GYM DEBATE COMMENTARY: Universalism (Cheetah vs. smaller)

[Amazing Rando]

A Gym debate thread is opened to debate the following issue:

Not all people will enter Heaven

Cheetah will be defending the affirmative and smaller will be defending the negative. This debate will begin as soon as Cheetah makes his first post. The debate will last 5 rounds.

This debate is taking place here (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?p=1178209#post1178209), and this thread is opened for the commentary on the debate.

[Sparko]

This should be interesting, at least until Smaller starts trying to redefine words like "men" to mean "devil" and so on.

[Sparko]

Yep.

Smaller did not disapoint. He totally ignored Cheetah's opening statement, never supported his strange view that devilkind lives in all of us, he routinely changed the meaning of words in scripture to mean something completely different just because it suits his doctrine, and so on.

Need we say who won this debate? Nice work Cheetah.

:clap:

[smaller]

Yep.

Smaller did not disapoint. He totally ignored Cheetah's opening statement,

Only if you can't read. Specifics are the mother of true dialog. Critique without specifics only makes one a false accuser.


never supported his strange view that devilkind lives in all of us,

heh heh heh. I had to laugh when Cheetah confessed that the devil was in him... That was quite entertaining and true as well.


he routinely changed the meaning of words in scripture to mean something completely different just because it suits his doctrine, and so on.

Prove it. Gendering terms are used throughout the text for God, Holy Angels and Devils. You didn't like to hear this the last time we discussed this either but it's an undeniable fact.


Need we say who won this debate? Nice work Cheetah.

:clap:

I never expect people to change their doctrinal spots. Cheetah is no exception.

enjoy!

smaller

[Cheetah]

Yep.

Smaller did not disapoint. He totally ignored Cheetah's opening statement, never supported his strange view that devilkind lives in all of us, he routinely changed the meaning of words in scripture to mean something completely different just because it suits his doctrine, and so on.

Need we say who won this debate? Nice work Cheetah.

Thanks Sparko! :highfive:
So have I like won the debate now?

...oh and thanks again for the POTD! I haven't forgotten that!

[Sparko]

Thanks Sparko! :highfive:
So have I like won the debate now?

...oh and thanks again for the POTD! I haven't forgotten that!

Well as far as I am concerned you won. Smaller did not logically prove his claims either with reasoning or scripture.

When a person changes the meaning of "men" into "devilkind" in scripture with just his own presuppositions for reasoning, he has lost the debate.

But then that is nothing new with Smaller. We see that in all of his threads.

[Cheetah]

So how d'you get the "Gym Debate Veteran" badge?

[Sparko]

So how d'you get the "Gym Debate Veteran" badge?

You just gotta wait. If you don't get it in few days, PM the moderator of your debate.

[Amazing Rando]

You just gotta wait. If you don't get it in few days, PM the moderator of your debate.

Heck no! I can't give em out! PM yxboom and $cirisme

[Cheetah]

You just gotta wait. If you don't get it in few days, PM the moderator of your debate.
Heck no! I can't give em out! PM yxboom and $cirisme
Awesome! Thanks guys. :smile:

[Little Shepherd]

One of smaller's points doesn't hold up at all upon close examination:
“Love asks you to do X (do unto others) so is Love then going to do less than X Himself?"
He also went on to mention the "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" statement.

To address the quote itself, God does ask us to do less than He does himself. He restricts us quite a bit in our actions. We are told to love others, even our neighbors(which God does). We are told to clothe them, feed them, shelter them(God does this, too). However, the actions associated with udgment and condemnation, which are necessitated by God's holiness and justice, are off-limits to Christians because we are not all-knowing, all-seeing, and perfectly just. God asks us to do less than He Himself does.

Also, "Do unto others..." I am firmly convinced that if the situation was reversed -- if I were the perfect, loving, holy god, and He were the imperfect sinner -- that He would want me to do exactly what He has done. For me to show my love for Him by offering my own son(who is me) to die for him so that He may not perish. And to condemn him the same way He would have condemned me were He to not accept. Why would God ask us to "do unto others..." and then do something else? He wouldn't. He'd have me do the exact same thing He is doing were our positions reversed.

And those are my comments.

[Sheepdog]

dang. someone agreed to debate smaller? :akk:

[smaller]

One of smaller's points doesn't hold up at all upon close examination:

He also went on to mention the "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" statement.

To address the quote itself, God does ask us to do less than He does himself. He restricts us quite a bit in our actions. We are told to love others, even our neighbors(which God does).

Are the neighbors God loves the same ones He fries forever? lol on that equation.


We are told to clothe them, feed them, shelter them(God does this, too). However, the actions associated with udgment and condemnation, which are necessitated by God's holiness and justice, are off-limits to Christians because we are not all-knowing, all-seeing, and perfectly just. God asks us to do less than He Himself does.

And you have fallen prey to my observation. God cannot both love unsaved neighbors and fry them alive for eternity. It just doesn't work that way.

It is typical eternal damnation of people christianity to say out of one side of their mouth that "God loves you" and out of the other side of their mouth that God is going to burn you alive forever in fire.

What they should say and what they really say but will not say it is that God loves you so much that He is going to burn you alive forever.

I say that is NOT love by any measure or stretch so NO, God does not love them whatsoever in this equation nor do the people who hold out such a God and as such THESE TYPE OF PEOPLE are not fulfilling God's commands to love others as themselves, love their enemies and to do unto them what they would want done unto themselves. They and their God utterly fail on all counts of Love.


Also, "Do unto others..." I am firmly convinced that if the situation was reversed -- if I were the perfect, loving, holy god, and He were the imperfect sinner -- that He would want me to do exactly what He has done.

Your view merely forces Love to burn people alive in the name of Love and Love really has no choice to Love in the matter but Love MUST BE an Eternal Human Torturer. I say you are sadly mistaken.


For me to show my love for Him by offering my own son(who is me) to die for him so that He may not perish.

And again what you present is that the death of God's Son was worthless for most and effective for a handful only. I call your presentation a denigration of God's Word, Work and Will expressed in Jesus Christ. Read the bottom of my post to see that Love Never fails. That would be a never. When did men ever succeed to save themselves? Answer: they didn't.


And to condemn him the same way He would have condemned me were He to not accept. Why would God ask us to "do unto others..." and then do something else? He wouldn't. He'd have me do the exact same thing He is doing were our positions reversed.

If your son failed would you burn him alive forever? Answer: No.


And those are my comments.

Better that your desired fate for other people comes upon YOU.

enjoy!

smaller

[smaller]

dang. someone agreed to debate smaller? :akk:

You are like most so called christians sheepd. You don't like to hear that Love is a success for all mankind. go figure.

[Little Shepherd]

Are the neighbors God loves the same ones He fries forever?
You're assuming the punishment to be an actual eternal fire. I'm not sure whether to take those passages literally or metaphorically, since they do refer to places that actually existed around Jerusalem at the time. If it's not a literal lake of fire, though, the alternative's certainly no better. Oh, and yes, God does love the people he "fries."
And you have fallen prey to my observation. God cannot both love unsaved neighbors and fry them alive for eternity. It just doesn't work that way.
According to you, yes, but you ignore the holiness and righteousness of God, a God who has been known to visit wrath and judgment upon people, in favor of a "God is love and only love" approach. Your view of God is incomplete(even by our imperfect human standards), so it's only natural that you would try to limit God in such a way.
It is typical eternal damnation of people christianity to say out of one side of their mouth that "God loves you" and out of the other side of their mouth that God is going to burn you alive forever in fire.

What they should say and what they really say but will not say it is that God loves you so much that He is going to burn you alive forever.
No, we tell them that God is angry and wrathful, and that He will visit the just punishment(of hell) upon them if they do not repent and turn to Christ. That God's very character necessitates such a punishment for sin, but that God loved them so much that He gave Jesus to pay that price Himself so that if they only turn to Him(repent of sin) they would receive the reward that Jesus Himself deserves instead of the punishment they deserve because of their sin.

You posit that hell is unloving. I posit that it's not. It's just, and holy, and righteous. God's wrath and just punishment does not somehow veto His love as you seem to believe. The fault of the punishment is not with God, Who is only acting within His perfect character, but rather in the men who have chosen to sin and not repent.
I say that is NOT love by any measure or stretch so NO, God does not love them whatsoever in this equation nor do the people who hold out such a God and as such THESE TYPE OF PEOPLE are not fulfilling God's commands to love others as themselves, love their enemies and to do unto them what they would want done unto themselves. They and their God utterly fail on all counts of Love.
Again, that's only what you say, and your definition of love falls flat in so many ways. Would you prefer that Christians, who have quotes from Jesus Himself to back up their view that there is an eternal punishment in a place called Hell, not mention this to others? Not warn them of the terrible judgment to come, and the necessity of repentence? If you believe that in any way to be love, let me tell you that what you're suggesting is for Christians to practice the most vile form of hatred I can imagine. A person who sees someone hanging off the side of a cliff and not at least try to pull him up is acting in hatred. A person who knows that a bridge is out, and doesn't at least try to warn the passing vehicles of the danger ahead would be acting in hatred. I would love for the "happy-happy gospel" to be true, but it's not, and it's not Biblical at all, and therefore I would have to hate other people an awful lot not to at least warn them of the coming judgment, which is Biblical.
Your view merely forces Love to burn people alive in the name of Love and Love really has no choice to Love in the matter but Love MUST BE an Eternal Human Torturer. I say you are sadly mistaken.
No, my view has God burning people alive(or whatever form the punishment takes) in the name of holiness, justice, and righteousness, aspects of God that you prefer to ignore in favor of love. God may be love, but He is not only love. He is much more than that, and again I point out that the Bible has Him being wrathful in many instances, and that these in no way diminish His love.
And again what you present is that the death of God's Son was worthless for most and effective for a handful only. I call your presentation a denigration of God's Word, Work and Will expressed in Jesus Christ. Read the bottom of my post to see that Love Never fails. That would be a never. When did men ever succeed to save themselves? Answer: they didn't.
Actually, what I present is that you are making the death of God's Son worthless and nonsensical. If God could not send anyone to hell and be loving, then the sacrifice of Jesus would have been unnecessary. Also, God's placing all sin upon Jesus and allowing Him to take our just punishment would have been unloving towards Jesus, and God couldn't be unloving towards Jesus and still be love could He? Not unless you are wrong, and the Christians who take the Biblical approach to God's character and judgment are right. Then God could pile all the punishment on Jesus and still be loving, and He could still send the people who refuse Jesus' sacrifice to hell and still be loving.
If your son failed would you burn him alive forever? Answer: No.
You're working with the assumption that all men are God's children, and this just isn't the case. By default, we are His creations(albeit beloved creations), not His children. We are only transformed(adopted, if you will) into His children when we accept Christ's sacrifice and take part in His death, burial, and resurrection. The Bible is quite clear on whose children we are if we reject the sacrifice of Jesus -- the devil's. So much for the unbiblical "brotherhood of humanity."
Better that your desired fate for other people comes upon YOU.
I'm already going to heaven, as I desire for all people, but I appreciate the sentiment. :hug:

[smaller]

You're assuming the punishment to be an actual eternal fire. I'm not sure whether to take those passages literally or metaphorically, since they do refer to places that actually existed around Jerusalem at the time. If it's not a literal lake of fire, though, the alternative's certainly no better. Oh, and yes, God does love the people he "fries."

And again you conceed to your own formula, that Love = Eternal Torment (of whatever ilk.) I find that kind of math wanting for some reason. go figure.


According to you, yes, but you ignore the holiness and righteousness of God, a God who has been known to visit wrath and judgment upon people, in favor of a "God is love and only love" approach.

If you bothered to read the debate I don't deny eternal torment or the scriptures that present this case, for the devil and his messengers who also happen to occupy the flesh...

...however I am hard pressed to find a single named instance of this happening to any person or even a named person threatened with such a fate. One should consider that of all the potential examples of mankind at least one named human example of such a thing could be located in the scriptures, but alas, zero.


Your view of God is incomplete (even by our imperfect human standards), so it's only natural that you would try to limit God in such a way.

Prove it. And then prove that your view is not incomplete.

In either case incomplete views have no position to be dishing out eternal torment to others and at the detriment of others.


No, we tell them that God is angry and wrathful, and that He will visit the just punishment(of hell) upon them if they do not repent and turn to Christ.

And your sins are all justified and forgiven and you will not receive the penalty you so freely dish out upon others. I cannot honestly say I see that presentation in the scriptures either. In fact what you practice is condemned outright as inexcusable in Romans 2:1.


That God's very character necessitates such a punishment for sin,

And I also believe that the penalty for sin and it's actions will be justly punished. I just don't see this the same way (i.e. in hypocritical fashion) that you do.

"Do as I say and not as I do" is the false altar call of present day Christianity. Let Jesus let you off the hook whilst He fries everyone else who doesn't take the 4 step program of activating God in their behalf.


but that God loved them so much that He gave Jesus to pay that price Himself so that if they only turn to Him(repent of sin) they would receive the reward that Jesus Himself deserves instead of the punishment they deserve because of their sin.

Your real message is that the death and resurrection of Christ is completely worthless unless some couch potato makes a confession of sorts (which sort is up to endless debates as well.) I don't buy that baloney either. There are many scriptures that openly state sins are not counted against mankind. Many. But they obviously don't interest you for some reason.


You posit that hell is unloving. I posit that it's not.

Sure. Eternal torment is totally OK as long as it's NOT YOU.


It's just,

If it were just you'd be the first one in so I don't buy your form of double talking justice. You say it's OK for me to endlessly sin and I, I, I am off the hook while you, you, you will be eternally tormented. More hypocritical baloney as far as I'm concerned.


and holy, and righteous.

I don't see anywhere where the Lake of Fire is holy.


God's wrath and just punishment does not somehow veto His love as you seem to believe.

I don't have any problem with God frying the devil and his messengers. I do have a problem with a God who fries His Own offspring alive in fire. (Acts 17:25-31 says all people are His offspring)

And if people are God's offspring (I'm sure you can find a way to deny this position presented by Paul and others in the O.T.) then it is also wrong to say that God bore sinners. He didn't. Mankind holds the unique scriptural distinction of being His offspring and children.


The fault of the punishment is not with God, Who is only acting within His perfect character, but rather in the men who have chosen to sin and not repent.

Your form of Perfect God is only forced to burn His Own and cannot chose not to do so. All men will not receive mercy as Romans 11:32 states. All men will not be drawn as the scriptures state. Most men will be cast out, again contrary to the scriptures. Your position is filled with BLACK HOLES that it cannot extract itself when The Word is set next to it.


Again, that's only what you say, and your definition of love falls flat in so many ways.

Love that tortures His Own offspring eternally in fire has it's problems buddy.


Would you prefer that Christians, who have quotes from Jesus Himself to back up their view that there is an eternal punishment in a place called Hell, not mention this to others?

I'm already on record hundreds of times stating that I believe in eternal torment. Just not like you do. Your way is the way of the hypocrite and Jesus warned me about voices like yours.


Not warn them of the terrible judgment to come, and the necessity of repentence?

When you stop sinning or become sinless perfection in the flesh just let me know. I'll come and build you a shrine and you can worship yourself and your performance which is obviously rewarded based upon your works.


If you believe that in any way to be love, let me tell you that what you're suggesting is for Christians to practice the most vile form of hatred I can imagine.

Telling other people that God is going to eternally roast them for the same sins that you have is in my opinion the worst form of hatred that one person can vaunt against another. It's worse than anything else. It's the single most vile form of hatred and this is what YOU ARE to others that you have been commanded to love. Your form of love is only capable of saying SAVE YOURSELF FROM GOD as if such a thing is even possible. Such a God should be rightfully hated as the blazing hypocrite He obviously is. Commanding you to love those that He in fact BURNS ALIVE FOREVER. And then having the gall to call itself LOVE while doing so.

If God Alone is Perfect what does that automatically make everything else? I mean really what is it that you really expect from "less than God Style Perfection?"


A person who sees someone hanging off the side of a cliff and not at least try to pull him up is acting in hatred.

But your God is only capable of throwing out a CHANCE. "Here" he says to the drowning man, SAVE YOURSELF from ME!

Yikes!

The God I know searches for the last sheep until He finds it and He finds every single sheep and never fails. Your God is nearly a complete and helpless failure and far from what He presented Himself as, The Saviour of the world and of ALL MEN.


A person who knows that a bridge is out, and doesn't at least try to warn the passing vehicles of the danger ahead would be acting in hatred.

My God can patch the bridge instantly or fly the vehicles over it if He wanted to. Yours can only helplessly stand by only holding up a warning sign and watch them drive over the edge forever.


I would love for the "happy-happy gospel" to be true, but it's not, and it's not Biblical at all,

The Good News, peace on earth good will toward men is true, Jesus is The Saviour of the world, The Saviour of all men and every Word of His is True. Your version however is far from it and full of itself to boot.


and therefore I would have to hate other people an awful lot not to at least warn them of the coming judgment, which is Biblical.

You mean your mean spirited double standard version of The Truth of these matters?


No, my view has God burning people alive(or whatever form the punishment takes) in the name of holiness, justice, and righteousness, aspects of God that you prefer to ignore in favor of love.

If what you say is true you'd be frying right along with them. I find no excuses for sinning in the name of Jesus or forgiving yourself by your actions or thinking you are somehow off the hook for the same things you eternally condemn other people for. But hey, this is nothing new within eternal torment of people christianity. Your God is merely a human torturist in the name of love or justice or whatever other false justification you spin on what He does.


God may be love, but He is not only love. He is much more than that, and again I point out that the Bible has Him being wrathful in many instances, and that these in no way diminish His love.

I'll spare you my other forms of vindictiveness over your form of God for now. Suffice it to say that your God is a human torturer. No more, no less. I might also remind you that said torture transpires eternally in your very presence as well if you are with The Lamb..Rev. 14:10-11 Nice view of heaven eh? You'll be right in the middle of hell yourself as hardened to their plight as your own God. I suppose He'll give you the same Divine Lobotomy that He operates in Himself eh?


Actually, what I present is that you are making the death of God's Son worthless and nonsensical.

I see. I see the scriptures stating openly that God's Word, Work and Will are sufficient for all mankind AS IT SAYS and you say just a handful, yet my position denigrates His Effectiveness? I say your position only enhances your own effectiveness for yourself at the expense of others.

The scriptures I see says everyone who loves both knows God and is born of God as is everyone who does what is right regardless if the name Jesus happens to drip poisonously from their lips.

If God is Love then so is Jesus.


If God could not send anyone to hell and be loving, then the sacrifice of Jesus would have been unnecessary.

Only in your twisted view. Jesus also came to judge things other than people but of course these very things have blinded you as well and they IN YOU will also find judgment because of your vile hatred of other people in making their lack of performance a source of eternal torture.


Also, God's placing all sin upon Jesus and allowing Him to take our just punishment would have been unloving towards Jesus, and God couldn't be unloving towards Jesus and still be love could He? Not unless you are wrong, and the Christians who take the Biblical approach to God's character and judgment are right. Then God could pile all the punishment on Jesus and still be loving, and He could still send the people who refuse Jesus' sacrifice to hell and still be loving.

All I can say whoever you are is that I do not believe that Love made people to subsequently torture them forever, especially in light of some of the facts above displayed. Perhaps you can bring your position down to some of those specifics?


You're working with the assumption that all men are God's children, and this just isn't the case.

Then Paul was a liar in Acts 17:25-31 and David was a liar in Psalm 82:6 and Moses was a liar in Deut. 14:1 etc etc. The fact of the matter is Adam was God's son (Luke 3:38) just as all of Adam's offspring are and I find zero justification in the scriptures stating that God is going to burn His Children. Even Paul says that the enemies of the Gospel shall be saved and those enemies are past tense enemies. Romans 11:25-30 who are loved in spite of being enemies of the Gospel. go figure.


By default, we are His creations(albeit beloved creations), not His children.

And you don't know your Word very well. Is this my problem?


We are only transformed(adopted, if you will) into His children when we accept Christ's sacrifice and take part in His death, burial, and resurrection. The Bible is quite clear on whose children we are if we reject the sacrifice of Jesus -- the devil's. So much for the unbiblical "brotherhood of humanity."

The belief that tells a seeing child from a blinded one is that Jesus IS Lord and this being He is Lord of ALL, not just those who happen to agree with Him.


I'm already going to heaven, as I desire for all people, but I appreciate the sentiment. :hug:

God is the Saviour of all men, especially those who believe. 1 Tim. 4:10
All men will be drawn to Jesus. John 12:32
None will be cast out.John 6:37

You believe NONE of these Words, yet call yourself a believer. You're not.

enjoy!

smaller

[Sparko]

actually we DO believe the actual words of the bible, Smaller. IN CONTEXT. We don't have to chop them up to make them say what we want them to say like you do above, and we don't have to redefine words like "men" to mean "devils" and other such nonsense.

You should believe the bible as it is instead of changing it to suit your doctrine.

[smaller]

actually we DO believe the actual words of the bible, Smaller. IN CONTEXT. We don't have to chop them up to make them say what we want them to say like you do above, and we don't have to redefine words like "men" to mean "devils" and other such nonsense.

You've had your day in the sun Sparko. My words to you would be no different than my debate with Cheetah and it will end with the same conclusions. If you need a repeat just go back through either our exchanges or the Cheetah debate. I don't need a repeat of ignorance from you. It's a waste of time.


You should believe the bible as it is instead of changing it to suit your doctrine.

You can't even get past the fact that gendering terms are applied to God, men, and devils throughout the Bible so what in the world are you even bothering with any more difficult stuff like loving your unsaved neighbors???

Stew in your damnation of your fellow man. You belong there.

It's God's Will. I have made my case for you by both truth and prayer to God and never to you. If you come around it will be a real miracle but I know that when any man dies they are released from sin (Romans 6:7) so your freedom from the eternal damnation of your fellow man will come soon enough.

enjoy!

smaller

[Sparko]

You've had your day in the sun Sparko. My words to you would be no different than my debate with Cheetah and it will end with the same conclusions...

Hey, we finally agree on something! :thumb:

You have nothing new to add to the conversation. You just repeat the same nonsense over and over.

If you had anything to say you would have said it in the debate with Cheetah, but all you did was spout the same old assertions with no evidence for your view other than (paraphrased) "Gee... God is love. Surely a God of love would think exactly the way I do! You all are morons if you don't think like me and my buddy God"

So why do you keep repeating the same nonsense here? If you have nothing new to add and admit that you don't, then just go away. We have heard your OLD nonsense quite enough already.

[smaller]

Hey, we finally agree on something! :thumb:

You have nothing new to add to the conversation. You just repeat the same nonsense over and over.

Like eternal human torturists are any different?


If you had anything to say you would have said it in the debate with Cheetah,

And if you had any specific responses to the points I gave you'd have given a response as well. I don't expect you to agree with me. The devil of course is in the details.


but all you did was spout the same old assertions with no evidence for your view other than (paraphrased) "Gee... God is love.

And we already know your math God's Love for mankind = eternal concious torture in fire. DING! And all the double standard, hypocritical measures that your form of God uses as only briefly noted in the dialog with cheetah.


Surely a God of love would think exactly the way I do! You all are morons if you don't think like me and my buddy God"

God Is The Saviour of the world. If sparko doesn't get it I could care less. I know that it is not sparko, but that within sparko that says to his unsaved neighbors "my God loves you so much that if you do not activate Him in your behalf He is going to burn you alive forever." Whatta God! not...


So why do you keep repeating the same nonsense here?

To torment the evil in men like you with The Truth of God's Love for all mankind.


If you have nothing new to add and admit that you don't, then just go away. We have heard your OLD nonsense quite enough already.

Likewise.

enjoy!

smaller