BRXII Battle talk

[Aimiel]

Because I believe in Jesus Christ I have saving faith.

If you did, you would believe that what He said is Truth, not fables or mere allegory, designed to scare people.

Apparently Satan himself, and demons as well, will be given the gift of belief some day.

What do you have to back that up, scripturally? It isn't given to them, anywhere in Scripture. You're presuming that it is.

They must be reconciled to God through the blood of the cross. Why should that seem so incredible to us?

Because The Word of God says that Christ was given because of God's Love for the world, not for Heavenly creatures. They were judged the moment they sinned. Men, who don't walk in the light but walk in darkness, will be judged by their deeds, when they are exposed to the light.

I think it's because we think God made a permanent hell to place them in.

No, it is because The Word of God tells us that; realizing the truth of The Word is secondary to that truth.

But if it is corrective and remedial as well as punitive, then even hell itself was made to rid the universe of evil...even within sentient creatures that God created, including even the Devil himself.

Pure speculation, discarding what Scripture says.

When eternal torment, as a doctrine like is currently believed by so many, is accepted as being plausible and even true...then the doctrine itself serves itself while reading and even translating scripture. And that is the problem: people BELIEVE in eternal torment, they believe it to be acceptible, and plausible, that Jesus Christ will raise the dead and billions of people will be in permanent and unending misery for all eternity as a result..and they think it to be "justice" solely because they believe God will do that...therefore it MUST be justice.

That is called faith, since we don't know God's Purposes or reasoning. His Understanding is above ours. We can't even see Him, and you want to paint Him into a corner with your 'logical' presumptions from His Word.

Truth is...the idea of permanent misery because the fallen remain fallen forever is what we are scripturally proving to be false.

You mean attempting to prove false, and failing, miserably. The Word doesn't show that to be false.

But no matter how compelling and scriptural an argument against it is presented, the believers in this idea of a permanent misery because the fallen remain fallen forever will not accept anything else.

If it were stated in Scripture, it would be (at the very least) believeable. It isn't, so we don't. Making compelling and 'scriptural' arguments is what the Pharisees did. They perverted The Word of God to promote their agenda, without even knowing what God's is.

 

[logos_x]

See what I mean?

 

[Aimiel]

See what I mean?

I do, but most of it isn't plausible, at all. :think:

 

[logos_x]

I do, but most of it isn't plausible, at all. :think:

Most of the doctrine of eternal torment isn't plausible, Aimiel. Yet it is the only reason you think what I'm saying isn't plausible.

 

[Ecumenicist]

I think it good to help heal their lives, but it is not the most important thing at that moment. Trying to heal their lives without turning them over to Satan will destroy lives.

It is never a good idea to think you are smarter than God. When God has left instructions for how to deal with the sexually immoral and someone says "Well, I think this approach is better....", frankly that tells me they are not equipped to be a leader in a church.

Even worse is that someone that gives their own opinion and then announces that they have not sought God's opinion and suggests that people need to instruct them if they disagree. Uggg!!!

If it does not yield healing and reconcilliation, then the doctrine is false.

That's the beauty of God's Word, it yields healing and reconcilliation if interpreted and
applied in Truth.

This is why concepts such as eternal torment and isolation and the practice of
ostracizing people who are already hurting are patently false, because they yield
nothing but hurt and more hurt, in the lives of the people who enforce those falsehoods,
and in the lives of those who are victimized by those falsehoods.

 

[PKevman]

If it does not yield healing and reconcilliation, then the doctrine is false.

That's the beauty of God's Word, it yields healing and reconcilliation if interpreted and
applied in Truth.

This is why concepts such as eternal torment and isolation and the practice of
ostracizing people who are already hurting are patently false, because they yield
nothing but hurt and more hurt, in the lives of the people who enforce those falsehoods,
and in the lives of those who are victimized by those falsehoods.

I took you off of ignore long enough to read what you had said Dave, and the message from it is this: "I, Dave Miller, determine what in God's Word is true and what isn't true. What works and what doesn't work." So you have yet to address the specific verses where the Bible instructs the church how to handle sexually immoral members.

 

[PKevman]

Most of the doctrine of eternal torment isn't plausible, Aimiel. Yet it is the only reason you think what I'm saying isn't plausible.

No it is because he accepts the Word of God and what the Word of God says on this subject.

 

[logos_x]

No it is because he accepts the Word of God and what the Word of God says on this subject.

No, it isn't.

 

[red77]

And anyone can restate what someone else says, but that is hardly a compelling argument. Tell me what questions that were asked by Logos during the battle that I didn't answer Biblically? I can provide the exact questions and numbers from the debate that Stephen never clearly answered from the Word of God, such as the question of how angels are forgiven from their sins when Christ didn't die for angels. There has not ever been even a hint of an attempt from Universalists to answer that question, in fact they want to make every effort to steer the conversation away from the fallen angels when that topic comes up. To say that Satan and the fallen angels get saved is not supported anywhere in Scripture, and Universalists refuse to admit this.

Here is why: Universalists don't want to admit that Satan and the fallen angels are tormented for all eternity in the Lake of Fire because it destroys their doctrine, and they would have to admit that eternal torment is possible, which is not something that any Universalist is willing to do. So they will fight and claw and attempt to prove that Satan and the fallen angels get saved, when in fact to do that they must make a ton of assumptions that are found nowhere in the Bible, such as:

-They must be saved because all are saved!
-If all are saved, then obviously Satan and the fallen angels are included.
-God provided some other way of salvation for the angels apart from Jesus Christ. (Which is in itself completely unBiblical because there is no other way to be saved except by Jesus!)
-Angels are saved through the sacrifice of Christ, the same as fallen men. (This is even more unBiblical because the Bible makes it clear that angels CANNOT be saved by Jesus, because Jesus died for men and not for angels)


And this was just one example of many that I could cite from the debate itself, which was overwhelmingly voted to be in our favor. Not to say that braggingly, but rather to say that those who read it and cared enough to vote on it overwhelmingly said that we won the debate.

Now I didn't participate in the debate in order to win a debate, as much as I wanted to give those who are trapped in the false teachings of Universalism something to think about and consider. But the point that I am making is why would we be attempting to take attention away from a debate that went very well for our position, as you say when you restate my statement? Really Redfin, you are grasping at straws, but then again what else would we expect from an adherent to Universalism?

Pastor - i think Stephen has already answered you in regards to the fallen angels and I wouldnt have any more to add to his answer although I would suspect that you will still be dissatisfied

But I would say this, in terms of the battle being a 'victory' then to have boasted about such a win would be remarkably hollow, on a forum such as this it was practically a foregone conclusion that the majority decision would have been in favour of ingrained tradition, I doubt whether Stephen was under any delusion of 'winning' from the outset - but rather more concerned with giving ET'ers and those interested something to think about, much the same as you seemed more concerned with trying to "help those trapped" within universalism.....

in all honesty I would say that there have been unanswered points from both sides of the debate, neither side is blameless, neither side is totally at fault

The thing is Pastor - you will one day have to accept that the message you portray as being the 'good news' of the gospel is one that conveys a misery of which there can be no compare, eternal torment is beyond any words that can depict pain/suffering and horror and is in contradiction to a God whose character is described as love,

In the ET scenario God's love is minimised by either wrath/vengeance or justice instead of those characteristics being part of his love, God's love cannot conquer all, it cant conquer sin because in the ET model sin is never vanquished but continually exists throughout eternity in an ongoing hellhole

Scriptures abound that speak of God working all things out, his will to save all men, for all men to find the truth, that all things will be in subjection to him that created it all and yet these arent enough to even seemingly make you stop and think that this almighty God - who created everything in existence - may just actually have a better plan in place than to torment the vast majority of his own handiwork for no constructive reason at all,

You have repeatedly accused universalists of relying on their 'feelings' when it comes to this subject, I will say to you that in fact feelings play their part also, we are not robots, we all have feelings and emotions and they are unavoidable in a subject of this nature, if we see a story about a child being molested or a woman being raped and killed then it is our feelings and the moral law written on our hearts that cries out that this is wrong, that the violent suffering of which is rife in our world is a travesty against what is right, this is the same in regards to the torture of helpless people, if a human being violates another then it is wrong, I do not believe that God is a bully nor a sadist either,

You say that you wanted to help those trapped in universalism, how? By preaching a message where you're effectively telling everone that God might be able to do many wondrous things but restoring his own world cannot be one of them?
That to think that Jesus sacrifice on the cross being 100% successful was in actual fact beyond him?
That the eternal agonies of our family/loved ones and friends is 'right' because it requites God's 'justice' no matter how much we may love them?

ET is the most hopeless and despairing message that there could possibly be, and does so much to turn people away from a God who's portrayal is one of pain and suffering as oppose to the source of everything good,

Your belief system dictates to you that God cannot do certain things - and once a theology places it's limits on God - and ET does exactly that - then i'd sooner be "trapped" in a belief that God can do all that he wills - and that his love isnt restricted by man made dogma......

 

[PKevman]

Because I believe in Jesus Christ I have saving faith.

Apparently Satan himself, and demons as well, will be given the gift of belief some day.

They must be reconciled to God through the blood of the cross. Why should that seem so incredible to us?

I think it's because we think God made a permanent hell to place them in. But if it is corrective and remedial as well as punitive, then even hell itself was made to rid the universe of evil...even within sentient creatures that God created, including even the Devil himself.



All that came from God must return to God (Romans 11:36). Christ Jesus didn't shed his blood on Calvary for mankind only, but for all creation (Rom. 8:20-21). We know that there are "spiritual forces of wickedness among the celestials" (Eph. 6:12). Don't they also need reconciled to God? Colossians 1:16-20 proves that all creation, "whether those on the earth or those in the heavens,"...which is where Satan is now.... will be "reconciled to God through the blood of [Jesus Christ]." What is wrong with believing this?

I don't think there is anything wrong with believeing this, but because of the doctrine of permanent misery for angel or man we think that it isn't plausible. But this isn't because of what the scriptures themselves say, rather it is because of the belief in eternal torment itself that causes that to be considered false. When eternal torment, as a doctrine like is currently believed by so many, is accepted as being plausible and even true...then the doctrine itself serves itself while reading and even translating scripture. And that is the problem: people BELIEVE in eternal torment, they believe it to be acceptible, and plausible, that Jesus Christ will raise the dead and billions of people will be in permanent and unending misery for all eternity as a result..and they think it to be "justice" solely because they believe God will do that...therefore it MUST be justice.

And, in reality Kevin I did answer it.

The idea that "universalists" shy away from this question is understandable, given that we are fighting a plausibility structure that says that God CANNOT save all MEN. If we can't convince you...with the preponderance of evidence presented....that God can do THAT, then why go on and try to prove that Satan and demons can be reconciled to God?

Truth is...the idea of permanent misery because the fallen remain fallen forever is what we are scripturally proving to be false. But no matter how compelling and scriptural an argument against it is presented, the believers in this idea of a permanent misery because the fallen remain fallen forever will not accept anything else.

The leaven has leavened the whole lump.

So, your assessment as to why (you think) the question goes unanswered is not because it destroys universal salvation when an argument is presented...but because the answer is considered implausible to those that believe in eternal torment, so making an argument for Satan being saved in the end still does no good as an argument when you can't even believe all MEN will be saved first.

The flipside to this is that you have not established that all men are saved. You have pulled certain verses out of context and tried to use them to bolster your position. But every time we have examined those verses IN CONTEXT we have shown them not to mean what Universalism says they mean. And in the process you have openly denied many verses in the Bible which clearly teach eternal torment. You act as if this stuff is stuff we are making up on a whim and that it is not found in the Bible.

I simply brought up one point in regards to Satan and the fallen angels and you again either missed the point of the question or dodged it altogether.

And regardless of the position, I will seek to expose false doctrine when I see it and have the time and the energy to respond to it. I haven't had as much of that time lately, but that's the way it goes sometimes. To answer directly some of your points and compare them with what the Bible says:

You said:

Apparently Satan himself, and demons as well, will be given the gift of belief some day.

They must be reconciled to God through the blood of the cross. Why should that seem so incredible to us?

Three words that show that your whole theology is faulty: Must be, and Apparently! You make assumptions that are not found in the Word of God, and that is why the best you can answer are "Must be" and "Apparently".

Well here is what the Bible says:

Hebrews 2:14-18

14 Inasmuch then as the children have partaken of flesh and blood, He Himself likewise shared in the same, that through death He might destroy him who had the power of death, that is, the devil, 15 and release those who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage. 16 For indeed He does not give aid to angels, but He does give aid to the seed of Abraham. 17 Therefore, in all things He had to be made like His brethren, that He might be a merciful and faithful High Priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. 18 For in that He Himself has suffered, being tempted, He is able to aid those who are tempted.


Christ did not come to save angels. Period. They cannot be saved by the propitiation for sins that Christ made FOR PEOPLE. Your "must be's" and "apparently's" do not line up with Scripture!

If the fallen angels and Satan were saved by Christ, Christ would have to come back and become an angel and die for the sins of the angels!

Indeed the Scripture that says:

Rev. 20:10 The devil, who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone where the beast and the false prophet are. And they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

ENTIRELY lines up with Scripture!

Repent of the false doctrines you are propagating!

 

[Ecumenicist]

I took you off of ignore long enough to read what you had said Dave, and the message from it is this: "I, Dave Miller, determine what in God's Word is true and what isn't true. What works and what doesn't work." So you have yet to address the specific verses where the Bible instructs the church how to handle sexually immoral members.

Why don't you help us out, Pastor? What specific verses does Nin have in mind?

thanx,

Dave Miller

 

[PKevman]

Why don't you help us out, Pastor? What specific verses does Nin have in mind?

thanx,

Dave Miller

I know exactly the verses in which Paul instructs the church on how to handle sexually immoral members. Why should I have to do your work? Seriously, the question that was asked by Nin was a fair one and it was directed to you and you still have not answered it.

Do you not know?

 

[PKevman]

Jesus does not save those who reject Him. They have no hope of salvation if they reject Jesus Christ that is why it says those who do not believe are condemned already.

 

[logos_x]

The flipside to this is that you have not established that all men are saved. You have pulled certain verses out of context and tried to use them to bolster your position. But every time we have examined those verses IN CONTEXT we have shown them not to mean what Universalism says they mean. And in the process you have openly denied many verses in the Bible which clearly teach eternal torment. You act as if this stuff is stuff we are making up on a whim and that it is not found in the Bible.

You are full of prunes.
In fact...every time you have pulled out your "proof texts" I've shown time and again that they NEVER speak of an endless aion of chastisment as a matter of duration.
You continually ignore the facts...even now.

I simply brought up one point in regards to Satan and the fallen angels and you again either missed the point of the question or dodged it altogether.

Here we go again.
What have I dodged Kevin? Hmmm?
What was the point I missed?

You are saying it is impossible for God to save angels. Well, why doesn't He do away with them then? Why leave them alone to wreak havok wherever they go? Why allow them to influence anything? And why allow the serpent into Eden?

See...this plays into all of our beliefs about free will, God's ability to save, and what He planned to do all along. If you think the outcome is eternal misery, then God is gambling with His own creation that most of it will end up evil and in torment forever as the outcome of eternal life...which is a gift, not an innate and natural possession of man apart from God.

It is you that keeps missing the point.

And regardless of the position, I will seek to expose false doctrine when I see it and have the time and the energy to respond to it.

As will I.

To answer directly some of your points and compare them with what the Bible says:

Three words that show that your whole theology is faulty: Must be, and Apparently! You make assumptions that are not found in the Word of God, and that is why the best you can answer are "Must be" and "Apparently".

Hey, Kevin, just because you don't like that I can voice my opinion of what the Bible is actually saying, and use words that do not try to shove it down your throat, doesn't reduce my arguments to ones that have no validity. I'm leaving it up to the readers of my posts to think about what I'm saying...not trying to say they must believe as you do or I do.

Is that alright with you?

Well here is what the Bible says:

Hebrews 2:14-18

14 Inasmuch then as the children have partaken of flesh and blood, He Himself likewise shared in the same, that through death He might destroy him who had the power of death, that is, the devil, 15 and release those who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage. 16 For indeed He does not give aid to angels, but He does give aid to the seed of Abraham. 17 Therefore, in all things He had to be made like His brethren, that He might be a merciful and faithful High Priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. 18 For in that He Himself has suffered, being tempted, He is able to aid those who are tempted.


Christ did not come to save angels. Period. They cannot be saved by the propitiation for sins that Christ made FOR PEOPLE. Your "must be's" and "apparently's" do not line up with Scripture!

So...you see in this verse that because He came to save men, He CANNOT save angels?

I think that is a leap of logic based on your plausibility structure that God does not intend to bring the whole universe back to Himself. Yet other scriptures say that He DOES intend to do just that. You can dismiss the scriptures I've already cited if you wish, or try to make them fit with your theology like making a square peg fit a round hole...but I'm not going to do that. I don't need to, because I know that the Hebrew and the Greek scriptures don't make an endless aion of misery a cornerstone of faith or the gospel. In fact...I don't see any endless misery in the scripture you quoted above. What I DO see is that He came to destroy all the WORKS of the Devil...and I think it's just possible He might get that done, even in the Devil himself.

If the fallen angels and Satan were saved by Christ, Christ would have to come back and become an angel and die for the sins of the angels!

I thought He died for all creation the first time.
What...His death was not valuable enough to redeem everything and make everything new? I'm not prepared to dismiss God's ability to save whatever the hell He wants to save...and I think the doctrine of eternal torment requires one to make the kind of "logical" conclusions you've made here.

Frankly...I don't care if He saves the Devil or not, Kevin. Right now I'm more interested in what He wants to do with mankind.

Indeed the Scripture that says:

Rev. 20:10 The devil, who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone where the beast and the false prophet are. And they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

ENTIRELY lines up with Scripture!

No, it doesn't..because that is not what it says.
The Greek does NOT say forever and ever. Period. Never did. Never will.

Your KJV reads "forever and ever" which is an absurd translation of the Greek aionas ton aionon, a translation which ignores both the plural of aion and the genitive case, "of the." The Greek connective kai—"and"—is nowhere seen in this passage. This is a scene of judgment. It is not the end, because after the eons run their course, God becomes all in all. This happens at the consummation (1 Cor. 15:22-28).

Repent of the false doctrines you are propagating!

If I were propagating a false doctrine it should be easy to prove, which no one has done. I see no reason to repent of "propagating false doctrine" when I'm not doing that.

 

[Ecumenicist]

I took you off of ignore long enough to read what you had said Dave, and the message from it is this: "I, Dave Miller, determine what in God's Word is true and what isn't true. What works and what doesn't work." So you have yet to address the specific verses where the Bible instructs the church how to handle sexually immoral members.

False witness Kevin, using quotes besides. I never said those words.

I Dave Miller, have witnessed and experienced the power of the Holy Spirit in healing
people, physically, mentally and Spiritually. I have been blessed to be a witness to and
a part of the Holy Spirit's healing presence and power.

I have also witnessed the destructive hurt that accompanies false witness, denying
God's healing Grace and Love. I've witnessed lives wasted, ruined, and people driven
from their families, and driven from fellowship with Christ, through harsh, false words.

 

[Nineveh]

If it does not yield healing and reconcilliation, then the doctrine is false.

That's the beauty of God's Word, it yields healing and reconcilliation if interpreted and
applied in Truth.

But you don't even know what Paul has to say, or even if he had something to say on the issue.

This is why concepts such as eternal torment and isolation and the practice of ostracizing people who are already hurting are patently false, because they yield nothing but hurt and more hurt, in the lives of the people who enforce those falsehoods, and in the lives of those who are victimized by those falsehoods.

Know who is prone to advance falsehoods, dave? People who have no clue what the Bible says. About "meat" matters, "milk" matters or even matters that apply to their own authority in a church group. That is who spreads, supports, enforces and preaches falsehoods.

The Truth hurts, dave. Lies and falsehoods dressed up in the clothing of "unconditional love" harms.

Why don't you help us out, Pastor? What specific verses does Nin have in mind?

thanx,

Dave Miller

Pathetic. You accept authority in a flock, yet you have no clue what a shepherd is supposed to do. What's it been, dave? Ten pages or so? ... and you still haven't bothered to look?

 

[Aimiel]

Most of the doctrine of eternal torment isn't plausible, Aimiel. Yet it is the only reason you think what I'm saying isn't plausible.

I meant plausible in the light of Scripture, which you, quite obviously, don't understand. :think:

 

[Aimiel]

This is why concepts such as eternal torment and isolation and the practice of ostracizing people who are already hurting are patently false, because they yield nothing but hurt and more hurt, in the lives of the people who enforce those falsehoods, and in the lives of those who are victimized by those falsehoods.

You're idea, "Live and let live," will simply encourage those who sin to do so freely; and their end will be hell, where the real victims end up. The victims of heresy and foolish 'interpretation' of Scripture. You're the one who is victimizing people, in the name of, "Peace, peace," where there is no peace. Thank God that your kind is farther and further between, and that His Spirit is capable of revealing Truth with or without your 'help.'

 

[logos_x]

I meant plausible in the light of Scripture, which you, quite obviously, don't understand. :think:

What I don't understand is your "argument" :think:

 

[logos_x]

You're idea, "Live and let live," will simply encourage those who sin to do so freely; and their end will be hell, where the real victims end up. The victims of heresy and foolish 'interpretation' of Scripture. You're the one who is victimizing people, in the name of, "Peace, peace," where there is no peace. Thank God that your kind is farther and further between, and that His Spirit is capable of revealing Truth with or without your 'help.'

Where has Dave said anything about "Live and let live"?

At any rate...seems to be much better than "live and let die".