Hitler in Heaven?

[ih8censorship]

first off- just let me say that what Hitler did to the Jews was terrible and that im not like a nazi or white supremacist or anything

now, im sure weve all heard of depictions of hell where bad things are happening to Hitler, and people say how hitler is in hell now.now i was just thinking i dont have any proof and this more than likely did not happen, but if hitler repented of what he had done before he died would he still go to heaven? if God can save a death row inmate why cant he save a genocidal dictator? and as far as i can remember blasphamy is the only un-pardonable sin, so could hitlers actions have been pardoned by his asking for forgiveness from God? i would think so, it wouldent help him in mans eyes but in Gods eyes it would right? the only thing that makes me think maybey not is that he was messing with the Jews which are "Gods people"....

anyway its all theoretical, and ive heard hitler was really into the occult so odds are he was never saved, but its something to think about anyway.

[smaller]

Hitler's sin is no different than any other man's sins.

Hitler was like every man:

Bound with disobedience (Romans 11:32)

Had sin indwelling him that was "no longer I." (Romans 7:17,20)

Had evil present with him. (Romans 7:21)

Was blinded by the god of this world (2 Cor. 4:4)

Was planted in corruption, weakness, and humility (1 Cor. 15)

Was a slave of sin (John 8:34)

Now here is the Good News:

Sins are not counted against mankind! (2 Cor. 5:19)

When anyone dies they are released from sin. (Romans 6:7)

Love does "NO ILL! (1 Cor. 13)

Love keeps "NO RECORD OF WRONGS!" (1 Cor. 13)

Jesus will draw all men to Himself! (John 12:32)

All who come to Him He will in no way cast out! (John :37)

Everything God has was given to Jesus! (John 3:35)

Of everything given to Jesus, He looses nothing! (John 6:39)

Every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus is Lord! (Phil. 2:10)

Now, regarding those invisible powers that blinded Hitler and ruled his flesh to do those "sins" that he surely did, they will pay the price, but these things are not the same as mankind. Satan and his messengers are anti-Christ or against everything that Christ is and does. These MANipulators will be put away forever and it is to THEM that every eternal damnation scripture SOLIDLY APPLIES. There is not one single instance in the entire Bible where any named person is said to be going to the Lake of Fire or even threatened with such a fate.

So where is Hitler???

Hitler and the evil work that was done in his body will no longer be remembered (Isaiah 65:17)

There will be a Day of Wrath for the things that controlled what happened in Hitlers body. (Rev. 6:17)

The Child of God formerly known as Hitler will be with His True Father enjoying the FIREWORKS!

enjoy!

smaller

[GoBahnsen]

Hitler's sin is no different than any other man's sins.

Hitler was like every man:

Bound with disobedience (Romans 11:32)

Had sin indwelling him that was "no longer I." (Romans 7:17,20)

Had evil present with him. (Romans 7:21)

Was blinded by the god of this world (2 Cor. 4:4)

Was planted in corruption, weakness, and humility (1 Cor. 15)

Was a slave of sin (John 8:34)

Now here is the Good News:

Sins are not counted against mankind! (2 Cor. 5:19)

When anyone dies they are released from sin. (Romans 6:7)

Love does "NO ILL! (1 Cor. 13)

Love keeps "NO RECORD OF WRONGS!" (1 Cor. 13)

Jesus will draw all men to Himself! (John 12:32)

All who come to Him He will in no way cast out! (John :37)

Everything God has was given to Jesus! (John 3:35)

Of everything given to Jesus, He looses nothing! (John 6:39)

Every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus is Lord! (Phil. 2:10)

Now, regarding those invisible powers that blinded Hitler and ruled his flesh to do those "sins" that he surely did, they will pay the price, but these things are not the same as mankind. Satan and his messengers are anti-Christ or against everything that Christ is and does. These MANipulators will be put away forever and it is to THEM that every eternal damnation scripture SOLIDLY APPLIES. There is not one single instance in the entire Bible where any named person is said to be going to the Lake of Fire or even threatened with such a fate.

So where is Hitler???

Hitler and the evil work that was done in his body will no longer be remembered (Isaiah 65:17)

There will be a Day of Wrath for the things that controlled what happened in Hitlers body. (Rev. 6:17)

The Child of God formerly known as Hitler will be with His True Father enjoying the FIREWORKS!

enjoy!

smallerGag me with a spiritual fork. Having said that, smaller did make a lot of good points before he gagged me.

Hitler? I make him look like a princess in a toutou (or however it's spelled). I was just telling my family at devotional time tonight, that I'm no better than Judas. I really mean that. Is that a badge of honor? No! It's just that I'm keenly aware of my need to throw myself at Jesus feet and beg for mercy. Hitler, would that I could have been so decent.

Oh sure I wouldn't actually kill people and I saw myself out there with Schindler hosing down the poor Jews in the railroad box-car, with the water hose to help heal their misery and plight. But I know me a little and like Walter Martin used to say "you don't want to know the real you".

Hitler? A monster? Yes. But none of us wants to meet the Hitler within us all. I know that in me, that is in my flesh...dwells no good thing. Paul knew that too.

[smaller]

Gag me with a spiritual fork. Having said that, smaller did make a lot of good points before he gagged me.

Hitler? I make him look like a princess in a toutou (or however it's spelled). I was just telling my family at devotional time tonight, that I'm no better than Judas. I really mean that. Is that a badge of honor? No! It's just that I'm keenly aware of my need to throw myself at Jesus feet and beg for mercy. Hitler, would that I could have been so decent.

Oh sure I wouldn't actually kill people and I saw myself out there with Schindler hosing down the poor Jews in the railroad box-car, with the water hose to help heal their misery and plight. But I know me a little and like Walter Martin used to say "you don't want to know the real you".

Hitler? A monster? Yes. But none of us wants to meet the Hitler within us all. I know that in me, that is in my flesh...dwells no good thing. Paul knew that too.

Thank you for being honest GB. The Truth is the "same as" Love.

Perhaps when you browse the scripture citings you will see why I bow very low to the Power of Love and condemn that which measures hatred via eternal damnation to any of mankind.

There is a rightful place to measure eternal damnation in fire, and it is not upon your fellow man. I do not want to be the dupe of sin indwelling that makes false measures to "all."

His Word is Light. Every jot and tittle of it.

enjoy!

smaller

[kaleidoscopic]

I don't intend to be antagonistic but how can God be love and send people to eternal damnation for not choosing to follow him? Do you not find it ironic that the bible refers to his followers as sheep? ( Sheep, by the way, are one of the most naive and docile creatures on the planet)

[jason]

now i was just thinking i dont have any proof and this more than likely did not happen, but if hitler repented of what he had done before he died would he still go to heaven?
Of course he would, without question.

Interestingly, if you reflect on the question, most people instantly have a reaction of , "How could you say such a thing ? That isn't fair !!!" and so on.

But the reason people say things like that is not because what Hitler did was so evil, but because they fail to recognise the seriousness of their own sin.

I seriously doubt Hitler was saved for a variety of reasons, mostly to do with being a genocidal occultist, but in theory he could most certianly have repented and sought forgivness from God. Just as any of the rest of us can.

Jeffery Dahmer (Cannibal serial killer) did exactly this prior to being beaten to death in prison.

Jason

[GoBahnsen]

I don't intend to be antagonistic but how can God be love and send people to eternal damnation for not choosing to follow him? Because He is also just. California is democratic and liberal in majority, how can the State send Scott Peterson to prison?



Do you not find it ironic that the bible refers to his followers as sheep? ( Sheep, by the way, are one of the most naive and docile creatures on the planet)His followers...but what has that got to do with His non followers? Justice will be met. Either Jesus meets it in substitutionary payment or sinners meet it on their own. The wages of sin is death.

[jason]

I don't intend to be antagonistic but how can God be love and send people to eternal damnation for not choosing to follow him?
This is a common misunderstanding. God sends people to Hell for all of the wrong doing and rebellion they commit during a lifetime, against God and against their fellow man.

And don't forget, God is not just loving, he is also Holy and Perfectly Just.

Jason

[smaller]

Of course he would, without question.

Interestingly, if you reflect on the question, most people instantly have a reaction of , "How could you say such a thing ? That isn't fair !!!" and so on.

But the reason people say things like that is not because what Hitler did was so evil, but because they fail to recognise the seriousness of their own sin.

I seriously doubt Hitler was saved for a variety of reasons, mostly to do with being a genocidal occultist, but in theory he could most certianly have repented and sought forgivness from God. Just as any of the rest of us can.

Jeffery Dahmer (Cannibal serial killer) did exactly this prior to being beaten to death in prison.

Jason

It is even more interesting how most Christians overlook scriptures such as these:

Matthew 6:15
But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

Matthew 18
34 And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due unto him.
35 So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their trespasses.

Luke 6:37
Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven:

But of course most "christians" will take up the eternal judgment to damnation of another person at the drop of a hat and then find ways to eternally condemn others and justify themselves.

go figure.

[smaller]

Because He is also just. California is democratic and liberal in majority, how can the State send Scott Peterson to prison?

Uh, don't you think there might be just a slight difference between temporal punishment and eternal torture in fire??? hellow

His followers...but what has that got to do with His non followers? Justice will be met. Either Jesus meets it in substitutionary payment or sinners meet it on their own. The wages of sin is death.

"Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men." Romans 5:18

Of course most christians will deny this statement from Paul to their dying breath.

[rhutchin]

I don't intend to be antagonistic but how can God be love and send people to eternal damnation for not choosing to follow him? Do you not find it ironic that the bible refers to his followers as sheep? ( Sheep, by the way, are one of the most naive and docile creatures on the planet)

I think your question might be phrased, Why doesn't God force people to follow Him if they do not want to do so?

The retort is, If God warns people that they will be thrust from His presence if they do not follow Him, should God then do that which He said He would do?

Not only are sheep naive and docile, they trust the shepherd completely. They will follow the shepherd anywhere he goes. I would not call the illustration ironic since it accurately characterizes the relationship between the believer and God.

[Macarthur]

This is a common misunderstanding. God sends people to Hell for all of the wrong doing and rebellion they commit during a lifetime, against God and against their fellow man.
Again, I have yet for anyone to make understand how an eternal damnation is "just" when weighted against a finite lifetime.

And don't forget, God is not just loving, he is also Holy and Perfectly Just.

Jason
See my previous question about God being "perfectly just". If you had to rank God's three main attributes of loving, holy, just & grace, where would you rank grace. It appears you would rank it dead last.

[Macarthur]

I've always had a hard time with the explaination that most Christians have with regards to a question like this (Hitler). The first thing that they have to is make all sins equal. In other words, Hitler, you and I are no different. I'm sorry, but that just doesnt' wash with me. Trying and equate me swiping a piece of candy or having the occational lust in my heart or even worse, to lie to someone because you just can't bear to tell them the truth, with what Hitler did just goes against any sort of logic that my mind can muster. What you have to do is check your logic and reason at the door to believe "scripture" in this case.

[smaller]

I've always had a hard time with the explaination that most Christians have with regards to a question like this (Hitler). The first thing that they have to is make all sins equal. In other words, Hitler, you and I are no different. I'm sorry, but that just doesnt' wash with me. Trying and equate me swiping a piece of candy or having the occational lust in my heart or even worse, to lie to someone because you just can't bear to tell them the truth, with what Hitler did just goes against any sort of logic that my mind can muster. What you have to do is check your logic and reason at the door to believe "scripture" in this case.

All sin is of the devil. If you think your devil is any better than anyone else's you are deceiving yourself. Occaisional lust? Yeah, sure, right.

I say most christians are far worse than Hitler. At least Hitler just killed peoples bodies. Most "christians" want to see others tortured for eternity in fire.

How much worse than Hitler is that??? Waaayyyy bad.

[Alberta girl]

Speculation is all we are left with concerning Hitler. God has told us that judgement is strictly up to Him. I usualy rely on the phrase, you will know them by their fruits. But God has also told us that His mercy and wisdom are beyond our reach to comprehend. I had a pastor that frequently identified deseased people as unsaved and dead in their sins, and I never liked it much. As for forgiveness, it more between the person and God than anything else, I certainly don't have the power to grant someone third party forgiveness against God's will. Thank you for letting me share.

[jason]

Again, I have yet for anyone to make understand how an eternal damnation is "just" when weighted against a finite lifetime.
That makes no sense at all. We regularly punish crimes with penalty of duration unrelated to the time the crime takes to commit. Murders can be done in mere seconds, yet it attracts the longest of penalties.

Next up, how do you know that people are punished infinitely for finite crime ?

How do you know they do no receive a finite sentence but continue to sin once they get to hell, thus extending their sentence ?

Also how do you know that crimes against God do not deserve infinite punishment ?

See my previous question about God being "perfectly just". If you had to rank God's three main attributes of loving, holy, just & grace, where would you rank grace. It appears you would rank it dead last.
Umm ... loving, holy just & grace is four properties and grace is not a property mercy is.

And God is incredibly merciful. But why does God have an obligation to show mercy to those who sneer at the very idea of receiving mercy from him ?

And how exactly is it loving for God to essentially rape someone who rejects him ? After all they could never come into his presence without being perfected and changed, which is something they don't want.

This inclusivist God you hint at is a monster.

[Macarthur]

All sin is of the devil. If you think your devil is any better than anyone else's you are deceiving yourself. Occaisional lust? Yeah, sure, right.

I say most christians are far worse than Hitler. At least Hitler just killed peoples bodies. Most "christians" want to see others tortured for eternity in fire.

How much worse than Hitler is that??? Waaayyyy bad.
Smaller, are you being sarcastic?:wink:

[Macarthur]

That makes no sense at all. We regularly punish crimes with penalty of duration unrelated to the time the crime takes to commit. Murders can be done in mere seconds, yet it attracts the longest of penalties.Sure it makes sense. So are you trying to make a true analogy for spending 30 or 40 years in prison to eternal damnation & torture? Come on....

Next up, how do you know that people are punished infinitely for finite crime ?Because that's what the Bible says, right? :wink:

How do you know they do no receive a finite sentence but continue to sin once they get to hell, thus extending their sentence ? I don't. What is your point?

Also how do you know that crimes against God do not deserve infinite punishment ?Well, I think your making it a little dramtic to say that I am committing "crimes against God". I have never had any intention to commit a crime against God. I goes back to that old discussion of God condeming his flawed creature eternally for making the wrong decision. Doesn't that kinda go against some sort of logic?


Umm ... loving, holy just & grace is four properties and grace is not a property mercy is. Okay, we're playing word symantics here. I think you know what I mean.

And God is incredibly merciful. But why does God have an obligation to show mercy to those who sneer at the very idea of receiving mercy from him ?There are many examples in the Bible that God doesn't "appear on the surface" to have mercy.

And how exactly is it loving for God to essentially rape someone who rejects him ? After all they could never come into his presence without being perfected and changed, which is something they don't want.

This inclusivist God you hint at is a monster.I have no idea how to reply to this one. I would say that a God that would throw one of his children into a lake of fire for simply "not believing" because God never really showed himself to that child is a monster.

[smaller]

Smaller, are you being sarcastic?:wink:

Uh, can you possibly imagine any greater hatred toward another person than to think in your heart that "those other people" will burn alive forever in fire???

Sorry. This one is the most vile thing that a person can "think" about others, including Hitler.

Those who "think" this are not satisfied with just a few or the worst of sinners, but nearly ALL.

Bad? Especially in the light of the FACT that there is not one single named person in the entire Bible said to be going to suffer this fate as an example or confirmation of the position, there is not even one named person threatened with such a fate.

go figure what's being reflected from these people's hearts....

way bad.

[Macarthur]

Uh, can you possibly imagine any greater hatred toward another person than to think in your heart that "those other people" will burn alive forever in fire???

Sorry. This one is the most vile thing that a person can "think" about others, including Hitler.

Those who "think" this are not satisfied with just a few or the worst of sinners, but nearly ALL.

Bad? Especially in the light of the FACT that there is not one single named person in the entire Bible said to be going to suffer this fate as an example or confirmation of the position, there is not even one named person threatened with such a fate.

go figure what's being reflected from these people's hearts....

way bad.
I can't argue with anything you're saying.

[Earthbound Misf]

I say most christians are far worse than Hitler. At least Hitler just killed peoples bodies. Most "christians" want to see others tortured for eternity in fire. Warning people of hell is not the same as "want[ing] to see others tortured for eternity in fire". On the contrary, if we wanted this lot to befall others, why would we be trying to get them to avoid it?

go figure what's being reflected from these people's hearts....

way bad.
But if you're right, we're all going to be saved anyway, so why should we change?

[Drashi]

I think a reasonable answer about the afterlife as it concerns anyone is "We don't know (we didn't get to watch the judgment); it's not up to us to decide (we don't get a vote); but when you find out for certain, please let the rest of us know."

[smaller]

Warning people of hell is not the same as "want[ing] to see others tortured for eternity in fire".

It is your own personal "desire" to see such things. I say this from many scriptural perspectives but they include the fact that

A.) There is not one single named person in the entire Bible who is said to be going to suffer the fate of the Lake of Fire or even threatened with such a fate (so how legitimate is your eternal damnation to other people???)

B.) The Word is meant to show you what is in your own heart, i.e. what dwells "in you." What's being shown in your heart when you measure to others the worst possible fate ever imaginable??? This means that it is "you" who bear that sin in your body. You measure such things to mankind (always to others of course) apart from a single named example.

Not to mention you conveniently let yourself off the hook. It is a most detestable practice. The worst that can possibly be. That is what you "mouth."

On the contrary, if we wanted this lot to befall others, why would we be trying to get them to avoid it?

I believe they call what you present the "nicer than God" position. You are much better than your own God if you do not want this to "happen" to others, yet you think God is actually going to burn people alive in fire forever.

Perhaps you should apply for His job??? You'd get my vote over God using your system.

Save yourself from God??? hello.

But if you're right, we're all going to be saved anyway, so why should we change?

A few of the minor/micro arguments against your presentations are:

Do you serve God only under the threat of eternal torture???

One is saved from the devil and his messengers, not from God.

You should not beat the other captive slaves of darkness because in doing so you show your own captivity to same darkness. (Romans 2:2) Paul called what you do "inexcusable." So do I.

You are commanded to Love both your neighbors and your enemies. Love does no ILL nor does Love keep record of wrongs. You on the other hand only express your desire to count sins against mankind. Unwise to do since this means the "sin indwelling you" who speaks through you is likewise condemned.

enjoy your scriptural dilema.

His Word is Light and Love and Truth.

smaller

[Beanieboy]

Everytime I've questioned the behavior of a self-proclaimed Christian, they shrug and say,"I'm not perfect - just forgiven."

So, technically, according to many, yes, Hitler is in heaven, and Gandhi is in hell.
To enter heaven, one must claim Jesus as their PL and S, which Hitler did.
Christians also claim that the devil cannot proclaiim the name of Jesus. Hitler did.
While you can't "earn" your way into heaven, nor is any sin too great.

Wherever Gandhi is is what I choose.

[Earthbound Misf]

It is your own personal "desire" to see such things. Interesting... are you some sort of mind-reader, able to tell what my "personal 'desire'" is, especially when I've stated clearly that what I want is the exact opposite of what you say I want?

There is not one single named person in the entire Bible who is said to be going to suffer the fate of the Lake of Fire or even threatened with such a fate (so how legitimate is your eternal damnation to other people???) First, your usage of three quotation marks adds not a bit of weight to your arguments, so why you choose to do so is beyond me. Second, the scribes and the pharisees in Mat. 23:33 (and elsewhere) are named as being in danger "from the judgment of hell", those that allow their foot, hands or eyes to cause them to stumble are told that it is better to cut them off than to be cast into hell (Mark 9:42-48 and elsewhere), Peter tells Simon that he and his money are going to perdition because Simon thought he could buy the free gift of God (Acts 8:20).

What's being shown in your heart when you measure to others the worst possible fate ever imaginable??? This means that it is "you" who bear that sin in your body. You measure such things to mankind (always to others of course) apart from a single named example. Not quite sure what you mean by "measure" here, my best guess is that you are using it for "bestow", "administer", "mete", etc. In that case you are incorrect, since I don't choose who goes to heaven or hell, but rather, that decision is made between the individual and God.

Not to mention you conveniently let yourself off the hook. It is a most detestable practice. The worst that can possibly be. I reject the notion that I am somehow able to save myself (or "let [my]self off the hook). I have not earned heaven, God grants it out of His mercy, not as a duty.

I believe they call what you present the "nicer than God" position. You are much better than your own God if you do not want this to "happen" to others, yet you think God is actually going to burn people alive in fire forever. I don't want people to go to hell, God doesn't want people to go to hell. How is that being "nicer than God"? The preresquite for entering heaven is to love God, and not everyone is willing to do that. Therefore, the only means that God would have to get those people into heaven is to force them to "love" him. However, "forced love" is a contradiction in terms, for love must be given willingly or it is not love at all, but rape- regardless of whether one is speaking physically or spiritually.

Perhaps you should apply for His job??? No thanks, I wouldn't have the experience necessary for it.

Save yourself from God??? hello. :huh: I have no idea what you're referring to here. How can anyone be saved from the only source of salvation?

Do you serve God only under the threat of eternal torture??? No, I do so out of love, since He has been merciful in saving me from my sin and the spiritual death that I deserve.

One is saved from the devil and his messengers, not from God. Thanks for pointing out the obvious.

You should not beat the other captive slaves of darkness because in doing so you show your own captivity to same darkness. (Romans 2:2) Paul called what you do "inexcusable." So do I. This is just a rehash of the old "judge not, lest ye be judged" argument used with Matthew 7:1. But isn't calling something "inexcusable" an act of "judging" (at least, how you seem to be using the term; cf. Romans 2:1)? Aren't we commanded in John 7:24 to "Stop judging by mere appearances, and make a right judgment" (http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nojudge.html)?

You are commanded to Love both your neighbors and your enemies. How is wanting people to go to heaven and avoid hell not loving them?

Love does no ILL nor does Love keep record of wrongs. Another scripture taken out of context as Rev 20:12 tells us "The dead were judged by what was written in the books, by the way they had lived." Aren't these books records?

You on the other hand only express your desire to count sins against mankind. Unwise to do since this means the "sin indwelling you" who speaks through you is likewise condemned. If what you say is true, how is this unwise? Is there some consequence you feel I will suffer for doing so and if so, what is it? If there is no consequence, then how is it any less wise than not doing it?

[smaller]

Interesting... are you some sort of mind-reader, able to tell what my "personal 'desire'" is, especially when I've stated clearly that what I want is the exact opposite of what you say I want?

Feel free to clarify at any time. The bottom line is as I previously observed from "your" presentation. You subjectively believe other people are going to burn in fire forever for the same sin that is in you.

First, your usage of three quotation marks adds not a bit of weight to your arguments, so why you choose to do so is beyond me.

I do so to show you how petty judgement can be. You damn nearly the entire population of the world to burn forever and pick at me for 3 quotation marks??? lol

Second, the scribes and the pharisees in Mat. 23:33 (and elsewhere) are named as being in danger "from the judgment of hell", those that allow their foot, hands or eyes to cause them to stumble are told that it is better to cut them off than to be cast into hell (Mark 9:42-48 and elsewhere), Peter tells Simon that he and his money are going to perdition because Simon thought he could buy the free gift of God (Acts 8:20).

The quote unquote "free gift" came upon "all men" though didn't it? But of course the every day common variety of eternal damnationist will make God's Work in Jesus Christ completely ineffective for the "all men" and mark said work only for themselves. Typical.

Not quite sure what you mean by "measure" here, my best guess is that you are using it for "bestow", "administer", "mete", etc. In that case you are incorrect, since I don't choose who goes to heaven or hell, but rather, that decision is made between the individual and God.

But you see Mr. EM, I already pointed out that your personal position is without any personal scriptural merit since no such thing as eternally damning any named person or even threatening a named person was ever done in the Bible. It could actually make you question such a position eh?

I reject the notion that I am somehow able to save myself (or "let [my]self off the hook). I have not earned heaven, God grants it out of His mercy, not as a duty.

Yes indeed. He taps "you you you" on the head with His Magic Wand but is fated to burn nearly everyone else in fire forever. lol

I say that the practice of condemning anyone, even in the backhanded manner that you use is a detestable and inexcusable practice per The Word. Jesus did "no such thing." Why do "you???" I say it is the sin indwelling you that does such things, so I do not hold it to "your" charge.

I don't want people to go to hell, God doesn't want people to go to hell. How is that being "nicer than God"?

Obviously your "God" cannot quite get the "job" done so He then reverts to an Eternal Hitler burning people alive in fire??? Uh, sorry. Nope. When anyone dies they are released from sin. (Romans 6:7)

The preresquite for entering heaven is to love God, and not everyone is willing to do that.

What? You think God is actually in "need" of man's kind of self serving, self justifying, self righteous "love?" lol God needs nothing, least of all your brand of self serving "love." Sorry to tell you this.

Then there are those pesky little scriptures that say that every knee will bow, every tongue confess, that Jesus is Lord. And of course we even see "enemies" of the Gospel being saved "after death" in Romans 11:25-32 so go figure.


Therefore, the only means that God would have to get those people into heaven is to force them to "love" him.

You might read the bottom of my post to see who is born of God and who God lives in. It is in those who love. Ever heard of a person who did not love in some way? So why would "your brand" of love be so much special than any others?

In reality you beat the other slaves of sin and condemn them to burn alive forever. I know what happens to those "wicked servants" who do such things. What you practice remains inexcusable per Romans 2:1-2. It is blasphemy of The Holy Ghost, that is why it is "inexcusable."

Look! Your own measure is upon YOU! ^ ^ ^


However, "forced love" is a contradiction in terms, for love must be given willingly or it is not love at all, but rape- regardless of whether one is speaking physically or spiritually.

Mankind is blinded to God's Love by the "god" of this world. You want to mark the slave the same as the master. This is not right behaviour, particularly in the light of the fact that sin dwells in your flesh as well. I find it quite impossible for any person with sin indwelling to even think they could render an "eternal verdict" based on some convoluted logic from the scriptures to someone else's detriment. But of course this behaviour is "common" within the "so called believers" today. During Jesus' Day no one believed in eternal damnation for people. Not even Jesus.

No, I do so out of love, since He has been merciful in saving me from my sin and the spiritual death that I deserve.

I think it is your mindset that is deserving of death. Love does no ILL nor does Love keep record of wrongs. You on the other hand want to count sins against others and condemn them to eternal fire. tsk tsk.

This is just a rehash of the old "judge not, lest ye be judged" argument used with Matthew 7:1. But isn't calling something "inexcusable" an act of "judging" (at least, how you seem to be using the term; * edited by a moderator * )? Aren't we commanded in John 7:24 to "Stop judging by mere appearances, and make a right judgment" (http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nojudge.html)?

Look, I believe in "every" eternal damnation scripture. They are "all" meant for the devil and his messengers who also happen to occupy the flesh of all mankind save One of course. That is why "we" all get so confused about the issue OK?


How is wanting people to go to heaven and avoid hell not loving them?

Uh, let's see. Either believe "like me" or you will fry like a weiner forever? Do you really think this kind of "entry dialog" is deserving of Love? I think "not." I have yet to find one person who did not believe in God who Is Love when presented in that manner and apart from the "fib" of eternal torture to other people.


Another scripture taken out of context as Rev 20:12 tells us "The dead were judged by what was written in the books, by the way they had lived." Aren't these books records?

The Words that Jesus spoke will judge every man. What word did He speak in the manner of Judgment? "If any man believe not, I judge him not." That's it as far as I'm concerned.

But the "man of sin" who is satan in the flesh will pay the price of eternal damnation. The antiChrist spirit who is "opposite of" Love will be taking a long bye bye. That is exactly what he was meant to do by God.

If what you say is true, how is this unwise? Is there some consequence you feel I will suffer for doing so and if so, what is it? If there is no consequence, then how is it any less wise than not doing it?

Love is it's own reward. What you practice is the opposite of Love and therefore that is multiplied in the world as well.

Besides it is very bad mannered.

enjoy!

smaller

[Earthbound Misf]

You subjectively believe other people are going to burn in fire forever for the same sin that is in you. If I believed that people burned in fire forever (and I'm quite willing to admit that the fire may be figurative, rather than literal), than no one would be safe. It isn't for sin, but the refusal to repent from sin.

I do so to show you how petty judgement can be.
How can a judgment be petty without the person who makes it being guilty of making petty judgments? And if someone says that another is guilty of petty judgments, isn't that judging them?

You damn nearly the entire population of the world to burn forever and pick at me for 3 quotation marks??? lol Since I'm not God, I can damn no one. If anyone is damned, it is for their refusal to repent of sin, not because of any judgment you believe I've made of them.

The quote unquote "free gift" came upon "all men" though didn't it? First off, the "free gift" referred to in the verse is not salvation, but the power to place hands on someone and have them receive the Holy Spirit. Second, evidently Simon had not received this free gift or otherwise he wouldn't have tried to buy it. Third, according Peter, Simon's money is going to be destroyed with him if he doesn't change his wicked thoughts.


But of course the every day common variety of eternal damnationist will make God's Work in Jesus Christ completely ineffective for the "all men" and mark said work only for themselves. What will "not-every-day uncommon variety" of eternal damnationists make God's Work? You wouldn't be trying to slip an ad hominem into the argument, would you? But in response to your statement, the work is for all men, although not all men accept such work. You make it sound like I believe that I would try to keep such a gift for myself, when, on the contrary, I would gladly share it with all who would partake of it.

But you see Mr. EM, I already pointed out that your personal position is without any personal scriptural merit since no such thing as eternally damning any named person or even threatening a named person was ever done in the Bible. Irrelevant, since there are definitely groups of people (such as those of Sodom and Gomorrah, see Jude 1:7) who are mentioned as being eternally damned.

Yes indeed. He taps "you you you" on the head with His Magic Wand but is fated to burn nearly everyone else in fire forever. A Magic Wand has nothing to do with it... it is a matter of accepting the free gift of salvation.

Jesus did "no such thing."
Would this be the same Jesus who says, "You, Capernaum, who are exalted to heaven, you will go down to Hades" (Mat. 11:23; World English Bible)?

Obviously your "God" cannot quite get the "job" done The fault lies not with God, but with those who refuse to accept His free gift.

When anyone dies they are released from sin. (Romans 6:7)
Anyone? It seems clear that this verse is referring only to those who were baptised with Jesus unto His death (Rom. 6:3). Or does the author of Romans have to spell this out in verse 7 as well?


You think God is actually in "need" of man's kind of self serving, self justifying, self righteous "love?" lol God needs nothing, least of all your brand of self serving "love."
I never said God needed anything, and I would thank you to stop putting words into my mouth.

Then there are those pesky little scriptures that say that every knee will bow, every tongue confess, that Jesus is Lord. Yes, but how does this prove your thesis? Note that among those that will be bowing and confessing are those that are "under the earth", which would seem to include Satan and the demons.

To be continued....

[smaller]

If I believed that people burned in fire forever (and I'm quite willing to admit that the fire may be figurative, rather than literal), than no one would be safe. It isn't for sin, but the refusal to repent from sin.

Romans 2:4
Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of -->God leadeth thee to repentance<--?

2 Timothy 2:25
In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;

God Himself grants and draws men to repentance. It is not a work of men. If some do not repent God has Divine Purposes for that man also. See Romans 11:32 for the "reason."

How can a judgment be petty without the person who makes it being guilty of making petty judgments? And if someone says that another is guilty of petty judgments, isn't that judging them?

Perhaps closer attention should be paid to the scriptures EM?

Paul called the "sin indwelling him" NO LONGER I twice in Romans 7. This clearly shows that the working of "sin in men" is something that is NOT THEM. Using this understanding you will see from The Word that The Word speaks many times to "entities" in men that are not the "same as" the person. Jesus also showed this as a legitimate position in the Gospels over and over again. Why do you not see it this way rather than blindly condemn the "slave of" sins? Because you to are "enslaved" and "blinded" to this scriptural fact, as most are.

There will be "no sins" counted against mankind, but rest assured, the cause of sin in men will pay the price of eternal punishment. Again since the same sin in you causes you to be blinded to The Word in this matter you falsely condemn mankind regardless of the direct Words of Jesus Christ, that "every sin and blasphemy" shall be forgiven to men. The "cause" however will not "go free."

Since I'm not God, I can damn no one. If anyone is damned, it is for their refusal to repent of sin, not because of any judgment you believe I've made of them.

Again you violate The Word in this matter because you think sin is "eradicated" when repented of. It isn't. Sin's have never been held to the account of mankind. Sin "entered" into Adam in the Garden and has remained in the bodies of all men ever since.

Sin remains dwelling in the flesh of every person whether they repent or not. We cannot say we "have" no sin and be In Truth. (1 John 1:8)


First off, the "free gift" referred to in the verse is not salvation, but the power to place hands on someone and have them receive the Holy Spirit.

lol

Romans 5
18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.

You would appear to be largely guessing at this point EM. Men do not have to "activate" God. God is quite active apart from "mens works" as His Word shows.


Second, evidently Simon had not received this free gift or otherwise he wouldn't have tried to buy it. Third, according Peter, Simon's money is going to be destroyed with him if he doesn't change his wicked thoughts.

So Simon was blinded by the sin indwelling him that controlled him. What else is new? Every man that condemns any other man is likewise blinded.

What will "not-every-day uncommon variety" of eternal damnationists make God's Work? You wouldn't be trying to slip an ad hominem into the argument, would you? But in response to your statement, the work is for all men, although not all men accept such work. You make it sound like I believe that I would try to keep such a gift for myself, when, on the contrary, I would gladly share it with all who would partake of it.

See my "God activator" statement above. It is quite irrelvant if you are blinid to the Word and the Work of Jesus Christ and does not "eliminate" the Word or The Work of God in Jesus Christ.

You think you must "cash in" your salvation coupons? I can assure you that God alone controls all the pieces on the chessboard more than we think.

Irrelevant, since there are definitely groups of people (such as those of Sodom and Gomorrah, see Jude 1:7) who are mentioned as being eternally damned.

My observation is quite secure. The flesh can surely die, but as previously stated there is not one single named person in the entire Bible said to be going to the Lake of Fire or even threatened with such a fate, so what you "think" you see does not exist. It is merely a reflection of the hatred that dwells in you and blinds you to The Truth of God and His Work in Jesus Christ for "all men."

A Magic Wand has nothing to do with it... it is a matter of accepting the free gift of salvation.

Your activation of God and His Work is quite irrelevant. No man can set God's Work aside by "failing to activate Him" in their behalf.

Would this be the same Jesus who says, "You, Capernaum, who are exalted to heaven, you will go down to Hades" (Mat. 11:23; World English Bible)?

As previously stated I believe in every damnation text. Just not in the same way you do BECAUSE IT DOES NOT FIT WITH The Word in all ways.

The fault lies not with God, but with those who refuse to accept His free gift.

Men were never "able" to save themselves. They still aren't.

Anyone? It seems clear that this verse is referring only to those who were baptised with Jesus unto His death (Rom. 6:3). Or does the author of Romans have to spell this out in verse 7 as well?

It says quite clearly that sin indwells the flesh and that when anyone dies they are released from sin.

I never said God needed anything, and I would thank you to stop putting words into my mouth.

Hey it was your presentation. That you must "love God" to get "your reward."

Yes, but how does this prove your thesis? Note that among those that will be bowing and confessing are those that are "under the earth", which would seem to include Satan and the demons.

The anti-Christ spirit will do what it was always meant to do. Resist God and His Christ. They are no more than a temporal piece of anti-spiritual "equipment" that God will put away when He is done using them. They are not some "life" being, but ANTI-Life being. Ever heard of such a thing anywhere else in all the world? No. This is a "Word" exclusive presentation.

enjoy!

smaller

[Earthbound Misf]

Romans 2:4
Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of -->God leadeth thee to repentance<--? Leads? Yes. Forces? No. Big difference.

2 Timothy 2:25
In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; Peradventure = maybe; perhaps. In other words, maybe they'll turn to him and maybe they won't. If anything this, this verse supports my position, since it only gives the possibility that men will turn to God, rather than definitely stating that they will.

God Himself grants and draws men to repentance. It is not a work of men. If some do not repent God has Divine Purposes for that man also. See Romans 11:32 for the "reason." Reading the entirity of Romans 11 shows that the "all" in verse 32 does not refer to "all mankind". For example, vs 18-21 speaks of branches that have been broken off due to unbelief and will not be spared. Note that those branches that have been grafted on in their place will also be broken off if they too fall into unbelief; and the re-unification of those that have been broken off to the tree is conditional based on their forgoing their unbelief.

Perhaps closer attention should be paid to the scriptures EM? Perhaps you should answer my question directly instead of avoiding it with rhetoric that adds nothing to your argument? Perhaps the same thing regarding paying closer attention to the scriptures could be said about you?

Paul called the "sin indwelling him" NO LONGER I twice in Romans 7. This clearly shows that the working of "sin in men" is something that is NOT THEM. And about whom is Paul talking in this chapter? All of humanity or him and his "brothers [who] were made dead to the law" (verse 4)? Context clearly indicates the latter.

Why do you not see it this way rather than blindly condemn the "slave of" sins? Because you to are "enslaved" and "blinded" to this scriptural fact, as most are. Again, I condemn no one, I damn no one, I... etc., etc., etc.... How many times do I have to repeat this fact?

There will be "no sins" counted against mankind, but rest assured, the cause of sin in men will pay the price of eternal punishment. Then prove it by scripture without taking the verse or verses out of context.

you falsely condemn mankind regardless of the direct Words of Jesus Christ, that "every sin and blasphemy" shall be forgiven to men. The "cause" however will not "go free." Nonsense; on the contrary, Jesus clearly taught that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven "either in this age or in the one to come" (Mat 12:31; see also Mark 3:29 and Luke 12:10).

Since I'm not God, I can damn no one. If anyone is damned, it is for their refusal to repent of sin, not because of any judgment you believe I've made of them.Again you violate The Word in this matter because you think sin is "eradicated" when repented of. How can I "violate The Word in this matter" when I never said that I "think sin is 'eradicated' when repented of." Show me where in the section you quoted above that I even mention the word "eradication". Thus, you continue your habit of putting words in my mouth.

Sin remains dwelling in the flesh of every person whether they repent or not. We cannot say we "have" no sin and be In Truth. (1 John 1:8) Since I agree, your point is?

Then they [Peter and John] laid their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit. Now when Simon saw that the Spirit was given through the laying on of the apostles' hands, he offered them money and said, "Give me this power too, so that when I lay my hands on someone he will receive the Holy Spirit." But Peter said to him, "May your money perish with you because you thought you could obtain God's free gift with money!...["] (Acts 8:17-20, International Standard Version; emphasisis added).First off, the "free gift" referred to in the verse is not salvation, but the power to place hands on someone and have them receive the Holy Spirit.[emphasis added] Romans 5 [sic]
18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. What verse where we talking about again? Acts 8:20, wasn't it? And to what does the "free gift" in Acts 8:20 refer to if not "the power to place hands on someone and have them receive the Holy Spirit"? So what does the "free gift" in Romans 5:18 have to do with the "free gift" in Acts 8:20? Absolutely nothing. Thank you very much and have a nice day.
Speaking of Romans 5:18, verse 17 makes clear who the "all" that verse 18 is referring to: "All who receive God's abundant grace and are freely put right with him will rule in life through Christ" (or is the writer supposed to keep repeating this to make it clear?)
You would appear to be largely guessing at this point EM.
Is John 3:16 a guess? "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." Who does the verse say should not perish? Everyone? No, only "whosoever believeth in him". And verse 18 goes on to say "He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God" (KJV; emphasis added).

[smaller]

Leads? Yes. Forces? No. Big difference.

What "eternal damnationists of people" present EM is pure force. Either "love and obey" OR burn forever in fire. This is force, NOT LOVE. Get it?

Peradventure = maybe; perhaps. In other words, maybe they'll turn to him and maybe they won't. If anything this, this verse supports my position, since it only gives the possibility that men will turn to God, rather than definitely stating that they will.

The point was repentance is FROM GOD and GOD alone. God grants "repentance." Some He chooses to "harden." I consider the "hardened" to be those who count sins against others and free themselves. This is the greatest form of hardening. You're IT!

Reading the entirity of Romans 11 shows that the "all" in verse 32 does not refer to "all mankind".

And again the point of Romans 11 is that ALL OF ISRAEL shall be saved, even the "enemies" of the Gospel. That position alone sticks a big pin in your damnation balloon. You will also admit that all are bound to "disobedience" since ALL "have sin." But of course you will not measure the ALL to receive MERCY from God. This is to your own loss of belief.

For example, vs 18-21 speaks of branches that have been broken off due to unbelief and will not be spared. Note that those branches that have been grafted on in their place will also be broken off if they too fall into unbelief; and the re-unification of those that have been broken off to the tree is conditional based on their forgoing their unbelief.

Perhaps you could examine this position for a moment before making false assumptions about who is cut off and who is grafted in. IF ALL of Israel SHALL BE SAVED then WHO are the "cut off" ones??? That's right! The "sin indwelling" the people of ISRAEL. In the "same lump" you have a "vessel of HONOR" because The Word says ALL OF ISRAEL are GOD'S CHILDREN. And in these temporal human vessels of FLESH we also have SIN INDWELLING which Paul calls multiple times "NO LONGER I." THE VESSEL OF DESTRUCTION. Two SEPARATE POSITIONS in the SAME LUMP.

Any other way simply makes you a false accuser of people and an "excuser" of yourself. This is of course an "inexcusable practice." Romans 2:1-2

Perhaps you should answer my question directly instead of avoiding it with rhetoric that adds nothing to your argument? Perhaps the same thing regarding paying closer attention to the scriptures could be said about you?

I do not deny that sin indwells me and that evil is present with me. This is clearly revealed by THE LAW. You are "no exception" to this fact either.

And about whom is Paul talking in this chapter? All of humanity or him and his "brothers [who] were made dead to the law" (verse 4)? Context clearly indicates the latter.

Well, it is always convenient to "contextualize" then the obvious statment was that all men were bound over to sin by the acts of one man, sin in Adam. Then when it comes to the "free gift" coming upon the same ALL you LIMIT GOD. So what else is new???

Again, I condemn no one, I damn no one, I... etc., etc., etc.... How many times do I have to repeat this fact?

Oh baloney. You measure sins against people and you condemn them to burn forever in your head if they don't "cotton" to your imaginary doctrines. So yes, YOU DO CONDEMN OTHERS TO BURN IN HELL FOREVER. Trying to deny it is talking out of both sides of your mouth. You say God "does it" not me. Well then where is your "named evidence" for such a position??? There is NONE. So it is only your imagination of what you THINK you see and this is really just a reflection of what is in your own heart. The worst sin and hatred that one person can measure to another, eternal torture in fire. This IS what you are enslaved to and all your "free will" in the world cannot "release you" from these thoughts. You are the slave of eternal damnation.

Then prove it by scripture without taking the verse or verses out of context.

And again your contextualization is merely a convenience for you to re-write the plain language. The Word says what it says. If all have sinned and all have the free gift, there is no limit on the "gift" side if there is no limit on the "sin" side. You cannot "contextualize" both ways to serve your eternal damnation of others.


Nonsense; on the contrary, Jesus clearly taught that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven "either in this age or in the one to come" (Mat 12:31; see also Mark 3:29 and Luke 12:10).

And again The Word says "every sin and blasphemy" will be forgiven of men. That which dwells in (SIN INDWELLING) men is not forgiven, EVER.

How can I "violate The Word in this matter" when I never said that I "think sin is 'eradicated' when repented of." Show me where in the section you quoted above that I even mention the word "eradication". Thus, you continue your habit of putting words in my mouth.

Exactly my point. You are not "free" from sin and you should not eternally condemn others for it. The Word does not allow you to do this because it is a LIE.

What verse where we talking about again? Acts 8:20, wasn't it? And to what does the "free gift" in Acts 8:20 refer to if not "the power to place hands on someone and have them receive the Holy Spirit"?

Uh, no. It is Romans 5:18. One of my favorites.

So what does the "free gift" in Romans 5:18 have to do with the "free gift" in Acts 8:20? Absolutely nothing.

You brought up the "free gift" that is hidden so well that only a few people find it under their christmas tree. Romans 5:18 says that the free gift has come upon all. You say men must "open" the gift for God to be effective. I say that is simply works on your part to justify your being "reconciled" to a fact and others being damned forever because they are BLINDED to this Truth by the God of this world.

Speaking of Romans 5:18, verse 17 makes clear who the "all" that verse 18 is referring to: "All who receive God's abundant grace and are freely put right with him will rule in life through Christ" (or is the writer supposed to keep repeating this to make it clear?)

The all who fell are the same recipients of the all upon whom the free gift came. You cannot "limit" the all on good side of the "equation."

Is John 3:16 a guess? "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." Who does the verse say should not perish? Everyone? No, only "whosoever believeth in him".

And again I do not deny that there is that in every man which IS CONDEMNED. No one will believe unless God allows, all will bow and confess PER THE WORD and none can confess without the Holy Spirit, so the ALL who will bow and confess will have been "enabled" by The Holy Spirit.

The "resistors" in makind, the SIN INDWELLING THEM will not escape their fate either. They will be sent away forever.

And verse 18 goes on to say "He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God" (KJV; emphasis added).

At this point I think you have enough on your plate for a full meal. Most when the hear the "real" Good News having been made a "double son of hell" by the doctrine of demons will become hardened into the hatred that they bear to others.

Love does NO ILL. Love keeps NO RECORD of wrongs.

By doing the OPPOSITE you are in lockstep with the OPPOSERS of both God and mankind. I feel sorry for slaves like this and that is why I write.

enjoy!

smaller

[Earthbound Misf]

What "eternal damnationists of people" present EM is pure force. Either "love and obey" OR burn forever in fire. This is force, NOT LOVE. Get it? No, force is "whether you want to or not, God is going to make you love Him", thus violating the free will of man.

The point was repentance is FROM GOD and GOD alone. God grants "repentance." Some He chooses to "harden." I consider the "hardened" to be those who count sins against others and free themselves. This is the greatest form of hardening. You're IT! So, would you count the sin of "hardening" against me? Would God?

And again the point of Romans 11 is that ALL OF ISRAEL shall be saved, even the "enemies" of the Gospel. That position alone sticks a big pin in your damnation balloon. You will also admit that all are bound to "disobedience" since ALL "have sin." All have sinned? What about Jesus? Does "all" mean "all, without exception"? If you think it does, then how do you square Romans 3:23 with with Hebrews 4:15?

But of course you will not measure the ALL to receive MERCY from God. This is to your own loss of belief. Of course I don't measure mercy from God, since it's not mine to measure. It's God's.

I do not deny that sin indwells me and that evil is present with me. This is clearly revealed by THE LAW. You are "no exception" to this fact either. I never claimed to be an exception either.


You are the slave of eternal damnation. Carefull there... one might get the impression that you're measuring sins against me.

And again your contextualization is merely a convenience for you to re-write the plain language. The Word says what it says. If all have sinned and all have the free gift, there is no limit on the "gift" side if there is no limit on the "sin" side. You cannot "contextualize" both ways to serve your eternal damnation of others. My "contextualization" isn't a mere convenience, but a necessary tool to the proper understanding of scripture. Using your (and notice the emphasis placed on it being yours, not mine) logic, Romans 3:23, which says that "all have sinned and continue to fall short of God's glory", would mean, using reductio ad absurdum, that Jesus has sinned. Clearly, the writer of Romans does not mean this and, therefore, context clearly matters when determing what one means by "all". In fact, there are numerous verses "where it is (http://www.goforgod.com/Universalism-Hell.htm)impossible to give ['all'] an absolute force or meaning (http://www.goforgod.com/Universalism-Hell.htm)", such as Mark 1:5, Luke 3:15, John 3:26, and so forth.

And again The Word says "every sin and blasphemy" will be forgiven of men. The same Word that says, "Everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but the person who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven" (and note that this verse makes it quite clear that it is the "person" who will not be forgiven, not the "sin within him"; Luke 12:10)?

Uh, no. It is Romans 5:18. One of my favorites. And just because Romans 5:18 mentions a "free gift" does that means no other verse can use the term in for something altogether different than what Romans 5:18 uses it for? Your logic, or lack thereof, is simply astounding.

You brought up the "free gift" that is hidden so well that only a few people find it under their christmas tree. No, I brought up the "free gift" mentioned in Acts 8:20, which is how it's translated in International Standard Version.

The all who fell are the same recipients of the all upon whom the free gift came. You cannot "limit" the all on good side of the "equation." Would you limit the all in Romans 3:23?

At this point I think you have enough on your plate for a full meal. Most when the hear the "real" Good News having been made a "double son of hell" by the doctrine of demons will become hardened into the hatred that they bear to others. More rhetoric and appeal to emotion, which is a logical fallacy.

[smaller]

Greetings EM

smaller prior:
What "eternal damnationists of people" present EM is pure force. Either "love and obey" OR burn forever in fire. This is force, NOT LOVE. Get it?

No, force is "whether you want to or not, God is going to make you love Him", thus violating the free will of man.

That is the God that you present EM. "Either Love Me or I'll burn you forever in FIRE." Your typical Agape God of Love eh?

smaller prior:
The point was repentance is FROM GOD and GOD alone. God grants "repentance." Some He chooses to "harden." I consider the "hardened" to be those who count sins against others and free themselves. This is the greatest form of hardening. You're IT!

So, would you count the sin of "hardening" against me? Would God?

I already said multiple times that the voice that speaks "eternal damnation" in fire to his neighbors is the one of "sin indwelling" that man. That "speaker" is the one condemned, so no, to you as a Child of God there is no condemnation. I know that you will be released from your "captor" just as everyone will be when they depart the flesh. Sin indwelling remains judged and condemned. SIN IS OF THE DEVIL.

You just prefer to blame men. Surely an act of blindness, that's all. I already know that measure is just as hollow as the messengers of it. Nothing against you.

smaller prior:
And again the point of Romans 11 is that ALL OF ISRAEL shall be saved, even the "enemies" of the Gospel. That position alone sticks a big pin in your damnation balloon. You will also admit that all are bound to "disobedience" since ALL "have sin."

All have sinned? What about Jesus? Does "all" mean "all, without exception"? If you think it does, then how do you square Romans 3:23 with with Hebrews 4:15?

We just went through this little exercise with Romans 5:18. If the condemnation came to all (which you theoretically acknowledge) then the gift comes to all by the One Man as well. You cannot paint the all with sin without granting the all the gift. That was the point.

As far as harmonizing Romans 3:22-23 and Hebrews 4:15:

Romans 3:
22Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all AND upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:

23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

Clearly both classes above (the "all" and the "all who believe) have obtained the righteousness of God BY the faith of Jesus Christ, NOT YOURS (obviously.)

The structure here is almost identical to the both classes of people that Paul uses in 1 Tim. 4:10, God IS The Saviour of ALL MEN e-s-p-c-i-a-l-l-y those who believe.

As to the reference of Jesus being sinless in Hebrews 4:15, UNQUESTIONABLY. His Body was an Untainted Temple from which came TRUTH UNADULTERATED. It cannot be any other way.

smaller prior on Romans 11:32
But of course you will not measure the ALL to receive MERCY from God. This is to your own loss of belief.

Of course I don't measure mercy from God, since it's not mine to measure. It's God's.

But you flat out deny that this will happen, so no, you squeak out a very minor amount of mercy from God to any, accept to those who adhere to your interpretational positions.

smaller prior
I do not deny that sin indwells me and that evil is present with me. This is clearly revealed by THE LAW. You are "no exception" to this fact either.


I never claimed to be an exception either.

Most "believers" will reluctantly conceed this position as well.

smaller prior
You are the slave of eternal damnation.


Carefull there... one might get the impression that you're measuring sins against me.

The "slave of" does not make YOU the same as the "MASTER OF." I acknowledge this always. I know who does those things. It ain't YOU.

smaller prior:
And again your contextualization is merely a convenience for you to re-write the plain language. The Word says what it says. If all have sinned and all have the free gift, there is no limit on the "gift" side if there is no limit on the "sin" side. You cannot "contextualize" both ways to serve your eternal damnation of others.


My "contextualization" isn't a mere convenience, but a necessary tool to the proper understanding of scripture.

I explained your biased contextualization already. You cannot dually contextualize yourself in and others out in the same LINE.


Using your (and notice the emphasis placed on it being yours, not mine) logic, Romans 3:23, which says that "all have sinned and continue to fall short of God's glory", would mean, using reductio ad absurdum, that Jesus has sinned.

Jesus is not the "all" He is God. There is a marked difference between Creator who has no binding descriptive and the "created" who have been placed in bondage, so your attempt at falsely painting "my position" will not work either.

Clearly, the writer of Romans does not mean this and, therefore, context clearly matters when determing what one means by "all". In fact, there are numerous verses "where it is impossible to give ['all'] an absolute force or meaning", such as Mark 1:5, Luke 3:15, John 3:26, and so forth.

See previous notes above.

smaller prior:
And again The Word says "every sin and blasphemy" will be forgiven of men.


The same Word that says, "Everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but the person who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven" (and note that this verse makes it quite clear that it is the "person" who will not be forgiven, not the "sin within him"; Luke 12:10)?

And as stated multiple times there are two positions IN MEN that The Word speaks to. A Child of God and a "MAN OF SIN" who usurps the temple(s,) the BODIES of mankind. Jesus SHOWED THEM OPENLY and TRUIMPHED OVER THEM, but I guess you missed that part?

smaller prior:
Uh, no. It is Romans 5:18. One of my favorites.


And just because Romans 5:18 mentions a "free gift" does that means no other verse can use the term in for something altogether different than what Romans 5:18 uses it for? Your logic, or lack thereof, is simply astounding.

And again your will contextualize "all falling short" but will not allow the "free" gift to be "effective" to the same all. You lump the all on one side and LIMIT the all on the other side. This is not right, but it is what you MUST do to continue to BLAME OTHERS for sin and ETERNALLY CONDEMN THEM. Really it's just what is in your heart. A mere reflection of what is in you.

smaller prior:
You brought up the "free gift" that is hidden so well that only a few people find it under their christmas tree.


No, I brought up the "free gift" mentioned in Acts 8:20, which is how it's translated in International Standard Version.

In any translation your free gift appears to be rather worthless. Equates to placing a gift in the Mall of America and having a crippled, blinded invalid try to find it in the dark. Some gift YOU present. I believe Jesus is MUCH BETTER GIFT than what "you bring."

The Angels proclaimed Peace on earth GOOD WILL toward men. If what you say is true Jesus is the worst thing that could have ever happened on earth an it is FAR from Good Will.


Would you limit the all in Romans 3:23?

Same deal. There are the all AND the all who believe in whom there is NO DIFFERENCE. The Gift is effective for ALL.


More rhetoric and appeal to emotion, which is a logical fallacy.

When the Word says Love does NO ILL and keeps NO RECORD of wrongs it is not an appeal to logical fallacy. It's just a scriptural FACT.

enjoy!

smaller

[Bill the Cat]

smaller, If you have time, you could read over my debate with a Universalist type named Mickiel here: http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=276567

Enjoy!

:btc:

[smaller]

smaller, If you have time, you could read over my debate with a Universalist type named Mickiel here: http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=276567

Enjoy!

:btc:

What Mickiel might believe is anyones guess Bill. Universalists are no different than anyone else. We all see in the dark and in part.

Footnote:

After reading Mickiel's preamble I'd predict any easy win for you Bill. Mickiel is a newcomer to the Good News and carries many of his "old theories" with him to the table.

There is a very strong scriptural case and defense for the position of Universalism but it may not show up in Mickiel's hands. He prefers his own guesswork. I could elaborate but it's really a waste of time IMO. Been there done that with him a dozen times already and I'm on his side. Go figure.

[Earthbound Misf]

That is the God that you present EM. "Either Love Me or I'll burn you forever in FIRE." Your typical Agape God of Love eh? I do? I don't remember doing so. Or is it that just because you can't imagine me presenting God in any other way, you feel that it's safe to assume that has to be the way I would do it?
Now, as I've mentioned, I lean towards regarding the "fire" as figurative. Otherwise, how could hell be described as a place of darkness if there are literal flames? (cf. Lee Strobel's interview with J. P. Moreland in The Case for Faith, p. 177). Also, I think one can question whether the punishment comes from God, or whether it comes from one's own conscience and/or the realization of what one could have gained if not for one's own willful rejection of God.
Second, wording the threat this way makes it sound as if God is merely being arbitrary and egoistic in His demands. I think a better way to put it would be: "I want you to love me of your own free will, but if you decide that you want to be eternally seperated from My infinite goodness, then I will respect your choice, although I will warn you beforehand that the logical consequences for such a decision is everlasting torment." Thus, God is no less loving than any good father who warns his children not to play in the street because they might get hurt.

You just prefer to blame men. And you seem to think that if you repeat a lie often enough, that will make it true. I would prefer that all men be saved, but it just ain't happening- not because I want it that way, but because there is a logical consequence for rejecting God all of one's life, and that is that one eventually gets what one asks for. If you can't accept that I believe this, perhaps that reveals more of what's in your heart than what's in mine (your attempts at amatuer psychoanylisis cut both ways).

(prior)I do not deny that sin indwells me and that evil is present with me. This is clearly revealed by THE LAW. You are "no exception" to this fact either. I never claimed to be an exception either. Most "believers" will reluctantly conceed this position as well. More amateur psychoanalysis. How do you know how I, or anyone else, will "conceed this postition"? Because smaller does not believe that we can do it any other way than "reluctantly", therefore that must be true?

At this point I think you have enough on your plate for a full meal. Most when the hear the "real" Good News having been made a "double son of hell" by the doctrine of demons will become hardened into the hatred that they bear to others. More rhetoric and appeal to emotion, which is a logical fallacy.When the Word says Love does NO ILL and keeps NO RECORD of wrongs it is not an appeal to logical fallacy. It's just a scriptural FACT. When I said "More rhetoric and appeal to emotion, which is a logical fallacy", what was I referring to?

In regards to Romans 5:18:
If the condemnation came to all (which you theoretically acknowledge) then the gift comes to all by the One Man as well. You cannot paint the all with sin without granting the all the gift. The question here is what does Paul mean by "all men"? If he means it to be "every individual without exception", then his switching from "all men" in verse 18 to "many" in the next ("For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous", KJV) should leave one wondering if he is confused, if not outright contradictory, and asking, "Which is it- all or many?". Since the writers of the NT commonly use "all" in a non-universal way, perhaps a better explanation would be that he means "some of all kinds", that is, "he is making a reference to both Jews and Gentiles being saved[, rather than] just the Jews, God's first chosen people (http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/8449/univ.html)". Likewise, John 4:42 refers to Jesus as the "the Savior of the world"; that is, not just the savior of the Jews, but to the Gentiles as well (http://biblicalresearch.gc.adventist.org/documents/Justification1Tm4,10.htm).

In regards to 1 Tim. 4:10:
The structure here is almost identical to the both classes of people that Paul uses in 1 Tim. 4:10, God IS The Saviour of ALL MEN e-s-p-c-i-a-l-l-y those who believe. This latter webpage (http://biblicalresearch.gc.adventist.org/documents/Justification1Tm4,10.htm) goes on to note that the "participle [which is translated "e-s-p-e-c-i-a-l-l-y" here] could be rendered into English as 'that is, in other words' or by similar expressions'" and alternately translates the verse as "Because we have our hope set on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, that is, of those who believe."

In regards to Romans 3:22-23:
What two "classes of people" are you seeing in these verses? "Unto all that believe" and "upon all them that believe" are one and the same group. While there are two groups between which he says "there is no difference", whom he is talking about is clearly spelled out in Romans 10:12.

(prior) And again the point of Romans 11 is that ALL OF ISRAEL shall be saved, even the "enemies" of the Gospel. That position alone sticks a big pin in your damnation balloon. Time to patch up the balloon then. It should be evident by reading Romans 9:6b ("For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel....") that Paul uses at least two different meanings for "Israel". Therefore, one has to consider the possibility that Paul is not talking about the physical descendants of Israel, but something else entirely. Romans 2:28-29 ("For a person is not a Jew because of his appearance, nor is circumcision something external and physical. No, a person is a Jew inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by a written law. That person's praise will come from God, not from people"; cf. Galatians 3:29 "And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's descendants and heirs according to the promise") would seem to indicate that this "something else" is the spiritual heirs of Israel (source (http://216.239.57.104/search?q=cache:aiMgJAzw2o0J:www.wls.wels.net/library/Essays/Authors/M/MuetzelRomans/MuetzelRomans.pdf+Muetzel+%22scripture+is+allowed+to+interpret%22&hl=en) used; .PDF format (http://www.wls.wels.net/library/Essays/Authors/M/MuetzelRomans/MuetzelRomans.pdf%20)), who are the "natural branches" that were not "broken off" as well as the "wild branches" that were "grafted on" in place of the "natural branches" that were "broken off" (Romans 11:17ff.). Furthermore, Paul claims that it his intent that, by "glorify[ing] his ministry" among the Gentiles, he might "provoke... those who are [his] flesh [the physical descendants of Israel, perhaps?] and thereby "may save some of them". I think the ball is in your court- or should I say, the hole is in your balloon?- now, since your alleged anti-eternal-damnationist, Paul, indicates that some people might not be saved.

In regards to:
Paul called the "sin indwelling him" NO LONGER I twice in Romans 7. This clearly shows that the working of "sin in men" is something that is NOT THEM. First, you are generalizing from a specific case; what is true for Paul is not necessarily true for everyone. In other words, just because the "sin indwelling him" is no longer him, that does not mean that sin indwelling in men is something that is not them. On the contrary, he specifically addresses his "brothers, [who] also were made dead to the law through the body of Christ" (Romans 7:4; Young's Literal Translation), rather than people universally. Second, Paul attributes only those sins which he commits "now" to the "sin that dwells within [him]". If at time "y", statement "x" is no longer true, then it logically follows that before time "y", statement "x" was true. Thus, if it is no longer the "I" that commits sin "now", then it was the "I" that committed them before "now".

[smaller]

Now, as I've mentioned, I lean towards regarding the "fire" as figurative.

I'm sure you're an expert on the imaginations of eternal torture of people in fire. You let such a thing just "casually" browse your mind or have you ever stopped to really "consider" the implications of placing this measure upon others for your solely subjective purposes??? Hello.


Otherwise, how could hell be described as a place of darkness if there are literal flames? (cf. Lee Strobel's interview with J. P. Moreland in The Case for Faith, p. 177). Also, I think one can question whether the punishment comes from God, or whether it comes from one's own conscience and/or the realization of what one could have gained if not for one's own willful rejection of God.

As to the nature of the "eternal flames" I would perhaps call the infamous Lake a form of anti-heaven for the spirits (which are really no spirits at all) of the anti-Christ. To contemplate such a thing is difficult as the scripture references to it are sparse.

As to your speculations that this fate is for people, well, I think you have an abundance of scriptural difficulties in seeing this way. I could keep heaping the problems on you, but you seem reluctant to deal with what's already on the table. Most eternal damnationists in the end simply prefer to justify themselves and eternally condemn others. They progress into a further away state from Love. Seared consciouses I believe are the words used.

Second, wording the threat this way makes it sound as if God is merely being arbitrary and egoistic in His demands. I think a better way to put it would be: "I want you to love me of your own free will, but if you decide that you want to be eternally seperated from My infinite goodness, then I will respect your choice, although I will warn you beforehand that the logical consequences for such a decision is everlasting torment." Thus, God is no less loving than any good father who warns his children not to play in the street because they might get hurt.

Uh, if you say so. Of course such a presentation is pure nonsense in the light of Rev. 14:10 wherein said torture is done in the presence of The Lamb forever (and presumably your presence if you are with The Lamb) so the "separation" theory and the God abandoning His Own children theory are less than slim. Not even good guesswork IMO.

And you seem to think that if you repeat a lie often enough, that will make it true.

What lie might that be? That God is Love and not an eternal torturer of people? I would liken your God more to a very demented Hitler since this was the topic to start with.

I would prefer that all men be saved,

Yeah. I think this was covered previously. You are more loving than your own God. Can I pick you instead? What a bunch of baloney. Can I do a NEWSFLASH? Headline-EM is more loving than God! Sorry but the irony of some of you eternal damnationists is so predictable. I've had this conversation about ten thousand times and you are all the same. To hell with others, I'M IN and that's all that matters. Such Love. I'm sure God will be impressed with your output.

but it just ain't happening- not because I want it that way, but because there is a logical consequence for rejecting God all of one's life, and that is that one eventually gets what one asks for.

You call being blinded by sin and captured by the devil and being unable to save ones self a "logical consequece?" Why don't you get a clue and figure out how all these "church systems" and "schools" pay their bills??? Hello. It's just a convenient "control measure" for your mind and dollars. I don't like to be MANipulated by anything but THE TRUTH. I believe THE TRUTH is a GOOD AND BENEVOLENT BEING who is quite beyond my ability to LIMIT LOVE to others.

If you can't accept that I believe this, perhaps that reveals more of what's in your heart than what's in mine (your attempts at amatuer psychoanylisis cut both ways).

Look, you're the person who bit off on the story, not me. I already pointed out to you that your position does not have one named example in the entire Bible. That alone should enough for anyone to question the position a little further eh? lol

More amateur psychoanalysis.

Actually it's called a bit of "shock therapy." Hell gets a firm hold of peoples hearts but TOUGH LOVE can sometimes bring them back to a sound mind and a firmer scriptural grip. You know. Make them actually lovers of their neighbors and enemies rather than eternal condemners of them. But hey! It's God's job anyway. I just get to ride along and have some fun ridiculing the darkness that controls people.

How do you know how I, or anyone else, will "conceed this postition"? Because smaller does not believe that we can do it any other way than "reluctantly", therefore that must be true?

I've jousted scriptural measures with the best of 'em. Been around the track for awhile. It pleases me also to see one sinner repent...;)


When I said "More rhetoric and appeal to emotion, which is a logical fallacy", what was I referring to?

When you try to limit Love to logic you're in deep. Logic serves Love, not vice versa but of course this will bring on an entirely new topic.

In regards to Romans 5:18:
The question here is what does Paul mean by "all men"? If he means it to be "every individual without exception", then his switching from "all men" in verse 18 to "many" in the next ("For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous", KJV) should leave one wondering if he is confused, if not outright contradictory, and asking, "Which is it- all or many?".

Both terms are used. One is conveniently placed there in order for you to stumble headlong into the "many" category to reflect what is in your own heart, remember? The Word is The Revealer of the "thoughts and intents" of the heart. I would say He did a good number on showing what's in yours eh?

Since the writers of the NT commonly use "all" in a non-universal way, perhaps a better explanation would be that he means "some of all kinds", that is, "he is making a reference to both Jews and Gentiles being saved[, rather than] just the Jews, God's first chosen people (http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/8449/univ.html)". Likewise, John 4:42 refers to Jesus as the "the Savior of the world"; that is, not just the savior of the Jews, but to the Gentiles as well (http://biblicalresearch.gc.adventist.org/documents/Justification1Tm4,10.htm).

Look, trying to limit all to some or many is a waste of time. You have to jump through so many hoops to get there it's absurd. Not interested in that kind of "system" theology 'cause it amounts to nothing more than an educated lie. It's a field better left for politicians.


In regards to 1 Tim. 4:10:This latter webpage (http://biblicalresearch.gc.adventist.org/documents/Justification1Tm4,10.htm) goes on to note that the "participle [which is translated "e-s-p-e-c-i-a-l-l-y" here] could be rendered into English as 'that is, in other words' or by similar expressions'" and alternately translates the verse as "Because we have our hope set on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, that is, of those who believe."

When did you take up re-writing the Bible? Oh, that's write! You have to to get where you are. Can you spell bunky?

In regards to Romans 3:22-23:
What two "classes of people" are you seeing in these verses? "Unto all that believe" and "upon all them that believe" are one and the same group. While there are two groups between which he says "there is no difference", whom he is talking about is clearly spelled out in Romans 10:12.

You outright eradicate what the faith of Christ conveys so easily? Nice try anyway. Jesus Himself represented that He IS The Saviour of The World. All the revisionist history in the world will not limit what God Himself has "foreordained." It's a "done deal." I've knocked on your door and provided you a legitimate way to see the eternal damnation texts in a BETTER LIGHT, but of course I am also cognizant of "your personal controllers."

Time to patch up the balloon then. It should be evident by reading Romans 9:6b ("For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel....") that Paul uses at least two different meanings for "Israel".

If you can't see the devils in the Jews that Jesus cast out you cannot see what OF ISRAEL is NOT ISRAEL. Hello. Earth to Earthbound.

Therefore, one has to consider the possibility that Paul is not talking about the physical descendants of Israel, but something else entirely. Romans 2:28-29 ("For a person is not a Jew because of his appearance, nor is circumcision something external and physical. No, a person is a Jew inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by a written law.

I understand that. What do you think you are circumsized FROM? That's right. The "sin indwelling" the "flesh." The Word makes a CLEAN CUT in this matter.

That person's praise will come from God, not from people"; cf. Galatians 3:29 "And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's descendants and heirs according to the promise") would seem to indicate that this "something else" is the spiritual heirs of Israel (source (http://216.239.57.104/search?q=cache:aiMgJAzw2o0J:www.wls.wels.net/library/Essays/Authors/M/MuetzelRomans/MuetzelRomans.pdf+Muetzel+%22scripture+is+allowed+to+interpret%22&hl=en) used; .PDF format (http://www.wls.wels.net/library/Essays/Authors/M/MuetzelRomans/MuetzelRomans.pdf%20)), who are the "natural branches" that were not "broken off" as well as the "wild branches" that were "grafted on" in place of the "natural branches" that were "broken off" (Romans 11:17ff.).

Paul was very exacting in describing that even Pharoah served God's Purposes. Pharoah was no different than you or I. In his "same lump" he has a man of sin and a Child of God. Only one will be destroyed. Only one will be "taken."

Furthermore, Paul claims that it his intent that, by "glorify[ing] his ministry" among the Gentiles, he might "provoke... those who are [his] flesh [the physical descendants of Israel, perhaps?] and thereby "may save some of them". I think the ball is in your court- or should I say, the hole is in your balloon?- now, since your alleged anti-eternal-damnationist, Paul, indicates that some people might not be saved.

Paul was no different than Jesus. He wants to see the "captives" set free (not burn them forever.) Again, hello.

I'll catch you later. My wife says it's time to go to the Play.

enjoy!

smaller

[Earthbound Misf]

I'm sure you're an expert on the imaginations of eternal torture of people in fire. ad hominem
You let such a thing just "casually" browse your mind or have you ever stopped to really "consider" the implications of placing this measure upon others for your solely subjective purposes??? begs the question: assumes that my viewpoint is subjective.
As to the nature of the "eternal flames" I would perhaps call the infamous Lake a form of anti-heaven for the spirits (which are really no spirits at all) of the anti-Christ. To contemplate such a thing is difficult as the scripture references to it are sparse. Ah, guesswork done by smaller is acceptable, whereas guesswork done by me is not? Gotta love that consistency.
As to your speculations that this fate is for people, well, I think you have an abundance of scriptural difficulties in seeing this way. I could keep heaping the problems on you, but you seem reluctant to deal with what's already on the table. I have dealt with as many as I could at one time, and none too reluctantly. Again, you ability to psychoanalyze me has been proven false.
Most eternal damnationists in the end simply prefer to justify themselves and eternally condemn others. It is God that justifies or condemns.
Uh, if you say so. Of course such a presentation is pure nonsense in the light of Rev. 14:10 wherein said torture is done in the presence of The Lamb forever.... Does "done in the presence of The Lamb" = "done by The Lamb"?
What lie might that be? Well, what sentence of yours did I quote just before I said this? Maybe that might give you a clue? But just to refresh your memory:
"You just prefer to blame men."
"You... want to... condemn them to eternal fire."
"It is your own personal "desire" to see such things."
These words ring any bells for you?
That God is Love and not an eternal torturer of people? I would liken your God more to a very demented Hitler since this was the topic to start with. Speaking of red herrings, here's a perfect example.
Yeah. I think this was covered previously. You are more loving than your own God. Yep, it was covered previously. And I showed you you were wrong in thinking that I believed I was more loving than God. Thanks for ignore it, though.
To hell with others, I'M IN and that's all that matters. Such Love. I'm sure God will be impressed with your output. I see you're up to your old psychoanalysis tricks. When I have I ever said that the only thing that matters is that I'm in? Come on, show me the sentence. Oh, wait, you can't because I never said anything like that. (But if you think I believe something like that, that seems to be proof enough for you.)
You call being blinded by sin and captured by the devil and being unable to save ones self a "logical consequece?" I remember saying something like "Eternal seperation from God is the logical consequence of willfully rejecting God. If that's what someone wants, that's what God gives them."
Why don't you get a clue and figure out how all these "church systems" and "schools" pay their bills??? Hello. It's just a convenient "control measure" for your mind and dollars. "A Genetic Fallacy occurs when the origin a belief or idea is presented as grounds to accept or reject the idea." (http://www.tektonics.org/guest/fallacies.html) Furthermore, don't universalists have "church systems" (a loaded term, by the way) and "schools" that have to pay their bills? So, by your criteria, any idea they present must be false as well. They too must be "control measures" for people's minds and dollars.
I don't like to be MANipulated by anything but THE TRUTH. I believe THE TRUTH is a GOOD AND BENEVOLENT BEING who is quite beyond my ability to LIMIT LOVE to others. Truth doesn't manipulate. But the whole passage is pretty much just purple prose.
I already pointed out to you that your position does not have one named example in the entire Bible. Argument from silence. But if that's how you want to play the game, then you shouldn't have any problem with me pointing out that by "look through the Bible in its entirety reveals that there is not one verse that shows: (http://www.tektonics.org/guest/fallacies.html)



The sins of the wicked being forgiven in the after life.
The wicked repenting in the after life.
The wicked accepting Jesus Christ in the after life.
The wicked avoiding judgment in the after life.
The wicked having sin "conditioned" out of them in the after life.
The wicked getting out of the lake of fire.
The wicked getting their names written back into the book of life.
Nor can we find anywhere that God repents of His judgment on the wicked in the afterlife or that His judgment is anything short of final and fixed for all eternity."


Actually it's called a bit of "shock therapy." The only thing that I find shocking about all of this is that you seem to think that you have some inside track to my thoughts, when I've shown that you've been far off the track every time you have tried to do so.
I've jousted scriptural measures with the best of 'em.
Ah, so you must be used to losing arguments? :raspberry:
It pleases me also to see one sinner repent...;) Who doesn't, besides perhaps Satan and his ilk?
When you try to limit Love to logic you're in deep. Logic serves Love, not vice versa but of course this will bring on an entirely new topic. Whenever you bring up "an entirely new topic" unrelated to the topic under discussion, it's called a "red herring". You seem quite adept at doing so.

Both terms are used. One is conveniently placed there in order for you to stumble headlong into the "many" category to reflect what is in your own heart, remember? Circular reasoning. You assume that Paul's purpose is to reveal what's in my heart (or at least, the hearts of people like me), then you assume that what's in my heart is revealed by this verse.
Look, trying to limit all to some or many is a waste of time. Why? Because it might poke a few holes in your theory? Because you say so? I'm still waiting for you to provide one good reason why I cannot. On the contrary, I can, and do, limit the "all "because there are numerous passages in the Bible where the all does not have an "unlimited scope" (http://www.reformed.org/eschaton/pink_eternal_punishment.html). If you want to claim I can't, then prove me wrong.
When did you take up re-writing the Bible? I didn't re-write the Bible- I gave you an alternate, but still valid (since it's based "on the usage of this term [i.e., the Greek word [i]málista] in Greek papyrus letters"), translation of the passage. Since the study of biblical Greek continues to this day, one cannot use the KJV as the final authority on the matter.
You outright eradicate what the faith of Christ conveys so easily? Nope, I eradicate a misunderstanding of scripture, nothing less, nothing more.
If you can't see the devils in the Jews that Jesus cast out you cannot see what OF ISRAEL is NOT ISRAEL. Hello. Earth to Earthbound. Hello, Earth to Smaller. "They" is a pronoun, and pronouns refer to antecedents. Therefore, in order for "they" to be referring to "devils", Paul has to make some mention of them beforehand- yet this subject is conspicuously absent from the epistle. He does, however, say something about a person being a "Jew inwardly", rather than a Jew "by appearance" in Romans 2:28-29.
I understand that. What do you think you are circumsized FROM? That's right. The "sin indwelling" the "flesh." The Word makes a CLEAN CUT in this matter. Yeah, and your point is? We aren't discussing what one is circumsized from, but whether all are "circumsized".
Paul was very exacting in describing that even Pharoah served God's Purposes. Again, your point is? Just because he serves God's Purposes doesn't mean he did so willingly or that God will save him.
Paul was no different than Jesus. He wants to see the "captives" set free (not burn them forever.) Neither do I. But that still doesn't answer the question why he says only some of them might be saved, rather than definitely stating all of them will be saved.


Hope you enjoyed your play.

[smaller]

ad hominem

Uh, I'm still waiting for a single named example of your position...ho hum...


begs the question: assumes that my viewpoint is subjective.

When you find a viewpoint that is not subject, let me know. Reflections of the heart are "all" individually subjective. Some have better "subjective light" than others.


Ah, guesswork done by smaller is acceptable, whereas guesswork done by me is not? Gotta love that consistency.

Your field of damnation is strewed behind you waiting for you to pick up the pieces and attempt putting Burning the neighbor Humpty back together.

I have dealt with as many as I could at one time, and none too reluctantly. Again, you ability to psychoanalyze me has been proven false.

Subjective non-existent reconstruction.

You are still standing on the first barrage from Romans 2:1 empty handed.


Go figure.

It is God that justifies or condemns.

I fully accept both positions. Next.

Does "done in the presence of The Lamb" = "done by The Lamb"?

Your "guesswork" that people torture themselves forever is pure fantasy without scriptural merit. Next.


Well, what sentence of yours did I quote just before I said this? Maybe that might give you a clue? But just to refresh your memory:

Uh, I believe that was just prior to the half dozen that went by you beforehand.


"You just prefer to blame men."
"You... want to... condemn them to eternal fire."
"It is your own personal "desire" to see such things."
These words ring any bells for you?
Speaking of red herrings, here's a perfect example.

It is always interesting to see people deny their own positions about eternal torture of other people and defend their position of seeing them burn simultaneously. Happens all the time. Not ME, but GOD. Yeah, sure, right. Still waiting for a SINGLE NAMED HUMAN EXAMPLE.

Yep, it was covered previously. And I showed you you were wrong in thinking that I believed I was more loving than God.

Well, let's take your logic for a little spin around the block. YOU don't desire to see ANYONE tortured forever, but of course God, (who is AGAPE PERFECT LOVE) is FORCED to do same. Hmmmm??? Looks like you are A LOT better than your own God to me EM. Sorry. This type of "logic" on your part is patent absurdity.

I see you're up to your old psychoanalysis tricks. When I have I ever said that the only thing that matters is that I'm in?

Obviously the "fact" that you so dearly adhere to which happens to be non-existent scripturally doesn't bother you a whit so there ya go. Torture 'em all except ME Lord. I "know" it's "Your Divine Will" inspite of the evidence to the contrary. You know, the evidence that says You Are Love.

Come on, show me the sentence. Oh, wait, you can't because I never said anything like that. (But if you think I believe something like that, that seems to be proof enough for you.)

You should know by now that I very much enjoy stirring the eternal damnation that is in others. Nothing against you, just that which is in you.

What I really enjoy is hearing people hiss or seeing their eyes hood up like snakes in defense of seeing others torture in fire forever. Happens all the time.


I remember saying something like "Eternal seperation from God is the logical consequence of willfully rejecting God. If that's what someone wants, that's what God gives them."

Oh yes. God is INCAPABLE of loving someone who does not love them right? Like these "others" are going to wait out PERFECT LOVE forever and TORTURE THEMSELVES IN THE FIRE GOD PREPARED for them. God spare me this drivel of false justification for eternal torture of people. Perpetually blaming OTHERS for what is also IN YOU is nothing new EM.


"A Genetic Fallacy occurs when the origin a belief or idea is presented as grounds to accept or reject the idea." (http://www.tektonics.org/guest/fallacies.html) Furthermore, don't universalists have "church systems" (a loaded term, by the way) and "schools" that have to pay their bills?

I would have to say the "threat" factor is somewhat "less" and the call to "love" is somewhat more. doi! Perhaps we could call it "voluntary tax" compared to "pay or go to jail forever tax." Does that make it clearer for you?

So, by your criteria, any idea they present must be false as well. They too must be "control measures" for people's minds and dollars.

Most people I've met who actually believe God IS Love are quite content apart from the "monetary structures" of "love" (as if there is such a thing.)

Truth doesn't manipulate. But the whole passage is pretty much just purple prose.

Truth doesn't manipulate? Puhleese. Are you saying "eternal torture in fire" of people is not manipulation??? Oh, that's right! They "burn themselves" forever. Of course a single reference to such a thing would be prudent eh? Maybe even a "name" to go with the "example." Gosh, if we found two examples we might even form a "doctrine" eh?

Argument from silence. But if that's how you want to play the game, then you shouldn't have any problem with me pointing out that by "look through the Bible in its entirety reveals that there is not one verse that shows: (http://www.tektonics.org/guest/fallacies.html)



The sins of the wicked being forgiven in the after life.

Well there is that pesky little scripture that says sins are not counted against mankind (among many others of the same) and that pesky little scripture that says ALL OF ISRAEL shall be saved, even the "enemies" of the Gospel, and of course the every knee and, and, and. You have been spared more examples for lack of dealing with the ones already on the table of "sharing." Just one or two God IS Love examples are enough to lock in any man into subjection and harden them into what is "really" controlling them.


The wicked repenting in the after life.

Uh, see the "rich man." Uh, see every knee bowing and every tongue confessing. Uh, see God all in all etc etc.

The wicked accepting Jesus Christ in the after life.

Are you going to make another case that every knee and tongue means a few also??? lol

The wicked avoiding judgment in the after life.

I've already conceeded the complete validity of every damnation text. Just not in the same way you insist on because you see there are those pesky little scriptures that say if YOU do not forgive YOU are not forgiven, and you MIGHT taste a little of your own medicine before you even depart from here.

The wicked having sin "conditioned" out of them in the after life.

Now that is a low blow. The "blood" of Jesus Christ ONE TIME perfected forever, EVEN WHILE WE ARE BEING PERFECTED and of course Romans 6:7 says when ANYONE dies they are "released from SIN" remember??? I am not a "temporarily burn" the people believer either. Some Universalists are.

The wicked getting out of the lake of fire.

Already conceeded the complete validity of every damnation scripture. Just not as you see it. By the way IF you wanted to "get them out" it would perhaps be prudent to "get them in" eh???

The wicked getting their names written back into the book of life.

Again a single named human example would really help your cause. I doubt Lucifer is really a good named "human" example though many big time denom's have bit the dust on that one.

Nor can we find anywhere that God repents of His judgment on the wicked in the afterlife or that His judgment is anything short of final and fixed for all eternity."


I don't want to accuse you of being a little slow, but I do believe in every eternal damnation scripture. Just not for "people."

The only thing that I find shocking about all of this is that you seem to think that you have some inside track to my thoughts, when I've shown that you've been far off the track every time you have tried to do so.

Well there is certainly no mystery to the fact that you hold sins against other people, FORGIVE YOURSELF for the SAME THINGS, and condemn other people unto eternal damnation even though you yourself have sin indwelling AND you consider their "fate" to be some form of eternal torture and you present that God's Eternal Love and Mercy to be of NO EFFECT. Is this supposed to escape my notice somehow??? lol.

Sooo predictable you people are. Always trying to deny what you "really" do and defend it at the same time. That's part of why I love to post. Just to see you dance around on your own fire.

Ah, so you must be used to losing arguments? :raspberry:

Premature eelation of victory on your part.

Who doesn't, besides perhaps Satan and his ilk?

Bravo. You get one point.

Whenever you bring up "an entirely new topic" unrelated to the topic under discussion, it's called a "red herring". You seem quite adept at doing so.

You are calling God who has no "limits" or "limits by definitions" a red herring? Oh well, what do I know?


Circular reasoning. You assume that Paul's purpose is to reveal what's in my heart (or at least, the hearts of people like me), then you assume that what's in my heart is revealed by this verse.

Uh, what's in your heart is the eternal damnation of your friends, neighbors, and enemies. You can run but you can't hide. I don't even need scriptures to see that much.

Why? Because it might poke a few holes in your theory? Because you say so? I'm still waiting for you to provide one good reason why I cannot. On the contrary, I can, and do, limit the "all "because there are numerous passages in the Bible where the all does not have an "unlimited scope" (http://www.reformed.org/eschaton/pink_eternal_punishment.html).

Uh, did I say all the all's were all all's? You cannot eliminate or alter the "all's" in the same sentence. That is a blatant violation, but of course you eternal damnation dudes must do this continually to uphold what is in "your hearts."

If you want to claim I can't, then prove me wrong.

You miss the point entirely. You CAN read the scriptures exactly like YOU THINK. That is the "fun" part eh? In the end these various readings will remain "reflections" of the "reader." Hello. What's in YOUR wallet?


I didn't re-write the Bible- I gave you an alternate, but still valid (since it's based "on the usage of this term [i.e., the Greek word [i]málista] in Greek papyrus letters"), translation of the passage. Since the study of biblical Greek continues to this day, one cannot use the KJV as the final authority on the matter.

Convenient switching. I do it all the time, but of course some "translations" are more slanted to eternal damnation and some more to Love. What can I say? Could it be the "translators?" Hmmm? Maybe the Jehovah Witness translators could answer that better than I?

Nope, I eradicate a misunderstanding of scripture, nothing less, nothing more.

Romans 3:22 is abundantly clear. The "righteousness" of God is conveyed to all AND unto all who believe by the faith of Jesus Christ for there is NO DIFFERENCE (until YOU get ahold of the scripture of course. go figure)

Hello, Earth to Smaller. "They" is a pronoun, and pronouns refer to antecedents. Therefore, in order for "they" to be referring to "devils", Paul has to make some mention of them beforehand-

You are kidding on this one right?

yet this subject is conspicuously absent from the epistle. He does, however, say something about a person being a "Jew inwardly", rather than a Jew "by appearance" in Romans 2:28-29.

Well, lets see. All of Isreal are God's Children. Who with them is NOT? Could it be the "devils" in Israel that Jesus spoke to and cast out continually during His Ministry? Hmmm??? Some people just insist on blaming God's Children for the work of the devil.

Yeah, and your point is? We aren't discussing what one is circumsized from, but whether all are "circumsized".

Jesus condemned "sin" in sinful flesh. Got any?

Again, your point is? Just because he serves God's Purposes doesn't mean he did so willingly or that God will save him.

If you cannot see the "all" who receive mercy in Romans 11:32 what can I say? You want the "all" to be bound with "disobedience" but not the same "all" who will receive God's Mercy eh? t