you and your mentor because you were presented with challenges that you had no biblical answer for.
You did not provide scriptural support for the very same challenges I presented to you and your mentor that firedup has presented. Your mentor, Jason Pratt has already declared…Paraphrasing… No where in the bible is this recorded…So, why don’t you stop with the tap dancing games, Sonia.
No, it’s a ‘travesty’ because of your unwillingness to engage with the arguments being made.
And, actually, I did provide scriptural support–as anyone who reads my posts will easily see. BTW, I also explained to you that I could not honestly call Jason my ‘mentor’ at this time–though I do respect his abilities and mostly agree with what I’ve read of his posts, and I told you who could qualify as such in my life. Perhaps you forgot–or perhaps you think I’m lying. I’ve been a universalist for nearly 5 yrs now, and only known of Jason’s existance for 8 months.
Aaron, I would like to see your answer to Roofus’ question here.
Firedup–I’m sorry your thread has been so derailed. If you come back to discuss more, I guess you better start another thread. 
Sonia
A37: Tom, you are a typical rude, arrogant Universalist that has nothing to offer other than erroneous comments. Your behavior is very disappointing and immature, but what do you care.
Tom: I care a great deal about many things. Your opinion of me is not one of them.
You are correct in that it is a radical shifte in thinking from the traditional doctrine of hell, the traditional doctrine that Jesus fails to save most of humanity and instead consigns most of humanity to endless torture. Universalism affirms that Jesus fully accomplished all that He set out to do - the salvation of all humanity. Jesus did not come to condemn the lost but to save the lost.
And yes, you are correct in that there are many problems with the traditional doctrine of Hell. For one, how could a god that claims to love man, who even died a substitutionary death for man, then torture man forever? Yes, the traditional doctrine does foster many such contradictions. I was just talking with someone yesterday and she noted that as a child she saw an evangelistic movie, and in the movie the Devil is rejoicing over getting another soul in hell. This really disturbed her because she just could not reconcile how God could be a looser in the battle for souls. Her mother tried to explain to her how that God really wins even though according to the traditional doctrine He looses most of humanity and Hell ends up more populated than Heaven; Satan ends up having a bigger kingdom than God does. It just didn’t make sence to her as a child and it took years of religious endoctrination to convince her that God really wins though he looses most of humanity.
Actually, in correct English interpretations of scripture, Hell is never mentioned in either the Old or the New Testaments. Sheol and Hades are either transliterated or interpreted as the grave or realm of the dead. Gehenna is usually transliterated, though it would best be interpreted as “the city trash dump”. And Tartaroo being only used once to descibe a torturous place of holding for sinning angels until judgment, is best also transliterated, or possibly translated as Purgatory. The word Hell should not be in English Bibles.
1st, note that the absence of information is not proof of anything; it only gives room for speculation.
2nd, note that Revelation is interpreted at least 4 significantly different ways - preterist, historical, metaphorical, and futuristic, each having substantial evidence that their view is correct. The Lake of Fire is interpreted to have a different meaning in each view of Revelation. I thus believe it best to build doctrine on biblical literature that is more didactic and not so open to such drastically different views of interpretation.
3rd, note that the word that signifies the purpose of the Lake of Fire is “torment”, basanizo - which is a word used in the purification of metal. Gold was “tormented”, rubbed against the touchstone, to see how pure it was; and it was repeatedly put into the fire until it was pure enough for the Gold smith. In the fire, impurities were burnt up but the gold was purified. Purification.
4th, note that the word brimstone, theon, means “divine fire”. It was “fire from God” and referenced volcanic lava, lightening, geological fires, etc. Each of these give off the smell of burning sulfur, so sulfur was called brimstone. And sulfur was burnt as incense for both spiritual purification and physical healing. And of course, the hot sulfur/brimstone springs were world renown for their healing properties. Healing and Purification.
5th, note that Rev.14.10 says that the lake of fire is in the Presence of the Lamb and the Presence of the Angels. To me the Lamb speaks of the revelation of the Atonement of Christ, and the Angels speaks of the every-day supernatural provision, blessing, and protection of God in our lives.
When I consider these Facts, to me the Lake of Fire and Brimstone speaks of the Purification and Healing that comes through the Revelation of the Atonement of Christ and the supernatural provision, blessing, and protection of God! When one encounters this Revelation (whether in this life or the life to come), it burns the hell (evil) out of him (to put it bluntly) and heals his soul, and one dies to self (second death). This metaphorically speaks of us, of all that is not pure, encountering the fire of God and being purified. And as gold is tormented, tested against the touchstone, we too shall be tormented, test agains the touchstone of Truth, truth about God’s love for us, truth about the righteousness and holiness of God, and truth about our wickedness, twistedness, selfishness, lazyness, lying, cheating, and stealing. This encounter with truth burns the hell out of us!
But of course, traditionalists interpret this passage based on Greek Mythology and pagan beliefs of gods who are capricious and get joy from torturing others who do not line up with what they want. To believe that God would torture anything forever, much less that He would torture His children, those created in His Image, endlessly is to believe a terrible lie about our loving Father. It is some seriously twisted thinking about God and keeps many people from turning to Him in love. It perverts the Good News that God loves us and we are His children, into a threat of endless torture if you don’t line up. It misrepresents our loving Father as an easily offended authoritarian Dictator that promises endless torture for everyone and everything that refuses to bow to his rule. The traditional doctrine of Hell even presents Jesus as a failure who fails to save most of humanity!
Sherman
I’m just going to comment on one of your many errors.
I believe it is clear that Rev 14:10 is describing the events that will happen in the tribulation period and has nothing whatsoever to do with the lake of fire, revelation of the atonement of Christ, supernatural provision, blessing, and protection of God in our lives. How in the world do you come up with all of that from the text? 
Read Isaiah 34 which prophesies about the events that will take place during the tribulation. Isaiah 34:10 is parallel to Rev 14:11.
Sonia, I would like you to answer firedup’s challenge here: Universalists are quick to point out that hell is never mentioned in the Old Testament. However, if Universalism is true, it is also striking that the New Testament, and especially the book of Revelation, does not mention souls repenting and being redeemed from the lake of fire.The mere mention of one person being plucked from their torment, having their name added to the Lamb’s book of life, and entering the city of God would shed so much light on this subject.
FYI, Jason has already admitted that none of this is recorded in the word of God. or did you miss that?
Hey Sherm,
Just wanted to let you know that you cause me to fall in love with the Savior Christ and our Everlasting Father all over again. You make me want to go to the ends of the earth for him.
Love,
Your brother in Christ,
Justin
I’m sorry for Aaron37 rudely hacking your thread, Firedup. We allow him a lot of leeway here, so we share some responsibility in what he does on the board. There are instructions for how to set the system to disregard any posts and emails from any member (including admins and mods like myself, though not in the case of private mails for purposes of keeping one line of communication open with forum management) posted as a thread in several subcategories including here.
Hopefully you’re off reading the prior threads Sonia listed where this topic has been recently discussed (including by me), and drawing your own conclusions about the merits (pro or con) of the material there by various forum contributors (including A37). You’re welcome to comment on any of those threads, or to come back here and pick up the topic if you prefer. It would be more efficient to continue in the context of previous discussions, than to start over again from scratch.
In case you didn’t know, Sonia and I have gone to some lengths to check and confirm that you are most likely NOT a sockpuppet for A37 (though I suppose that’s still technically possible). That thread, where we defend A37 from charges of deception on this point, based on the evidence so far, can be found here.
Firedup
I apologize for this forum not addressing your challenging post and redirecting you to links that do not address your remarks. I guess Jason kinda addressed this most challenging post with admitting Paraphrasing “No where in the bible does it record this” Also, I do apologize if you feel I have hi-jacked this thread as I have been accused of. The amusing part about this is this board thinks we know each other or that I was pretending to be you. Keep on presenting challenging posts that add to the dilema of UR. 
How funny. A few months ago, you had the utmost respect for Tom after he shared his testimony. Now he’s arrogant and rude. Who’s the one who refuses to leave the board after promising multiple times you would do so? Who’s the one who ridicules the universalist position and resorts to name calling? Nobody is buying what you’re selling, BAaron. You’re a fraud who is obsessed w/ disproving universalism and we’re all tired of your nonsense. Just leave, please, so we can come back to the board and not have to sift through all your swill to have a decent conversation.
Aaron37,
If one studies a passage based on it’s actual context then it’s relatively easy to draw FROM the passage it’s meaning. This is called Exegesis, and is more specifically the results of Inductive Bible study. Whereas it seems you take more of an Eisegetical approach to studying scripture where you read INTO the passage what you believe it should say. For example, in the above you appeal to other verses in completely other books written by other people, even written in another language and another culture to prove that what you read INTO Rev.14.10 is correct.
Also, what you bring up about the “tribulation period” is a good example of my 2nd point, that John’s Revelation is interpreted in many different ways by different leaders in the Church. You happen to interpret Revelation from a futuristic view, assuming that it is speaking of end-time events. Many in the church interpret Revelation from a historical point of view, believing it speaks of the rise and fall of nations. Some interpret Revelation from a preterist point of view, believing it speaks of events that lead to the destruction of Jerusalem and the full enaugeration of the Church and God’s Kingdom on earth. And yet others intepret Revelation from a metaphorical view, believing Revelation speaks of the ongoing battle between good and evil in our lives with the ultimate triumph of God! So to take a passage from Revelation and use it to “prove” a specific doctrine is useless, especially a doctrine that is not firmly established elsewhere in scripture.
For example, it’s easy to understand that the Lamb speaks of the Atonement of Christ, the sacrificial death of Jesus because this is firmly established in the Gospels, Acts, and the Letters. Understanding the Presence of the Angels as being the supernatural provision and protection of God is attested to throughout scripture, Old and New Testaments.
I don’t know about you, but it was the Revelation of the Lamb, the Revelation of God’s love for me that is revealed in the sacrifice of Christ that lead me and leads me to increasing faith in God and repentance from sin, doubt, fear, and unbelief. I’ve come to realize, have faith, that salvation is completely by grace and is not due to any good works or even right responses on my part. We are saved simply because Jesus died for us. I was dead in my sins, cut off from God, but He raised me to life through the Revelation of the Lamb and that same Revelation purged me of my sins.
Also, one may ask why I believe my name is written in the Lamb’s book of Life, and my answer is because He died for me. Who did Jesus die for? I believe He died for all of humanity, not just some of humanity like the Calvinist’s do. God truly was in Jesus reconciling all of creation to Himself. Jesus said that if He was crucified, lifted up, He’d draw all humanity to himself.
Aaron37, let me ask you, why do you believe your name is written in the Lamb’s book of Life (assuming of course you do believe that your name is written in there)?
Because I have accepted Jesus Christ from my heart to be my Lord and Savior which transformed me to be “born again” with the life and nature of God in my spirit that qualified me to be a partaker of the inheritance and has delivered me from the power of darkness and translated me into the kingdom of his dear Son, In whom I have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins.
Thanks Justin, that’s encouraging. Love is the most powerful and lasting motivation of all. Love moves us to give our lives in service of others. Love motivates us and empowers us to be kind and gentle. It takes power to be gentle and kind. It takes much more power, knowledge, and wisdom to build than it does to tear down.
Recently I’ve been thinking of why most Christians do not share the Gospel, the Good News of God’s love. And I’ve come to believe that the primary reason Christians do not share the Gospel is because what they believe is not the Gospel, but is a mixture of the Gospel with a lot a lies. The Gospel is that God loves us, God created us in His image, we’ve died spiritually because of sin (Adam’s and ours), but God will (now and later) raise us up to life in Him because of His love for us as revealed in the sacrifice of Christ.
Sadly though, instead of sharing the love of Christ, instead the traditional doctrine teaches that yes God loves you and Jesus died for you but if you do not Believe, Repent, and whatever else your denomination directs, unless you do all these things, even though God loves you He’s going to damn you to Hell if you don’t believe right and do right. Not only that, but God really only saves a few chosen people, everyone else He damns to Hell. Now if you don’t want to go to Hell, then you had better…whatever. No matter how one twists it, this is not “Good News”; it’s “Bad News” - you’re going to spend eternity being tortured if you do not…!
So why do most Christians cringe at sharing the “Gospel”? Because deep down inside the realize it is NOT “Good News” but is “Bad News” for almost everyone they speak with. This is especially highlighted in Cross-Cultural Missions, because one shares the “Good News” with a person who has never heard of Jesus, and in order for them to accept that they might be forgiven and loved by God, they must also accept that all of their loved ones who died not knowing God are now being tortured or will be tortured forever in Hell - Bad News.
So why do most Christians cringe when it comes to sharing the Gospel? Because what they believe is not “Good News” for most people. Because it is not the “Good News of Jesus Christ”!
The traditional doctrine also has a tendency to foster in it’s adherants a sence of pride and self-righteousness. I’m a Christian because “I” love God, because “I” have faith in God, because “I” have chosen to follow Him, because “I”, “I”, “I”.
So your salvation rests in you, in “I”, in you making a right choice, in you “qualifying” for heaven. So your salvation is based in you, not in Christ. It’s no wonder you come across so arrogant, because you believe salvation is based on your goodness, you making the smart choice, you having a right heart and choosing right. For emphasis sake, I enlarged the “I” above just to highlight how much you believing your name is written in the Lamb’s book of life is based on you and what you believe, not on what Jesus did.
I believe that the names that are written in the Lamb’s book of life are those who He died for, those who He has redeemed, those who He purchased with His Blood. And I believe that Jesus died for everyone, for all of humanity, even me! Now this is Good News!
Also notice that Rev.20.15 says “IF anyone’s name is not written…” This does not mean that there are certainly those who are not written in the Lamb’s book of life. In fact, it very well can highlight that all are written in the Lamb’s book of Life, that is, if one is interpreting this passage realizing that the focus of this passage is Jesus conquering all.
Firedup2000 - you don’t seem remotely interested in any of the replies to your question here. Again I extend an invitation to you to tell us all about yourself in the Introductions section.
Yes, Firedup2000, let’s have you tell us a bit about yourself.
Tom