The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Rejected by the orthodox church

Practices Church
#41

That’s being hypocritical because you do the same thing. I know God, I trust God, I know He is good - His essence is pure love. He is love. I am in awe of Him.

At my meanest and most evil, I could not do what you say He does. Yes, a god like that should be feared.

I don’t think you understand His Majesty and His Character as expressed by His Son who said that He would draw ALL men. He will not draw men by fear - every cruel despot in history has tried that method and failed.

So I think He wants us to correctly know HIM through His Word. Very few can do that. FEW. Perhaps the 1% UR’s you mentioned are correct and it’s, you, who are on the broad religious way to nowhere land. You are, after all, amongst the many.

#42

Ran

you said: So I think He wants us to correctly know HIM through His Word. Very few can do that. FEW. Perhaps the 1% UR’s you mentioned are correct and it’s, you, who are on the broad religious way to nowhere land. You are, after all, amongst the many.

Aaron: Funny, that is what the Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormon’s say too. They too, claim to have an inside revelation of God’s love and plan of salvation.

God bless,
Aaron

#43

That is the same thing that you are claiming when you say that the Holy Spirit leads you to have a correct interpretation of the scripture over and above others. It is simple appeal to authority to avoid the tension in the Biblical text. Please don’t substitute the dogmas of your denomination and your interpration of the Bible for the Biblical text itself. Ask yourself if you really want to follow out the logic you are using. Since you believe that as a Christian, your understanding of the Bible has been illuminated by the Holy Spirit to lead you to the “Truth”, then why not just say that others that don’t believe in the exact same micro subcultural sect of Christianity that you believe in have obviously not been Spirit-taught in the same method and thus are going to be burning in the lake of fire, or whatever you think is going to happen to unbelievers. Read through the gospels one more time and tell me how many times the disciplines showed Jesus that they just didn’t really get what he was doing. Are you really so sure that YOU do. Also, stop appealing to this made up number of 1% of Christendom believing in UR. During certain centuries (before “Hell” obtained the massive emphasis it has since the Middle Ages) the statistics could be switched. If you are going to argue that whatever sect within Christianity has the most people followers is the correct one, then you better not only believe in eternal constant torment in Hell, you better also believe in Purgatory and the Imaculate Conception because you are about to cross the Tiber. Oh? Wait? What’s that? The most prominent Roman Catholic Theologian of the century (who most certainly had the ear of Benedict XVI) wrote a book called Dare We Hope “That All Men Be Saved?”, with the answer being, yes we should hope this. Better not go there, Aaron!!! So, stop appealing to your statistics game or your ‘my church is special and has it right and others don’t game’.

#44

Rain

First, I never claimed that the Holy Spirit gives me the correct interpretation above others. I said, If we all were being led by the Spirit there would be no denominations, cults or UR. Obviously, everyone who is claiming to be led by the Spirit, Ain’t.

Second, I don’t put my faith in any denomination, you have me confused with Ran. ( Lutheran this and Lutheran that, etc)

Thirdly, The disciples were spiritually dead and not yet born again to understand fully the teaching and the works of Jesus.That is why he had to teach them in parables until he went to the cross.

Last, but not least, I have never mentioned the church I attend, nor have I implied that we have it right and the other churches do not. Again, I think you got me confused with Ran.

Btw, 1% of Christianity who believe in UR is probably too high. JW’s, Mormon’s and UR’s all claim and shout to have an inside revelation on God’s love and his plan of salvation that the other 99% of the bible believing body of Christ do not have… Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormon’s are false religious cults…hmmmm. Red flag!

God bless,
Aaron

#45

When Christ said that we shall be of one mind - I don’t think He meant on this side of the veil. Despising the rest of His Church for lack of accord is fruitless and destructive.

…And then there are the renegades, churchless and above it all. Destructive little gods.

#46

Ran

Don’t tell that to the New Testament church in the book of Acts. They were in one mind and in unity of the faith. ( Hint, notice there were no Baptists, Lutherans, Catholics, Pentecostals,etc…No denominations, Ran.) The current body of Christ is supposed to be an example of the church in the book of Acts.

God bless,
Aaron

#47

That didn’t last long. The Jerusalem church later had problems and even Peter and Paul went head to head over the ‘gentile question.’ Being of one mind is any church’s goal - so don’t blame them for trying.

What you are pointing to as ideal, was before there was anything written. Are you saying that the Gospels and Epistles mucked things up? If the experience, itself, is so unifying then why don’t the Pentecostals toss the books out and get on with it? (Come to think of it - maybe they have!)

#48

Ran

Sure it did. It lasted for centuries until The emperor Constatine merged Christianity with Rome’s pagan religion. The body of Christ today is supposed to reflect the new testament church in the book Acts…the reason it does not is because of Man made Religion…aka denominations…denomination’s are man’s creation, not God’s. Why do you think we have so many denominations, Ran? Because scripture has been lifted out of context to say what man wants it to say.

Btw, in these last days, God is going to clean up his church. He is going to bring down every ministry that does not preach, teach or demonstrate truth. Apostolic Revival is right around the corner, Ran. Praise God!

God bless,
Aaron

#49

…and for those centuries was, in large part, universalistic. Seems like you’re the one buddied up to Rome around here. Put the fear in people and you can control them…you’re dancing to Rome’s tune, not to the early church.

#50

Ran

Why do I feel like I’m banging my head against the wall when I interact with you? At no point in time did the majority of the body of Christ teach universalism, and those that did obviously were in error…just because you have gregory of nyssa and a few others does not mean the majority of the body of Christ taught universalism.

Btw, I believe Martin Luther was a Catholic monk. Thank God for the Reformation, but I do believe Luther brought over with him some false doctrines he learned from Rome. Just sayin.

God bless,
Aaron

#51

It was quite prevalent and might have been the majority at least with the Greek churches. But hey, you’re a follower of Rome and apparently think they did right by silencing universalism for centuries.

#52

Ran

Blame it on Rome…thats it… we are less than 1% strong because of Rome. I wander if the Mormon’s and Jehovah’s Witnesses blame the lack of their following on Rome, too? or maybe because it is unbiblical?

Btw, I know what you can blame on Rome… the unbiblical sprinkling of babies and telling people they are born again as a result of it…that you can blame on Rome, my friend. Wait a minute, isn’t that what you believe, Ran? Ooops.

God bless,
Aaron

#53

It’s amazing how God uses physical things as a means to spiritual ends. Blood, water, bread, wine, spit, mud. You only see water - we see a sacrament, that is, God at work. Don’t be so quick to judge what you don’t have faith to see.

#54

Ran

you said: It’s amazing how God uses physical things as a means to spiritual ends. Blood, water, bread, wine, spit, mud. You only see water - we see a sacrament, that is, God at work. Don’t be so quick to judge what you don’t have faith to see.

Aaron: What page from the Lutheran denomination handbook did you read that from? I judge by what I see in scripture. Again, where in the word of God does it teach to sprinkle babies with water and the result of that sprinkling they are born again? I see the ordinance of baptism of believers after they confess Jesus as Lord and Savior. I see babies dedicated by prayer and not by sprinkling them with water ( Luke 2:22-24).

God bless,
Aaron

#55

Aaron. The thing is, most historical Christian denominations take their various practices from the Bible. Now, some add quite a bit of tradition (RCC, EOC, etc.), and some don’t do a single thing not if it is not mentioned in the Bible to a degree that might seen excessive (for example, the orthodox Reformed and their refusal to use musical instruments during worship or use anything other than the Psalter for lyrics). They are all trying adhere to what they believe is in there, and they all have plenty of proof texts to back them up. Is it worth the time for everyone to bash each other over the head with their proof texts? No, it really isn’t. If you want to know more about why Lutherans, the church of the patristic fathers, Catholics, Orthodox, Anglicans, Presbyterians, etc. baptize babies and you don’t, then the information is out there. You aren’t convinced if their arguments? Fine. But stop pretending they don’t have them or that they aren’t from the Bible just because you are unwilling to do the research.

I was raised Baptist. Because of this, I too am uncomfortable with the idea of infant baptism. However, I see that the whole issue is just a matter of two sides unable to harmonize the oh so tense Bible. And thus, I don’t really think Jesus would encourage in-fighting over when Baptism should occur. Doesn’t that kind of in-fighting and making Baptism a divisive issue essentially say that you don’t trust Jesus Christ to save anyone unless they happen to decode the scripture right and get sprinkled or submerged at the right time and the right number of dunks and with the right set of names uttered during the process.

#56

Rain

I don’t have a problem with anyone wanting to dedicate their baby by sprinkling them with water, but don’t make doctrine out of it and call them born again as the result of it. I believe we should follow the pattern set in the bible for baby dedication ( Luke 2:22-24) not make up man made denomination doctrine and call it biblical.

Btw, I was just responding to Ran’s accusation that I follow the doctrines of Rome, which is ridiculous, if anyone is following Rome it is his Lutheran belief system. I believe everyone should get baptized after they confess Jesus as Lord and Savior, Jesus commanded it. I believe I have said enough about this unbiblical doctrine.

God bless,
Aaron

#57

Give me one reference to ‘dedicating babies’ in the NT! It’s not in the bible. Period. Whereas…

I can give you multiple references to entire households and families being baptized. That includes babies…unless you want to argue that babies are not part of families now. :mrgreen:

#58

Ran

I have given you Luke 2:22-24 as a reference multiple times. We are to follow the pattern how Jesus was dedicated to the Lord in the temple… dedication by prayer… not baptism. There is no mention of babies being baptized being apart of those families who confessed Jesus as Lord and Savior and afterwards were baptized… Children who could comprehend the gospel and repent, yes, but babies, NO! I don’t have anymore to add to this discussion, Ran, if you want to hold on to your unbiblical, religious denominational belief that is between you and the Lord.

God bless,
Aaron

#59

I know that. But don’t deride the early church for following the example of scripture - they baptized babies and rightfully so. You can’t fight history and you can’t rewrite it.

#60

Ran

I still love ya no matter what unbiblical doctrine you believe…Again, that is between you and the Lord.

God bless,
Aaron