Is universal Salvation possible? Does it make sense?

[achilles12604]

I think that Universal Salvation is possible. However, I do not think it makes an ounce of sense. If someone is in open rebellion to God because he hates him, and his actions cause pain and suffering around him on earth, why should this person be given the opportunity to enter heaven with the same people he hurt on earth?

If a murderer is given the death penalty, and then goes to heaven to be next to his victim, what justice is there in that? Is this Just? If it is NOT just, like I believe it not to be, then what does this say about God who authored this situation? He is not just. If God is not just, then why should I follow him?

[TruthSeeker1]

Achillies:

To be clear, you read an portion of my paper, not the whole thing. Additionally, in your zest to disagree with me you seem to have missed the whole point of my argument: that is, many people use the texts I pointed to as LITERALLY teaching about Hell, where it seems you and I agree the parables should NOT be taken literally. My point being, if someone is going to use part of the parable and say "this part is literal" but another part "is not", then I believe there is a credibility problem. I agree with you that there is real meaning even in a parable, but not in the way many conservative Christians believe when it comes to using parables as proof texts for Hell. For example, if I say, "I'm so hungry I could eat a horse". Do you really believe I could eat a horse, or am I simply hungry? If you study Church History, most early Church leaders interpreted parables like the one about Lazarus literally, and many still do today. To me this is incorrect.

By the way, I freely admit that I have no way of truly knowing if my interpretation of books which were written thousands of years ago in a language that is hardly used today, and translated many times with no oversight, and for which no original copies exist, might be incorrect! The difference between myself and many others is I freely admit I could be wrong about my interpretations, but the same is true for you and the thousands of others who read the same verses and come out with different conclusions. Are you at least willing to admit your interpretations might be incorrect? Or is your interpretation of the Bible infallible?? If so, then I'll refer to you as Apostle Achillies from now on.

[achilles12604]

Achillies:

To be clear, you read an portion of my paper, not the whole thing. Additionally, in your zest to disagree with me you seem to have missed the whole point of my argument: that is, many people use the texts I pointed to as LITERALLY teaching about Hell, where it seems you and I agree the parables should NOT be taken literally. My point being, if someone is going to use part of the parable and say "this part is literal" but another part "is not", then I believe there is a credibility problem. I agree with you that there is real meaning even in a parable, but not in the way many conservative Christians believe when it comes to using parables as proof texts for Hell. For example, if I say, "I'm so hungry I could eat a horse". Do you really believe I could eat a horse, or am I simply hungry? If you study Church History, most early Church leaders interpreted parables like the one about Lazarus literally, and many still do today. To me this is incorrect.

Literal interpretation is indeed incorrect in my view as well. However I still hold to my position about the gramatical structure indicating that hell is a real place. This along with the evidence from the OT and NT makes it almost a certainty for me.

By the way, I freely admit that I have no way of truly knowing if my interpretation of books which were written thousands of years ago in a language that is hardly used today, and translated many times with no oversight, and for which no original copies exist, might be incorrect! The difference between myself and many others is I freely admit I could be wrong about my interpretations, but the same is true for you and the thousands of others who read the same verses and come out with different conclusions. Are you at least willing to admit your interpretations might be incorrect? Or is your interpretation of the Bible infallible?? If so, then I'll refer to you as Apostle Achillies from now on.

Apostle Achilles. I like it. It rolls of the lips really easily.

Can I keep the title and still admit that I am not perfect?

[TruthSeeker1]

Literal interpretation is indeed incorrect in my view as well. However I still hold to my position about the gramatical structure indicating that hell is a real place. This along with the evidence from the OT and NT makes it almost a certainty for me.

We do have some areas of agreement, and where we disagree it is simply the two of us having a different interpretation. The interesting thing is we both can't be right, but we both could be wrong. In the end, who, aside from the author can say has the correct interpretation of any book? With some people, I think if they got to Heaven and learned that Hell didn't exist, these people would tell God He is doesn't understand the "correct" interpretation of the Bible.

Apostle Achilles. I like it. It rolls of the lips really easily.

Can I keep the title and still admit that I am not perfect?

No problem here Apostle Achillies!

[justifyothers]

Matthew 5:21-23
Murder
21"You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, 'Do not murder,[a] and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.' 22But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brotherwill be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, 'Raca,[c]' is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell.

Following this verse on down, in order to see the context, we see that VS. 26 addresses the fact that one will not be 'freed' until all has been paid. So, punishment, yes. Forever? No. (I know you know this too)
Looking at this verse as a whole, we see the sin of murder being subject to 'judgement'(old law) then one who is angry, being subject to judgement -(new law) then, one who says "RACA" (empty-headed, worthless, fool) is subject to local rulers, then one who says "you fool" will be subject to fires of hell.(new law) So, Jesus broke down the tiers of these sins to be equal to each other in terms of them ALL being sins of the heart - the new law's criteria. All to be 'judged'.
Let's look at the term "fire". Why did Jesus use it when speaking of judgment?

"The Lord is a consuming fire

"My heart was hot within me. While I was meditating, the fire burned."

"When you walk through the fire, you shall not be burned, nor shall the flame scorch you, for I am the Lord, your God."

"For He is like a refiner's fire and like launderer's soap. He will sit as a refiner ad a purifier of silver. He will purify and refine them.....that they may offer to the Lord an offering in righteousness."

"He will baptise you with the Holy Ghost and with fire."

"His breath like that of brimstone."

These NT terms for 'fire' are all the Greek word "pur". So, the same fire that baptises us, judges us. ( Even though there are other Greek words for fire available.)
I mention all of these to point out that "fire" is not necessarily a bad thing, biblically, but a purification process: one of correction and restoration.

Matthew 5:29

29`But, if thy right eye doth cause thee to stumble, pluck it out and cast from thee, for it is good to thee that one of thy members may perish, and not thy whole body be cast to gehenna.

So, better to be rid of sin (cutting off hand) than to suffer entirely for it later. In other words, take care of it as it comes along instead of ignoring it: only to deal with judgement later for the whole.

Matthew 23:15
15`Wo to you, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye go round the sea and the dry land to make one proselyte, and whenever it may happen -- ye make him a son of gehenna twofold more than yourselves.

This says to me that these leaders,are creating others that will need more 'judgement' or 'correction' because of their bad and incorrect teachings.

Matthew 10:27-29
27What I tell you in the dark, speak in the daylight; what is whispered in your ear, proclaim from the roofs. 28Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell. 29Are not two sparrows sold for a penny[a]? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from the will of your Father.

Following this to the end of next verse we see this: "Do not fear, therefore; you are of more value than many sparrows."
This says to me that God has the power to destroy, yes, (has more power than any man) but that because of our 'value', we have no fear.

2 Peter 2:4
4For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell,[a] putting them into gloomy dungeons to be held for judgment;

I will address this further down along with the book of Enoch.

Isaiah 1 28-31
28 But rebels and sinners will both be broken,
and those who forsake the LORD will perish.

29 "You will be ashamed because of the sacred oaks
in which you have delighted;
you will be disgraced because of the gardens
that you have chosen.

30 You will be like an oak with fading leaves,
like a garden without water.

31 The mighty man will become tinder
and his work a spark;
both will burn together,
with no one to quench the fire."

Again, the 'fire' or God's cleansing judgement, will not be quenched. It will be carried out. You will pay your dues, etc.

Isaiah 66:22-24
22 "As the new heavens and the new earth that I make will endure before me," declares the LORD, "so will your name and descendants endure. 23 From one New Moon to another and from one Sabbath to another, all mankind will come and bow down before me," says the LORD. 24 "And they will go out and look upon the dead bodies of those who rebelled against me; their worm will not die, nor will their fire be quenched, and they will be loathsome to all mankind."

This will be included in my comments on Enoch below.

Now outside of the bible is the book of Enoch. Many of the key concepts used by Jesus Christ himself seem directly connected to terms and ideas in the Book of Enoch.

I agree - there are bits of this book woven all throughout the bible. I believe they all knew it well and studied it. It is mentioned a few times in the NT, and quoted, as well in Jude.

Thus, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that Jesus had not only studied the book, but also respected it highly enough to adopt and elaborate on its specific descriptions of the coming kingdom and its theme of inevitable judgment descending upon "the wicked"–the term most often used in the Old Testament to describe the Watchers.

There is abundant proof that Christ approved of the Book of Enoch. Over a hundred phrases in the New Testament find precedents in the Book of Enoch.

Though I am rusty, there was a time I was very familiar with this book. I have read a couple of versions at least two times completely and partially on many occasions. I will try to recall it without actually going back through it.

The main idea of Enoch's writing concerned the "Watchers", a group of rebellious angels (kind of like a little rebel group seceding from the union). They came to earth and bred with man (cited in Gen and Jude), thus creating offspring that were later named and cursed as 'evil spirits' - alive and well today (or at least in biblical times)
The originators of this breed were captured and sent to a great hole in the desert and covered with rocks, so they could not see the light. I think this is the topic of this verse in Jude: " He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgement of the great day." AND this in Revelation: "...satan and his angels for whom the bottomless pit was created." (my paraphrase)

(You know how I feel about the bible, but if there were one source that could make it all come together for me, it would be this book. It creates a scenario where mankind is really kind of the 'victim', it you will, of these evil rebels and "hell" was created for them - not us. This is sooo interesting to me, and if anyone is interested, I would LOVE to discuss it further)

http://www.earlyjewishwritings.com/1enoch.html

Not granted it is not part of the cannon. But when you view the reasons for rejection by the Jews it is because of references to Christ, not hell. Thus the concept of Hell, preached on by Jesus, and alluded to by Isaiah is found in spades in another very early Jewish writing.

It was deliberately not included in canon because of its discussion of these 'fallen angels' and the involvement with mankind. I'm sure it made everyone more than a little uncomfortable Read it, if you haven't - it is fascinating!! It is my opinion that if we had all read the Book of Enoch before the bible, the bible would be understood in a completely different way.

I have tried to show how universal salvation is at least possible, but under a loving God, more probable.

[achilles12604]

Matthew 5:21-23
Murder
21"You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, 'Do not murder,[a] and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.' 22But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brotherwill be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, 'Raca,[c]' is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell.

Following this verse on down, in order to see the context, we see that VS. 26 addresses the fact that one will not be 'freed' until all has been paid. So, punishment, yes. Forever? No. (I know you know this too)
Looking at this verse as a whole, we see the sin of murder being subject to 'judgement'(old law) then one who is angry, being subject to judgement -(new law) then, one who says "RACA" (empty-headed, worthless, fool) is subject to local rulers, then one who says "you fool" will be subject to fires of hell.(new law) So, Jesus broke down the tiers of these sins to be equal to each other in terms of them ALL being sins of the heart - the new law's criteria. All to be 'judged'.
Let's look at the term "fire". Why did Jesus use it when speaking of judgment?

"The Lord is a consuming fire

"My heart was hot within me. While I was meditating, the fire burned."

"When you walk through the fire, you shall not be burned, nor shall the flame scorch you, for I am the Lord, your God."

"For He is like a refiner's fire and like launderer's soap. He will sit as a refiner ad a purifier of silver. He will purify and refine them.....that they may offer to the Lord an offering in righteousness."

"He will baptise you with the Holy Ghost and with fire."

"His breath like that of brimstone."

These NT terms for 'fire' are all the Greek word "pur". So, the same fire that baptises us, judges us. ( Even though there are other Greek words for fire available.)
I mention all of these to point out that "fire" is not necessarily a bad thing, biblically, but a purification process: one of correction and restoration.

Oh I agree. The fire is symbolic of God's justice and purification. I address this in detail under my heresy link. However, throughout the bible God's justice and fire consumes the unrighteous. The fire burns up the chaff. It refines gold by burning away all that is junk.

But as I point out, both Paul and Jesus state that evilness comes from within a person's soul. If the soul (or I call the heart) is impure and corrupt with evil, and the evil burns, the soul is destroyed by God's fire/Justice. Hence all the allusions of Jesus to the soul being destroyed. Not cleansed. Jesus doesn't warn people that if they don't shape up they will be cast into darkness and cleansed. He says destroyed.

Matthew 5:29

29`But, if thy right eye doth cause thee to stumble, pluck it out and cast from thee, for it is good to thee that one of thy members may perish, and not thy whole body be cast to gehenna.

So, better to be rid of sin (cutting off hand) than to suffer entirely for it later. In other words, take care of it as it comes along instead of ignoring it: only to deal with judgement later for the whole.

Granted. But we are not discussing the meaning of Parables here. We are estimating the reality of hell. Notice my conversation with Truth.

At one point he made a similar point that parables are not to be meant literally and I agree. However, the entire purpose of parables is to use symbolism and metaphorical circumstances to make a real world point.

Matthew 23:15
15`Wo to you, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye go round the sea and the dry land to make one proselyte, and whenever it may happen -- ye make him a son of gehenna twofold more than yourselves.

This says to me that these leaders,are creating others that will need more 'judgement' or 'correction' because of their bad and incorrect teachings.

And I agree. They require more judgement. And after said judgement, they belong to hell, where the soul is destroyed.

Matthew 10:27-29
27What I tell you in the dark, speak in the daylight; what is whispered in your ear, proclaim from the roofs. 28Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell. 29Are not two sparrows sold for a penny[a]? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from the will of your Father.

Following this to the end of next verse we see this: "Do not fear, therefore; you are of more value than many sparrows."
This says to me that God has the power to destroy, yes, (has more power than any man) but that because of our 'value', we have no fear.

So the verse says "fear God." and you interpret that as "Don't fear God"

Now you are starting to confuse me.

2 Peter 2:4
4For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell,[a] putting them into gloomy dungeons to be held for judgment;

I will address this further down along with the book of Enoch.

Isaiah 1 28-31
28 But rebels and sinners will both be broken,
and those who forsake the LORD will perish.

29 "You will be ashamed because of the sacred oaks
in which you have delighted;
you will be disgraced because of the gardens
that you have chosen.

30 You will be like an oak with fading leaves,
like a garden without water.

31 The mighty man will become tinder
and his work a spark;
both will burn together,
with no one to quench the fire."

Again, the 'fire' or God's cleansing judgement, will not be quenched. It will be carried out. You will pay your dues, etc.

Yes. I think I see a pattern here. You are continuing to refer to judgement, but you are not explaining what that judgement will be. Pay your dues is a very vague phrase.

Fortunately, Jesus was not nearly as vague. Neither was Isaiah. Fire consumes. Fire destroys. The judgement is destruction. This concept is repeated at length by Jesus.

Isaiah 66:22-24
22 "As the new heavens and the new earth that I make will endure before me," declares the LORD, "so will your name and descendants endure. 23 From one New Moon to another and from one Sabbath to another, all mankind will come and bow down before me," says the LORD. 24 "And they will go out and look upon the dead bodies of those who rebelled against me; their worm will not die, nor will their fire be quenched, and they will be loathsome to all mankind."

This will be included in my comments on Enoch below.

Now outside of the bible is the book of Enoch. Many of the key concepts used by Jesus Christ himself seem directly connected to terms and ideas in the Book of Enoch.

I agree - there are bits of this book woven all throughout the bible. I believe they all knew it well and studied it. It is mentioned a few times in the NT, and quoted, as well in Jude.

Thus, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that Jesus had not only studied the book, but also respected it highly enough to adopt and elaborate on its specific descriptions of the coming kingdom and its theme of inevitable judgment descending upon "the wicked"–the term most often used in the Old Testament to describe the Watchers.

There is abundant proof that Christ approved of the Book of Enoch. Over a hundred phrases in the New Testament find precedents in the Book of Enoch.

Though I am rusty, there was a time I was very familiar with this book. I have read a couple of versions at least two times completely and partially on many occasions. I will try to recall it without actually going back through it.

The main idea of Enoch's writing concerned the "Watchers", a group of rebellious angels (kind of like a little rebel group seceding from the union). They came to earth and bred with man (cited in Gen and Jude), thus creating offspring that were later named and cursed as 'evil spirits' - alive and well today (or at least in biblical times)
The originators of this breed were captured and sent to a great hole in the desert and covered with rocks, so they could not see the light. I think this is the topic of this verse in Jude: " He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgement of the great day." AND this in Revelation: "...satan and his angels for whom the bottomless pit was created." (my paraphrase)

(You know how I feel about the bible, but if there were one source that could make it all come together for me, it would be this book. It creates a scenario where mankind is really kind of the 'victim', it you will, of these evil rebels and "hell" was created for them - not us. This is sooo interesting to me, and if anyone is interested, I would LOVE to discuss it further)

I would be interesting in your interpretations of the passages which indicate that sinners will too be destroyed in the fires meant for Satan?

http://www.earlyjewishwritings.com/1enoch.html

Not granted it is not part of the cannon. But when you view the reasons for rejection by the Jews it is because of references to Christ, not hell. Thus the concept of Hell, preached on by Jesus, and alluded to by Isaiah is found in spades in another very early Jewish writing.

It was deliberately not included in canon because of its discussion of these 'fallen angels' and the involvement with mankind. I'm sure it made everyone more than a little uncomfortable Read it, if you haven't - it is fascinating!! It is my opinion that if we had all read the Book of Enoch before the bible, the bible would be understood in a completely different way.

I have tried to show how universal salvation is at least possible, but under a loving God, more probable.

And even in the outset, I acknowledged that universal salvation is POSSIBLE. But I find it unlikely.




We both have agreed that there will be a judgment. Let's focus on that. What do you think the judgment will be and what will be the result. and why?

[justifyothers]

We both have agreed that there will be a judgment. Let's focus on that. What do you think the judgment will be and what will be the result. and why?

Well, I will ignore the fact that you either chose to ignore or skimmed over most of what I wrote in post 155. (but I'll getcha back - I hope you will have time to go back over some of it.

Instead of spending a couple of hours searching and typing, I'll offer this link. It portrays what I think would be one of the most sensible biblical explanations of judgement:
http://www.hisremnant.org/eby/articles/ ... gment.html

I think basically judgement is going on at all times if we follow His will. So, see what you think. As far as punishment at the end of our lives.......it may be there to a certain extent for all of us. But, if one is sentenced to death at the end of it all - what would be the point ? What does God gain by losing even one soul to death, which He calls the 'enemy' (the last enemy to be destroyed)?

[achilles12604]

We both have agreed that there will be a judgment. Let's focus on that. What do you think the judgment will be and what will be the result. and why?

Well, I will ignore the fact that you either chose to ignore or skimmed over most of what I wrote in post 155. (but I'll getcha back - I hope you will have time to go back over some of it.

I wrote 155. You wrote 154. And rest assured I did read through it and I did take note of your beliefs on the Judgement. I simply wished to start a new side topic cleanly.

Instead of spending a couple of hours searching and typing, I'll offer this link. It portrays what I think would be one of the most sensible biblical explanations of judgement:
http://www.hisremnant.org/eby/articles/ ... gment.html

I shall go look.

But, if one is sentenced to death at the end of it all - what would be the point ? What does God gain by losing even one soul to death, which He calls the 'enemy' (the last enemy to be destroyed)?

He gains nothing. But he loses nothing either. It is up to us to gain or lose.