Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Universalism


  • Please log in to reply
31 replies to this topic

#1 celogan

celogan
  • Members
  • 4 posts

Posted 01 January 2003 - 02:05 AM

I only recently became aware in any detail, that these people exist.
The actually claim that Everyone who has ever lived will eventually be saved. That if they are "unsaved" when they die, that after chastizement (not payment) for thier unbelif is completed, then they will confess Jesus As Lord and be saved. I guess this chastisement is like a Big, Bad, Long, Whippin'. Then when Every Tongue Confesses that Jesus is Lord, then ALL will be saved.

I'd like to belive that everyone will be saved, I really do, but the Bible Says,
There Will Be Names Blotted Out of The Lambs Book Of Life.

I don't know how they get around that one.

#2 Anastasis

Anastasis

    Sigma

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,872 posts

Posted 01 January 2003 - 05:16 AM

Hi celogan,

This is certainly outside the Christadelphian realm but from my perspective, the relevant issues to discuss on this subject is whether all will be ultimately saved or that all will be reconciled in the sense of restored to a state where they will be tested. The Bible is very clear, all things will be reconciled (Col. 1:20) and all that ever lived will confess Jesus as Lord (Phil. 2:11). Just as clear it is that the Jews were blinded by God, that they should not believe and be saved (Mark 4:12) and that saints are predestinated to be saved (Eph. 1:4). But of cause in the ressurection, in a reality where God isn't a matter of belief, but something you can see with your eyes through his visible reign, salvation through faith wont cut it, hence the mysterious Rev. 20 passage speaks of judgment of works, while the saints are raised in a previous resurrection.

I am by no means done studying the issues in relation to Rev. 20, but I note that many read such symbolic passage in a very literal way. We should note that life and death in the passage isn't literal but spiritual, that death and hades is thrown into a lake of fire, that dead people are "alive" in that kingdom and therefore I can't understand the resurrection from hades and the sea as literal, but rather spiritual, thus the fact that they spiritually leave hades in passage in verse 13 doesnt say that they physical leave hades there. How could it? It would be gross violence to the symbolism. All in all I object strongly to the general very literal interpretation of this passage.

God Bless and happy new year
The Father is not one Person and the Son another, but ... they are one and the same.... The Spirit which became incarnate in the virgin, is not different from the Father, but one and the same.... That which is seen, which is man [is] the Son; whereas the Spirit, which was contained in the Son [is] the Father.... I will not profess belief in two Gods, Father and Son, but in one . . . for the Father, who subsisted [rested] in the Son Himself, after He had taken unto Himself our flesh, raised it to the nature of Deity, by bringing it into union with Himself, and made it one; so the Father and the Son must be styled one God, and that this person being one, cannot be two. (Callistus' statement of faith)

#3 Marv

Marv

    Beta

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 25 posts

Posted 01 January 2003 - 05:49 AM

Celagon:
"Names in the book of Life" is relationship with God. He was going to erase the Israelis outof the "book of life" ... but said nothing of killing them and "sending them to hellfire".

In Acts 24:15, Paul teaches the resurrection of the just and the unjust, as does Jesus in John 5, and Daniel in Dan 12:1-2. None of these men prophecy eternal burning in "hellfire brimstone". That's a doctrine taken from a literal interpretaton of verses in the gospels, and Rev 20-22 (which is highly figurative language). However.... none of the apostles preached it. And none would say that our "fiery trials' are literal fire....nor that our "faith tried by fire" is literal, nor that our "works tried by fire" is literal...nor "he shall be saved yet as by fire" is literal, nor "baptised in fire" is literal...
But they are so willing to believe in a literal fire after-life for the "wicked".

I'm not a Christadelphian, so I can't speak for them. But as I've studied this, I'm becoming more sure that God's anger is "but for a moment, and his lovingkindness endures forever".

Jesus came to save us out of death, which he did when he rose from the dead. Paul said had Christ NOT been raised, we would yet be in our sin, we would yet be "perished".

True discipes of Christ will rule and reign with him in the kingdom, and unbelievers (as well as hypocrites) will be "left out of the city" .... they will be subjects and servants...not kings and priests. Their "eternal punishment"... among other things for their deeds will be sacrficing their inheritance to reign as sons of God.... and they will find no repentance of God ( like esau, Heb 12, had sacrificed his brithright to be family ruler) .... their state will be locked.
Consider our system of "justice". Do we send someone to life imprisonment for speeding? Do we send murderers to do "community service" for a week? God will judge every man according to his works...and his walk with Christ. Jesus said "some will be beaten with few stripes, some with more stripes"...... but said nothing about "eternal beating".

We aren't talking about "purgatory". We are talking due justice. One of our heritage as believers is "therre is no condemnation for those who walk after the spirit, and not after the flesh".
Those who overcome will reign with Christ in a realm of glory and honor. Otherrs will rise, like daniel said "to contempt and shame".

Marv

#4 Anastasis

Anastasis

    Sigma

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,872 posts

Posted 02 January 2003 - 11:31 AM

Hi Marv,

I agree with your thoughts.

God Bless
The Father is not one Person and the Son another, but ... they are one and the same.... The Spirit which became incarnate in the virgin, is not different from the Father, but one and the same.... That which is seen, which is man [is] the Son; whereas the Spirit, which was contained in the Son [is] the Father.... I will not profess belief in two Gods, Father and Son, but in one . . . for the Father, who subsisted [rested] in the Son Himself, after He had taken unto Himself our flesh, raised it to the nature of Deity, by bringing it into union with Himself, and made it one; so the Father and the Son must be styled one God, and that this person being one, cannot be two. (Callistus' statement of faith)

#5 Marv

Marv

    Beta

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 25 posts

Posted 03 January 2003 - 02:47 AM

Thanks, Anastasis;
That's just a small nut-shell version, as you probably realize.

As far as I recall... I believe the Christadelphians believe that all "unbelievers" will be resurrected, then "roasted for wickedness and works"... then finally annaialated, extinquished, .... am I correct?

That is preferable to "burning in hellfire" forever and ever... but not consistent with dan 12:2; Acts 24:15, John 5:26-29... I don't think.

Another passage used for "eternal roasting" is Mat 25:41-16. However, I believe that is parabolic of the nation of Israel contemporary in apostolic days... and the fire of judgement they were cast into was the loss of their temple, levitical services, their nation, their identity, and mostly their covenant position with God outside of Christ.
The "hunger, thirst, and prison" in that passage speaks of the Pharisees and levites depriving the nation of spiritual food, spiritual water, and release from spiritual prison. They were cast out of the kingdom of God and of the covenant relation... and a spiritual nation "entered in" (peter 2:5-9).

Gates of Jerusalem were said to be "on fire forever" in the OT....yet they did not at all burn "forever". S&G were said to burn forever, and they did not.
If one should dispute that.... I'd remind them that the levitical preisthood was to "abide forever", as was the OT covenant. Yet it's clear they are done away with (Heb 8:13)
The words "forever" and "eternal", etc... must be taken in context, understood hebraistically, idiomatically.

Jesus uses the words "eternal life". Ever hear the phrase "eternal death"?
Why not? because he comes again to put death (his LAST enemy)....UNDER his feet, not to contribute more to it, but to defeat it.

Therefore eternal "LIFE" is not talking specifically of "immortality", but of the quality of life. We are not yet immortal (1Cor 15:22-51).... but those who believe have been given "life"... life more abundant, Joy unspeakable and full of glory, peace that passes understanding (for those who abide in his "rest")...

Will all men be restored to "equal status"? NO... for as certain crimimals loose certain citizenship rights... those outside of christ forfeit their inheritance to be of the "church of the firstborn"...who rule in Christ's kingdom. How can you have a kingdom without subjects... and if all are "equal kings"?

And how just would God be to judge hitler for his autrocities, if God himself puts his own creation in a fiery furnace forever and ever in torment without end??????

When will Christians learn the heart of God... and "figures of speech", and symbolisms??

Glad you are tracking with me, Anatasis.... at least in my previous post :ph34r:



{I'm explaining this now because I'm relatively sure it will come up in future refutations by the orthodoxy :)

#6 DonalGraeme

DonalGraeme

    Pi

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPip
  • 702 posts

Posted 03 January 2003 - 03:10 PM

Marv

Just one correction ...

As far as I recall... I believe the Christadelphians believe that all "unbelievers" will be resurrected, then "roasted for wickedness and works"... then finally annaialated, extinquished, .... am I correct?


Christadelphians don't believe that all unbelievers will be resurrected. We believe that there will be some resurrected who have known the message of the gospel, and chosen to reject it. However, those who have never heard the message of the gospel will not be raised.

As you mentioned - Dan 12:2 is a very good verse which indicates that not all will be resurrected.

"many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt." (Dan 12:2, KJV)

Many does not mean all :ph34r:

Quotes such as Rom 2:12; 5:13; Psa 49:20; Jn 6:44-45 and Isa 43:17 are also important as they indicate that there are those either who will not be judged, or not raised (I picked a selected to illustrate both points).

Regards

DG
I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.

Prov 18:13 - "He who answers before listening - that is his folly and shame."
Jas 1:19-20 - "My dear brothers, take note of this: Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry, for man’s anger does not bring about the righteous life that God desires."

#7 Anastasis

Anastasis

    Sigma

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,872 posts

Posted 03 January 2003 - 04:20 PM

Donalgraeme,


The Bible is clear. Resurrection is universel. It's tempting to let Jesus comment your interpretation of Dan. 12:2;

Mark 5:39 And when he was come in, he saith unto them, Why make ye this ado, and weep? the damsel is not dead, but sleepeth.

Sleep indicates that the one who is dead will rise. Rev. 20 is not to go wrong of on this, Hades gave up the dead in it. Acts 24:15 is likewise not to go wrong of and of cause Phil 2:10 that plainly says that all in the universe will confess Jesus as Lord at some point, which is not the same as saying that they are saved by that.

Sure it's tricky that Dan. 12:2 says "many". On other hand we have no indication of exactly when and how people will be raised physical, apart from it being after Christ's return. We know, that is a limited number of people face it, but it's clear that unsaved Jews will be raised during the Millenium (Ezk. 37:12-13, 38:8-10, Rom. 11:25-28, Rev. 20:8). On the more personal level, I find the idea that all people will be raised within a couple of days or months quit irrationel.


God Bless
The Father is not one Person and the Son another, but ... they are one and the same.... The Spirit which became incarnate in the virgin, is not different from the Father, but one and the same.... That which is seen, which is man [is] the Son; whereas the Spirit, which was contained in the Son [is] the Father.... I will not profess belief in two Gods, Father and Son, but in one . . . for the Father, who subsisted [rested] in the Son Himself, after He had taken unto Himself our flesh, raised it to the nature of Deity, by bringing it into union with Himself, and made it one; so the Father and the Son must be styled one God, and that this person being one, cannot be two. (Callistus' statement of faith)

#8 Anastasis

Anastasis

    Sigma

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,872 posts

Posted 03 January 2003 - 04:34 PM

Hi Marv,

Other good points you got there. This is what Christadelphians believe:

Unamended Christadelphians:

1. That only the accountable will be raised. Some to immortality after jugment, some to 2nd death.

2. They read Rev. 20 in the way that they believe it to talk of two literal resurrections. The information that Hades is emptied is then explained by the fact that knowledge will be universal in the Kingdom and then all who lived in that Kingdom will raised. However, the ignorant humanity dying before the kingdom stays eternally sleeping.




My comments:

1. It's enigmatic what it takes to be raised if you are not an OT Jew, a 1st century Christian according to CD understanding or a CD, given the darkness people have been exposed to. Surely it's not "many of those that sleeps" then.

2. The record is silent of unsaved participating in 1st resurrection. The Bible also points to the fact that the Messianic Kingdom is the day of judgment and that these new heavens and earth Christians look forward to are first finished after the 1.000 years (Rev. 21:1, Isa. 65:17). Thus the Kingdom I believe, is the burning process of 2 Peter 3:10. I also object to the idea that there will only be immortals after the 1.000 years. Note Isa. 65:17-20 and Rev. 21:26-27. However, Adamic death and its "container", Hades will be gone Rev. 20:14.


God Bless
The Father is not one Person and the Son another, but ... they are one and the same.... The Spirit which became incarnate in the virgin, is not different from the Father, but one and the same.... That which is seen, which is man [is] the Son; whereas the Spirit, which was contained in the Son [is] the Father.... I will not profess belief in two Gods, Father and Son, but in one . . . for the Father, who subsisted [rested] in the Son Himself, after He had taken unto Himself our flesh, raised it to the nature of Deity, by bringing it into union with Himself, and made it one; so the Father and the Son must be styled one God, and that this person being one, cannot be two. (Callistus' statement of faith)

#9 Marv

Marv

    Beta

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 25 posts

Posted 03 January 2003 - 11:25 PM

Marv
Many does not mean all :ph34r:

Quotes such as Rom 2:12; 5:13; Psa 49:20; Jn 6:44-45 and Isa 43:17 are also important as they indicate that there are those either who will not be judged, or not raised (I picked a selected to illustrate both points).

Regards

DG

Thanks, DG, for notable scripture and reply. Also, I apologize for sounding "cynical" regarding the "roasting". I din't mean to be disrespectful, ... just "colorful" in my description".

Will do a more thorough wordstudy on "many" in Dan 12. What I found so far is that it does not necessarily mean the exclusion of some, but points to "masses"... hence the translation "many". They are rather colorful in their choice of words back then :)

Acts 24:15...Paul doesn't seem to make a distintion between "some" or "all".
He just says there will be a resurrection of both the righteous and the dead.
I think the same applies to John 5:26-29.... not positive, however.

Regards,
' marv :ph34r:

#10 Marv

Marv

    Beta

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 25 posts

Posted 03 January 2003 - 11:29 PM

Anastasia; Thank you for the additional impute. It helps a lot.

Concerning exchatology... there are a number of divergent views. I think only one can be right ( and that's mine, of course :ph34r: :ph34r: } .... but time will tell (if God doesn't tell first }.

To give you a clue what I mean... I don't believe in a literal millinium (1,000 years) any more than I believe Christ to be a literal lamb with 7 literal horns, and 7 literal eyes.

And I believe the 1rst res of Rev 20 is synomous to Ep 2:1-6, Ro 6, Co 3.

Well, I'm out of time... must fly :)

#11 Marv

Marv

    Beta

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 25 posts

Posted 03 January 2003 - 11:54 PM

Well, I couldn't find the "edit" button, so had to start a new post. Now, where was I? something about literal interpretation of the Millinium and of the resurrection.
Oh, yes.... Revelation... I don't take any of Revelation as "literal"... because it is a vision that points to reality... does not show or display reality of the future. It does show spiritual warfare...overcoming or being defeated, it reveals reward and consequences ( not literal, but figurative in the vision).

It, in my understanding, doesn't teach "eternal hellfire/torment" as orthodoxy (so called) thinks...because they take it literally.

Getting back to the main topic of this post... I am proned to believe that all men will be resurrected -- It is because of Christ's resurrection that sin and death will ultimately be totally defeated. Paul said if Christ had not been raised, we'd all yet be in our sins... we'd alll yet be perished.

Those who walk in spirit (ie, the new creation in Christ) will see no condemnation (tho everyone's work shall be tried by fire...figurative, no doubt). And it's appointed once to man to die ( not twice, literally)... then the judgement. You can't have judegment following death, if death is the judgement... I believe. It' would have been grammatically clumsy to say "once to die THEN the judgement"... if death was the judgement.

I do concede the possibility that some were so wicked that they may indeed NOT be resurrected... but then how could Jesus be the savour of ALL mankind????

It is clear that the judgement for some will be something they will wish they didn't have to face. But to see a group of people clothed in splendor, given authority, honor, high positions, seated with Christ.... and your self being thrust out side that city, spiritually impoverished, and at the "bottom of the rung", so to speak.... would be devestating, I would think.

Furthermore, what punishement/judgement would the wicked endurre if they were "dead, lifeless". There would be NO sense of judgement...for there would be no existence to there soul. And judegement is to bring remorse, repentance, corrrection. Dead men feel no remorse, no sense of loss for their wickedness, no repentance, no punishment, no "just retribution" for tribulation on God's people (which he promised in Thesalonians).

Nor would God be just in burning / tormenting people forever in a lake of fire endlessly...for that would be worse than Hitler and nebbykudnezzar combined.

So, I vote "no" against anailation, and "no" against eternal torment ... and "Yes" to Jesus for restoring life and immortality at the resurrection to mankind... and for reconciling us to God, creating us a new creature in spirit, ie, incorrutption, immortality.

Clarification: I do believe those who are dead in Christ are indeed dead until the resurrection...not sitting bodiless in heaven with Christ, who rose physically. We are to be clothed with a body... not "naked"(bodiless), as gnostics and dualists teach :ph34r:

#12 Evangelion

Evangelion

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,351 posts

Posted 04 January 2003 - 08:00 AM

Marv - you'll find the "edit" button right next to the "quote" button.

It's on the top right hand corner of your post. :ph34r:
In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas
Imago
Credo

#13 Marv

Marv

    Beta

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 25 posts

Posted 05 January 2003 - 05:38 AM

Marv - you'll find the "edit" button right next to the "quote" button.

It's on the top right hand corner of your post. :ph34r:

Mine must have gotten "raptured", Ev :)

#14 Evangelion

Evangelion

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,351 posts

Posted 05 January 2003 - 11:59 AM

Have you found it now, Marv? :ph34r:
In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas
Imago
Credo

#15 Marv

Marv

    Beta

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 25 posts

Posted 06 January 2003 - 08:20 PM

Yep... it came back :ph34r:

#16 Marv

Marv

    Beta

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 25 posts

Posted 06 January 2003 - 08:26 PM

Marv
Many does not mean all :ph34r:

Regards

DG

DG: by the way... Maybe "many" doesn't mean "all".... but what do you do with this one:

JOhn 5:28
Do not be amazed at this, because a time is coming when ....ALL....who are in the graves will hear His voice
5:29
and come out--those who have done good things, to the resurrection of life, but those who have done wicked things, to the resurrection of judgment.

{just in case you didn't agree with my plausible answer to "many" :) }

#17 Grace

Grace

    Sigma

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,505 posts

Posted 06 January 2003 - 08:59 PM

And how about the promises to Abraham, that in him 'ALL families of the earth would be blessed'.

And how about "For as in Adam ALL die, even so in Christ shall ALL be made alive". I Cor 15:22

And how about Phil 2:10-11 - "So that at the name of Jesus EVERY KNEE WILL BOW, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth,and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."

I've been looking at the whole judgement thing, and who will be raised, and frankly I'm pretty confused - there seems to be statements that flatly contradict each other, which obviously they don't, but I do think there is a bigger picture than what CD's think.
"Common sense and a sense of humor are the same thing, moving at different speeds. A sense of humor is just common sense, dancing."

William James

#18 DonalGraeme

DonalGraeme

    Pi

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPip
  • 702 posts

Posted 07 January 2003 - 06:01 AM

Hi everyone!

Well, there's been lots of responses here, and that's great. I'm here to answer some of them, and not some that I want more time on. I also want to reiterate some quotes which I think have been lost in the mix.

First, the answers :ph34r: (Incidently, apologies for not specifying who I'm responding to here ... let's just say it's to everyone who's posted since my last post, that includes Anastasis, Marv and Grace).

1. Acts 24:15 was raised. Let's quote it:-

Acts 24:15 (NIV)
and I have the same hope in God as these men, that there will be a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked.

I agree with this quote - I believe that both the righteous and the wicked will be raised. While I do think that all the righteous will be raised, I do not think ALL the wicked will be, based on quotes I'll list at the end of this. Note also that Paul is not saying here that ALL will be raised ... just that both the righteous and wicked would be raised. It was important for him to state this, because while he lived there were some Jews who believed that only the righteous would be raised. For him to state that the righteous AND the wicked would be raised was to make a theologically significant statement in his time.

2. Phil 2:10 was mentioned. I have some answers, and a clarifying question.

i) Grace - are you parsing verses 10 and 11 as follows? "Every knee will bow to Jesus ... every knee in heaven, every knee on earth, and every knee under the earth", and then equating all those under the earth with all those ever buried? If so, I think you're going to run into some problems, because NOT every knee in heaven will be bowing to Jesus. Consider 1 Cor 15:27-28 which says that at the culmination of the kingdom everything will be under his feet EXCEPT for "God himself", and that "the Son himself will be subject to Him". So I think there's exceptions meant to be read into these verses, based on the rest of scripture.

ii) So, what do I think these verses are saying? I believe these verses refer to the time when the Glory of the Lord will fill the whole earth, and all living will be immortal, death having been swallowed up in victory. Truly at that time the knees of all that exist will bow to him (barring God - see above), but for the others who have been rejected, "even the memory of them is forgotten" (Eccl 9:5).

3. John 5:28-29 was mentioned. I'd like to spend more time on this and get back to you if I could, thanks.

I'd like to end with some quotes which I think supports the fact that there are those who have died who will never be raised. I'm going to quote them this time, rather than just list the references. We need to take these into consideration as well, and I'd like some answers on these from those of you who lean to a universal resurrection.

Isaiah 26:13-14 (NKJV)
O Lord our God, masters besides You Have had dominion over us; But by You only we make mention of Your name.
They are dead, they will not live; They are deceased, they will not rise. Therefore You have punished and destroyed them, And made all their memory to perish.

Jeremiah 51:57 (NIV)
I will make her officials and wise men drunk, her governors, officers and warriors as well; they will sleep forever and not awake,” declares the King, whose name is the Lord Almighty.

Psalm 49:19-20 (NIV)
he will join the generation of his fathers, who will never see the light of life.
A man who has riches without understanding is like the beasts that perish.

Psalm 88:5 (NIV)
I am set apart with the dead, like the slain who lie in the grave, whom you remember no more, who are cut off from your care.

Isaiah 43:17 (NIV)
who drew out the chariots and horses, the army and reinforcements together, and they lay there, never to rise again, extinguished, snuffed out like a wick:

God bless

Mike
I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.

Prov 18:13 - "He who answers before listening - that is his folly and shame."
Jas 1:19-20 - "My dear brothers, take note of this: Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry, for man’s anger does not bring about the righteous life that God desires."

#19 DonalGraeme

DonalGraeme

    Pi

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPip
  • 702 posts

Posted 07 January 2003 - 03:25 PM

Hi

Me again

I just wanted to expand some of those last quotes to add more of the context.

First was Isa 26:13-14. Let's add verse 19 to the mix to clarify we're really talking of resurrection here.

Isaiah 26:13-14,19 (NKJV)
O Lord our God, masters besides You Have had dominion over us; But by You only we make mention of Your name.
They are dead, they will not live; They are deceased, they will not rise. Therefore You have punished and destroyed them, And made all their memory to perish.
(19) Your dead shall live; Together with my dead body they shall arise. Awake and sing, you who dwell in dust; For your dew is like the dew of herbs, And the earth shall cast out the dead.

Second was Jeremiah 51:57. You may want to note that the same point is made in verse 39 of the same chapter.

Incidently, I have a question. Do those of you who believe in a universal ressurection believe in universal salvation as well?

God bless

Mike
I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.

Prov 18:13 - "He who answers before listening - that is his folly and shame."
Jas 1:19-20 - "My dear brothers, take note of this: Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry, for man’s anger does not bring about the righteous life that God desires."

#20 Marv

Marv

    Beta

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 25 posts

Posted 07 January 2003 - 07:21 PM

Incidently, I have a question. Do those of you who believe in a universal ressurection believe in universal salvation as well?

God bless

Mike

Hi, MIke... You've raised some incredible issues here, and some remarkable scriptures.

Let me say first that in answer to your last question, I at this time do not see a "general salvation" in the sense that most universlists see it. I see the saints who suffer with Christ will be glorified with him. Others who "squeak in the gate", will be subjects/servants/slaves of the kingdom...or certainly not intimate friends with the king of Kings, Jesus and our father YHWH. Still others may undoudtedly live "in disgrace and shame" (Da 12:2)... for the enormity of their wickedness, etc. As I tried to explain earlier, I see our judicial system theoritically made like unto God's ... in that as we don't give the same sentence to a misdameanor crime as we do to mass murderers, or to war crimes. Some crimes warrant a week in jail, some warrant life time imprisonment.

So... I don't see "equal status" in the resurrection. Nor do I see "equal punishment".

I wish I had time to elaborate on your scriptures. I've studied the first two out so far... and see a fallacy in your string of logic. I think you may be taking the words too literally. After examining the definitions, and the "spirit of the word of God"... ( ie, looking into his heart), I think he is NOT saying they won't be resurrected, but they will stay "dead in their sins".... {see eph 2:1-6.... we WERE dead in our trespasses, but made alive in Christ Jesus}

One of the letters to thesslonians, Paul says that God gives "them over to a spirit of deciet that they may believe a lie". That means, among other things... that they remain in darkness (sleep) until they die...without coming to the knowlege of the truth, without being "made alive in Christ".
Romans 6 deals with the same thing... being dead IN sin verses being dead TO sin.

In corinth, Paul says we are to "spiritaully dicern" the word of God. That, of course, doesn't give license to fabricate anything we want...but it does say that God doesn't always talk at "face value". Consder Jesus and his parables... and who he chose to explain them to.

Paul also said in thessolonians that we should not be as those who "sleep", but sober, vigilant...ie "awake".

Back to acts... maybe I missed something in your explanation... but which of the wicked ARE resurrected, if not "all"???

I'll try to get back asap with more conclusive arguements. One thing I appreciate is your spirit of meekness. It sets a good tenor for these discussions.


Not all versions interpret Isaiah 26:19 the same:
Darby: Thy dead shall live, my dead bodies shall arise. Awake and sing in triumph, ye that dwell in dust; for thy dew is the dew of the morning, and the earth shall cast forth the dead.

ASV Thy dead shall live; my dead bodies shall arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in the dust; for thy dew is [as] the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast forth the dead.

HNV (hebrew Name version) Your dead shall live; my dead bodies shall arise. Awake and sing, you who dwell in the dust; for your dew is [as] the dew of herbs, and the eretz shall cast forth the dead.

YLT (Young's literal): `Thy dead live -- My dead body they rise. Awake and sing, ye dwellers in the dust, For the dew of herbs [is] thy dew, And the land of Rephaim thou causest to fall.

Similar to Ez 37... these passages may point to the "spiritual resurrection"... ie, the new creation in Christ ( 2cor 5:16-17, eph 2:1-6)

There's much more... I'm on metered time, however... and it's "gone for now"...

God bless,
marv

#21 Anastasis

Anastasis

    Sigma

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,872 posts

Posted 07 January 2003 - 11:23 PM

Mark,

Ezk. 37:12-13 will not be explained away by the new creation in Christ. This refers to the ingathering of Israel and features ignorant people coming out of their graves to restoration. First the full number of the gentiles must be gathered to glory (Rom. 11:25-26). When almost all scholars and commentaries will tell you that this is non-literal, this is simply because this does not fit their theology. The same is a fact concerning Ezk. 16, the restoration of Sodom. Yet the Bible does promise a restoration of all things (Acts 3:21), a resurrection of all and a time where rejectors with knowledge will have a harder time than the ignorant (Matt. 11:21). Surely there is purpose behind the intermediate state, the Millenium, the real "purgatory".


Donalgraeme,

I think concerning Phil. 2:10 that you still face the problem in regards to your interpretation that it speaks of the dead bowing. They are not gone. I consider this to be a prooftext of my belief; universal restoration not salvation as God always require obedience. Just like Rev. 20 calls non saints dead, I think the proof here is that these people are still dead in the sense that they are still under Adamic curse, yet they will as of nature quit naturally bow to Jesus when they face Jesus or rather his saints. Only those restored to Adamic condition (Isa. 65:20) or of cause those who have sainthood can be said to be alive.

Consider the remarkable statement that Hades gives up its dead (Rev. 20:13). I also think that we must consider the Hebrew use of olam which sometimes means everlasting, sometims a long time. God remembers Sodomites no more, but Jesus became Lord over them by his death (Rom. 14:9) and therefore he will raise them. He tasted death for every man.. (1 Tim. 2:5).


God Bless
The Father is not one Person and the Son another, but ... they are one and the same.... The Spirit which became incarnate in the virgin, is not different from the Father, but one and the same.... That which is seen, which is man [is] the Son; whereas the Spirit, which was contained in the Son [is] the Father.... I will not profess belief in two Gods, Father and Son, but in one . . . for the Father, who subsisted [rested] in the Son Himself, after He had taken unto Himself our flesh, raised it to the nature of Deity, by bringing it into union with Himself, and made it one; so the Father and the Son must be styled one God, and that this person being one, cannot be two. (Callistus' statement of faith)

#22 Marv

Marv

    Beta

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 25 posts

Posted 08 January 2003 - 12:36 AM

Mark,

Ezk. 37:12-13 will not be explained away by the new creation in Christ. This refers to the ingathering of Israel and features ignorant people coming out of their graves to restoration. First the full number of the gentiles must be gathered to glory (Rom. 11:25-26). When almost all scholars and commentaries will tell you that this is non-literal, this is simply because this does not fit their theology.

Thanks, Anatasia... I'll take that under consideration. I was writing a hundred miles an hour, didn't take time to think it thru thoroughly :ph34r:

MarV

#23 DonalGraeme

DonalGraeme

    Pi

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPip
  • 702 posts

Posted 09 January 2003 - 11:33 PM

Marv, Anastasis

Just wanted you to know I'm not ignoring you. Things are just a little busy right now. I should be able to get back to you properly by this weekend. Sound good?

Incidently, how do the two of you deal with those verses I put forward that quite clearly state that there are some that shall not rise. If I remember correctly, they were from Isaiah and Jeremiah.

God bless

Mike
I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.

Prov 18:13 - "He who answers before listening - that is his folly and shame."
Jas 1:19-20 - "My dear brothers, take note of this: Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry, for man’s anger does not bring about the righteous life that God desires."

#24 Anastasis

Anastasis

    Sigma

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,872 posts

Posted 10 January 2003 - 11:46 AM

Hi Donalgraem,


You just take your time, I think we all know how it is to have a busy schedule.


You quoted;

Isaiah 26:13-14
Jeremiah 51:57
Psalm 49:19-20
Psalm 88:5
Isaiah 43:17


Surely you raise a valid point as these verses say that some will never rise.
But the point is that it speaks of unjust, enemies of God. The NT reveals that the Sodomites will be raised eventhough God passed his sentence over them. Why?


The Bible consistenly speaks of two forms of resurrection;

1) Philippians 3:11 If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.

2) Acts 24:15 And have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust.


The Bible is written to believers. Its their hope to be raised to life. Thus this is the resurrection in the context of example 1. It's not the hope of the unjustified, they have no hope of being raised to life. They are, just like the saints were before they became saints, dead in their sins. However new things came with Christ, he tasted death for all men and became their Lord through that (Rom. 14:9, 1 Tim. 2:5). Let us remember the great point that it's due to Jesus' sacrifice that anyone are raised at all.

The OT hardly mentions the resurrection of the unjust but the NT does. I think we must understand these passages you quote in that light. There is nothing special about the people spoken of those verses, they are either wilfull enemies of God's people or ignorant, they are simply unjustified. The statement of Rev. 20:13 is really not to go wrong of as I see it; "Hades gave back its dead".

I must also say that I have to believe that the Bible is very much an on going revelation, while the Christadelphian understanding as I see it often says that the OT has given us the basics, now the NT must fit that.


God Bless
The Father is not one Person and the Son another, but ... they are one and the same.... The Spirit which became incarnate in the virgin, is not different from the Father, but one and the same.... That which is seen, which is man [is] the Son; whereas the Spirit, which was contained in the Son [is] the Father.... I will not profess belief in two Gods, Father and Son, but in one . . . for the Father, who subsisted [rested] in the Son Himself, after He had taken unto Himself our flesh, raised it to the nature of Deity, by bringing it into union with Himself, and made it one; so the Father and the Son must be styled one God, and that this person being one, cannot be two. (Callistus' statement of faith)

#25 Marv

Marv

    Beta

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 25 posts

Posted 10 January 2003 - 08:02 PM

Marv, Anastasis

Just wanted you to know I'm not ignoring you. Things are just a little busy right now. I should be able to get back to you properly by this weekend. Sound good?

Incidently, how do the two of you deal with those verses I put forward that quite clearly state that there are some that shall not rise. If I remember correctly, they were from Isaiah and Jeremiah.

God bless

Mike

Hi, Mike;
I understand the time factor. I'm limited to use on library computer, which is metered when I'm here.

I did respond to Isa and Jer passages a few posts previously...haven't had time myself to elaborate...nor to look further into the other ones. So...take your time to reply to what has been written, and maybe we can move on to the other verses...tho I suspect the same principle will apply.

Marv

#26 DonalGraeme

DonalGraeme

    Pi

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPip
  • 702 posts

Posted 16 January 2003 - 11:30 PM

Marv, Anastasis

I'm still here, just no free time to post right now. Will check back when I get a moment to think :unsure:

DG
I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.

Prov 18:13 - "He who answers before listening - that is his folly and shame."
Jas 1:19-20 - "My dear brothers, take note of this: Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry, for man’s anger does not bring about the righteous life that God desires."

#27 Anastasis

Anastasis

    Sigma

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,872 posts

Posted 17 January 2003 - 01:04 PM

Splitpea,


Some Christadelphians do believe that Hitler will be raised for punishment. I have had good conversations with a respected CD who has been CD almost since Hitler’s finale days and he believes so from the stand that Hitler was a great enemy of Israel. One problem is how you understand the statement that God “knows how to preserve the unjust to the punishment in the day of judgment, but chiefly those..... (really bad ones)” (2 Pet. 2v9-10). From that view Hitler is sleeping awaiting his punishment.

I understand the problems you are having with the 24th clausul. Why are the Sodomites raised? They have been punished. The argument in 2 Peter 2 is that the wicked are punished. As it happened to Sodom it will happen to those bad ones God doesn’t get in this life. That is why the JWs and some Christadelphians say it’s a figurative comparison we have in Matt. 11v21, not to be understood literally. Other Christadelphians say that there were believers among the Sodomites and they are ones Jesus talk of.

However, the message is really not to go wrong of. It says that it will be better for the ignorant Sodomites than for the knowledgable people of Chorazin in the judgment. I once attempted to find some sort of accountability in CD sense among the Sodomites, but none is revealed. They were simply repulsing in their sinful acts and the hammer came down. They were accountable to God as all is pr. nature hence Romans 1, yet they were ignorant of God's ways. This is also why God in his message about the future restoration of Sodom says that the Jews are way more sinful than them (Ezk. 16v48 and about). Understand that they are all the property of Jesus now (Rom. 14:9) and that this was not revealed in the OT. He bought them from that Lord Never-Rise.

This is in fact a really difficult issue and over simplified solutions will seem to be in harmony with some statements and in contrast to others.


God Bless
The Father is not one Person and the Son another, but ... they are one and the same.... The Spirit which became incarnate in the virgin, is not different from the Father, but one and the same.... That which is seen, which is man [is] the Son; whereas the Spirit, which was contained in the Son [is] the Father.... I will not profess belief in two Gods, Father and Son, but in one . . . for the Father, who subsisted [rested] in the Son Himself, after He had taken unto Himself our flesh, raised it to the nature of Deity, by bringing it into union with Himself, and made it one; so the Father and the Son must be styled one God, and that this person being one, cannot be two. (Callistus' statement of faith)

#28 splitpea

splitpea

    Iota

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 113 posts

Posted 21 January 2003 - 08:55 AM

Anastasis, thanks for your reply. :ph34r: It cleared things up a bit.

This is in fact a really difficult issue and over simplified solutions will seem to be in harmony with some statements and in contrast to others.


That sure seems to be the case! I had no clue I was stepping into such a complicated topic. It seemed clear by a few passages mentioned that some won't be raised, and by another in Ps. 49 that lack of understanding was the basis of that. Do you know of any other Scriptural reasons why one wouldn't be raised?

2 Pet. 2:9,10 is confusing, especially in figuring who the 'unjust' are. No one is righteous without faith, so that encompasses the nasty people without any knowledge, including the likes of Hitler. On the other hand, in the context, the godly who were being troubled were people who weren't quiet about speaking the gospel. So then basing the resurrection on knowledge might work here too.

It says that it will be better for the ignorant Sodomites than for the knowledgable people of Chorazin in the judgment. I once attempted to find some sort of accountability in CD sense among the Sodomites, but none is revealed. They were simply repulsing in their sinful acts and the hammer came down. They were accountable to God as all is pr. nature hence Romans 1, yet they were ignorant of God's ways.


I don't know if we can really say that the Sodomites were ignorant. Because when Lot and Abram split up, it's because they were a big group. Likewise, when Abram was bargining to save Sodom, he started out high, perhaps figuring that there were a bunch of righteous people there, then being not so sure as he went down from there. I have no idea how big Sodom was, but I'd think that a group of that size would make an influence initially in telling people about their God. What gets to me though, is that I don't think that a group with the qualities they had would listen, so while they had opportunity to understand, they may not have talking Lot and his gang up on the offer to explain. So while they had some avenue to learn of God's ways, this is nothing compared to what the Jews had re. Ez. 16:48. Is this what the Christadelphian understanding doesn't account for? That people will be punished in different measures? I know they don't believe in the torturous hell, but what the deal with punishment?

Understand that they are all the property of Jesus now (Rom. 14:9) and that this was not revealed in the OT. He bought them from that Lord Never-Rise.


I'm sorry, I dont' understand what you're saying here. :unsure: Could you please clarify?

#29 Anastasis

Anastasis

    Sigma

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,872 posts

Posted 08 February 2003 - 05:11 PM

Hi Splipea,

Sorry, I didnt notice your post before now.


That sure seems to be the case!  I had no clue I was stepping into such a complicated topic.  It seemed clear by a few passages mentioned that some won't be raised, and by another in Ps. 49 that lack of understanding was the basis of that.  Do you know of any other Scriptural reasons why one wouldn't be raised?


I know of none. If lack of knowledge was a reason not to be raised, then consider;

Matthew 11:21 Woe unto thee, Chorazin! woe unto thee, Bethsaida! for if the mighty works, which were done in you, had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. 22 But I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the day of judgment, than for you.


Now what kind of knowledge did they have in Tyre or Sidon. I think Ps. 49 should really be read in OT context. Tell where do you read that Christ tasted death for all men (1 Tim. 2:5) in the OT? Didn't Ps. 49v15 tell us that the ignorant goes down to Sheol? Well Rev. 20v13 tells us they come back from Sheol.



2 Pet. 2:9,10 is confusing, especially in figuring who the 'unjust' are.  No one is righteous without faith, so that encompasses the nasty people without any knowledge, including the likes of Hitler.  On the other hand, in the context, the godly who were being troubled were people who weren't quiet about speaking the gospel.  So then basing the resurrection on knowledge might work here too.


Well the context of 2 Peter 2v9-10 is surely speaking of those with knowledge. Agreed.


I don't know if we can really say that the Sodomites were ignorant.  Because when Lot and Abram split up, it's because they were a big group.  Likewise, when Abram was bargining to save Sodom, he started out high, perhaps figuring that there were a bunch of righteous people there, then being not so sure as he went down from there.  I have no idea how big Sodom was, but I'd think that a group of that size would make an influence initially in telling people about their God.  What gets to me though, is that I don't think that a group with the qualities they had would listen, so while they had opportunity to understand, they may not have talking Lot and his gang up on the offer to explain.  So while they had some avenue to learn of God's ways, this is nothing compared to what the Jews had re. Ez. 16:48.  Is this what the Christadelphian understanding doesn't account for?  That people will be punished in different measures?  I know they don't believe in the torturous hell, but what the deal with punishment?


Actually Abraham was unaware if there were any rightious down there at all (Gen. 18v24) but he was appealing to God's justice. In the OT, we are just told that they were wicked sinners (Gen. 13v13), while Jesus tells us that they would have turned if the power of God had been shown to them.. That is something to think about.

Christadelphians do account for different level of torments.


I'm sorry, I dont' understand what you're saying here.   :P   Could you please clarify?


Well I was saying that Jesus bought these people. Therefore they are not done with.


God Bless
The Father is not one Person and the Son another, but ... they are one and the same.... The Spirit which became incarnate in the virgin, is not different from the Father, but one and the same.... That which is seen, which is man [is] the Son; whereas the Spirit, which was contained in the Son [is] the Father.... I will not profess belief in two Gods, Father and Son, but in one . . . for the Father, who subsisted [rested] in the Son Himself, after He had taken unto Himself our flesh, raised it to the nature of Deity, by bringing it into union with Himself, and made it one; so the Father and the Son must be styled one God, and that this person being one, cannot be two. (Callistus' statement of faith)

#30 Anastasis

Anastasis

    Sigma

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,872 posts

Posted 21 April 2004 - 03:19 PM

Hi, it's some time ago I posted anything. But I see that a UR discussion goes on here on another forum. I just want to comment on the old argument of "eternity" as something in the Bible. There's no eternity in the Bible. Eternity must be understood as eternal time and the Bible says time ends. God is thankfully not eternal. He's more than eternal, He out of time, not "eternal time".

The false "babylonian" concept of eternity is smuggled into the Bible through deceptive translation. The words aion, aiones and aionios are translated as the translators please. Young's or the Diaglott are some of the few exceptions. Rotherham and Darby are examples of a halfhearted attempt to reveal the truth of the ages. If eternity is in the Bible, then the "eternities" ended through Christ sacrifice (Heb 9v26). No no, the ages ended through his sacrifice. Another example is the deceptive translation "forever and ever" behind the greek words aionas ton aionas, they too literally mean the ages of the ages just as Jesus is the Kings of Kings.

blessings :P
The Father is not one Person and the Son another, but ... they are one and the same.... The Spirit which became incarnate in the virgin, is not different from the Father, but one and the same.... That which is seen, which is man [is] the Son; whereas the Spirit, which was contained in the Son [is] the Father.... I will not profess belief in two Gods, Father and Son, but in one . . . for the Father, who subsisted [rested] in the Son Himself, after He had taken unto Himself our flesh, raised it to the nature of Deity, by bringing it into union with Himself, and made it one; so the Father and the Son must be styled one God, and that this person being one, cannot be two. (Callistus' statement of faith)




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users