Does god want everyone to be saved?

[senja]

I always understood the passage in 1Ti. 2:4 to mean that god had a strong desire for everyone to be saved, past, present, and future. But the rest of the Bible does not support universalism. Jesus makes it clear that the vast majority will enter into the wrong gate.

I also thought god's will was inviolable. What god wants, god gets. Nothing can stand in the way of his will. No amount of human free will can change that. So if even one person goes unsaved, it has to be because god didn't want that person to be saved. How much more true does that have to be if most people will not be saved?

All of that is before you get to the declaration in Romans 9 that some are created to be vessels of destruction. This means the Bible offers two opposing views of god's will for salvation. One view is that god wants everyone to be saved. And the other view is that there are some created who were never intended to be saved. Which is it?

It's a moot point. There is no God.

 

[viole]

As attractive as the fruit was the warning not to eat it was at least as unattractive "because they would die", so it came down to who did they put their trust in, God or the Devil. And it seems to still work the same way.

What would you have done?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Kilgore Trout]

One view is that god wants everyone to be saved. And the other view is that there are some created who were never intended to be saved. Which is it?

Which it is depends on context, interpretation, and agenda.

If the bible was a clear, concise, consistent 20 page guide, it wouldn't be nearly as useful of a tool.

 

[viole]

None of the choices in your poll really described my feelings, so I didn't vote. The first two choices didn't apply at all, but I'll address the third one, which was:

I believe God definitely wants everyone to be saved, so I'd say that it's inaccurate to assume that He "doesn't really have a preference." I can definitely go along with the rest of your statement, i.e. "He established a path to salvation. The rest is up to us," but with a very important qualifier. A man I hold in very high regard once said, "The more we learn about the gospel of Jesus Christ, the more we realize that endings here in mortality are not endings at all." Almost every Christian in the world is convinced the curtain falls on our opportunity to find that path the moment we die. I don't believe it does. Billions of people have died without ever having had the opportunity to find the path God established for our salvation. I don't believe this means that those individuals are destined to an eternity in Hell.

I believe that when a person dies, his spirit leaves his body but does not cease to exist as a cognizant entity, with the capacity to learn, make choices and progress. I further believe that during the period between one's death and his resurrection, he will have the opportunity to hear and understand the gospel of Jesus Christ, repent of his sins, and accept the Savior's atoning sacrifice on his behalf. What kind of a loving God would create us (i.e. humanity), give His Only Begotten Son as a ransom for our sins -- contingent upon our belief in Him -- and then make it impossible for so many to be the recipients of that gift simply because they were born at the wrong time or in the wrong place? That's not the kind of God I believe in.

Do you think that all those people, who cannot have possibly heard of Jesus, have a higher chance to win salvation?

You seem to indicate that everyone will have the opportunity to repent and accept Jesus, AFTER their death. Which would entail equal opportunity to everyone. But then why did He sort of die, and why do you guys send white shirt and tie missionaries to almost everywhere?

Can you imagine anyone who would not repent and accept Jesus when they see Him before their spiritual noses after having passed away? I mean, you see Jesus after your death and you still reject Him? I am sure you would think twice before saying "sorry Jesus, no time for your pamphlets. Got to go (what happened to the tie, btw?)".

Well, but if that is indeed the case, Hell is not for the wicked. It is for the irreversibly mentally impaired.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Kapalika]

I think most people will agree that originally the Bible was Not written in English, but mostly in Hebrew and Greek.
KJV (King James Version Bibles ) translated the word ' Gehenna ' as hell or hellfire - Matthew 5:22, etc.
So, to me, we need to be educated as to what is ' Gehenna '.
Gehenna was a garbage pit outside of Jerusalem where things were ' destroyed forever ' and Not kept burning forever. So, KJV translating Gehenna into English as hellfire gave a different slant to the original wording.
My understanding then is that Gehenna stands for or represents: destruction.
To me, that is in harmony with Psalms 92:7 that the wicked will be destroyed forever. ( annihilated )
That is also why 2 Peter 3:9 gives us two (2) choices. ' repent ' or 'perish ' ( be destroyed ).

The biblical definition of the lake of fire as mentioned at Revelation 20:14; Revelation 21:8 B, and Revelation 2:11; Revelation 20:6 is defined as ' second death '.
My understanding of Hebrews 2:14 B is that Jesus will destroy wicked Satan.
Satan ends up in ' second death ' - Revelation 21:8
So, ' second death ' is a fitting term for: destruction.
Hope this is of some help.

So how is destruction, an irreversible and eternally lasting act, justified for any temporal crime real or imagined?

 

[Katzpur]

Do you think that all those people, who cannot have possibly heard of Jesus, have a higher chance to win salvation?

Absolutely.

You seem to indicate that everyone will have the opportunity to repent and accept Jesus, AFTER their death. Which would entail equal opportunity to everyone.

That's right.

But then why did He sort of die, and why do you guys send white shirt and tie missionaries to almost everywhere?

"Sort of dying" is like being "kind of pregnant." Jesus didn't sort of die. He died, was laid in a borrowed tomb, and rose on the third day. As to why we send missionaries out to almost everywhere, it's to spread His gospel. Some of us happen to think that there are benefits to believing that are a big part of our lives here and now. Maybe for a lot of Christians, it's all about being "saved," and avoiding hellfire. That's not the case with us. There is so much more to the gospel of Jesus Christ than what it's going to mean for us in the next life.

Can you imagine anyone who would not repent and accept Jesus when they see Him before their spiritual noses after having passed away?

I never said they'd see Him during the time between their death and their resurrection. If I didn't already made it clear, I will now. Heaven is not the same place as the Spirit World, and we believe that Jesus Christ is in Heaven today, not in the Spirit World. When Jesus told the repentant thief who hung on the cross next to Him on Calvary that He'd see him that day in Paradise, He was referring to the Spirit Word (which, as I already explained, is a state of existence that will resemble either Paradise or Prison, depending on the individual and what kind of life he's led). On the first Easter morning, when Mary saw Jesus in the garden near the tomb, she rushed to embrace Him, but He told her not to touch Him since He hadn't yet ascended to His Father. If Paradise and Heaven were one and the same, this couldn't be the case, because Jesus had by that time been to the Spirit World, where He presumably saw the thief He'd made the promise to and where He taught the spirits of the wicked who were also there.

I mean, you see Jesus after your death and you still reject Him? I am sure you would think twice before saying "sorry Jesus, no time for your pamphlets. Got to go (what happened to the tie, btw?)".

You won't be seeing Jesus until you're resurrected and actually do go to Heaven. But you will encounter a lot of His followers, some that you might have seen wearing white shirts and ties on the earth, and others that you'd have never guessed would have converted to His gospel, since they'd lived their lives as Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus and *gasp* even atheists. But your comment did remind me of a thread I started years and years ago. In that thread, I asked people what their response would be if, after death, they suddenly found themselves existing in the state that Mormonism tells them they will be. There won't be nothingness and non-existence, but there won't be Heaven and Hell either (at least not for a good long time).

The OP said to me, "In your scenario, there is a second-chance clause, where we get to hear a pure rendition of the gospel without errors or cultural biases. And we get to make choices free from external pressures." That is essentially what Mormonism teaches.

Well, but if that is indeed the case, Hell is not for the wicked. It is for the irreversibly mentally impaired.

Pretty close. Except that there will be no "irreversibly mentally impaired," any more than there will be any "irreversibly physically impaired." I suspect there will still be a few stubborn souls who will want no part of God or a hereafter. But, I suspect they will be few and far between. Mormonism is a religion that truly does teach that God wants us all to return to Him in the end and, although He will force no one to accept Him, He will give every last one of us every conceivable opportunity to do so. That's the kind of God I want to believe in, however laughable you may find Him.

 

[Kemosloby]

What would you have done?

Ciao

- viole

I would have ate the fruit and blamed it on the woman!! But knowing what I know now, would I make the same mistake twice and listen to the devil, rather than heed God's warning of the second death? Perhaps.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Yes, I believe God wants everyone to be saved. So, none of the options in the poll.

 

[viole]

Absolutely.

That's right.

"Sort of dying" is like being "kind of pregnant." Jesus didn't sort of die. He died, was laid in a borrowed tomb, and rose on the third day. As to why we send missionaries out to almost everywhere, it's to spread His gospel. Some of us happen to think that there are benefits to believing that are a big part of our lives here and now. Maybe for a lot of Christians, it's all about being "saved," and avoiding hellfire. That's not the case with us. There is so much more to the gospel of Jesus Christ than what it's going to mean for us in the next life.

I never said they'd see Him during the time between their death and their resurrection. If I didn't already made it clear, I will now. Heaven is not the same place as the Spirit World, and we believe that Jesus Christ is in Heaven today, not in the Spirit World. When Jesus told the repentant thief who hung on the cross next to Him on Calvary that He'd see him that day in Paradise, He was referring to the Spirit Word (which, as I already explained, is a state of existence that will resemble either Paradise or Prison, depending on the individual and what kind of life he's led). On the first Easter morning, when Mary saw Jesus in the garden near the tomb, she rushed to embrace Him, but He told her not to touch Him since He hadn't yet ascended to His Father. If Paradise and Heaven were one and the same, this couldn't be the case, because Jesus had by that time been to the Spirit World, where He presumably saw the thief He'd made the promise to and where He taught the spirits of the wicked who were also there.

You won't be seeing Jesus until you're resurrected and actually do go to Heaven. But you will encounter a lot of His followers, some that you might have seen wearing white shirts and ties on the earth, and others that you'd have never guessed would have converted to His gospel, since they'd lived their lives as Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus and *gasp* even atheists. But your comment did remind me of a thread I started years and years ago. In that thread, I asked people what their response would be if, after death, they suddenly found themselves existing in the state that Mormonism tells them they will be. There won't be nothingness and non-existence, but there won't be Heaven and Hell either (at least not for a good long time).

The OP said to me, "In your scenario, there is a second-chance clause, where we get to hear a pure rendition of the gospel without errors or cultural biases. And we get to make choices free from external pressures." That is essentially what Mormonism teaches.

Pretty close. Except that there will be no "irreversibly mentally impaired," any more than there will be any "irreversibly physically impaired." I suspect there will still be a few stubborn souls who will want no part of God or a hereafter. But, I suspect they will be few and far between. Mormonism is a religion that truly does teach that God wants us all to return to Him in the end and, although He will force no one to accept Him, He will give every last one of us every conceivable opportunity to do so. That's the kind of God I want to believe in, however laughable you may find Him.

Wow, that is a bit complicated.

Let me see if I understood. When Jesus resurrected, He was in the spiritual world. And that is why He asked Mary not to tough Him. To avoid that effect that happens when you hug a spirit. You know, you end up just embracing yourself. Like in that Ghost movie. Right?

I can count three different worlds here:

1) the physical world
2) the spiritual world
3) heaven

So, if I am mistaken. In which world was Jesus when He allegedely resurrected at Easter day?

Ciao

- ciole

 

[Katzpur]

Wow, that is a bit complicated.

Really? Maybe that's just because it's unfamiliar to you.

Let me see if I understood. When Jesus resurrected, He was in the spiritual world. And that is why He asked Mary not to tough Him. To avoid that effect that happens when you hug a spirit. You know, you end up just embracing yourself. Like in that Ghost movie. Right?

Okay, let me try again. During the three days in which Jesus' body lay in the tomb, His spirit visited a place Mormonism calls the "Spirit World." This is the place where the spirits of everyone who has ever lived go to at the moment of death, when the spirit leaves the physical body behind. There is no reference in the Bible to the "Spirit World" specifically, but there are several passages of scripture describing the two different states of mind the human spirit finds itself in while in the Spirit World -- namely "Paradise" and "the Spirit Prison." (The "Spirit Prison" is also occasionally referred to as "Hell," but it is not a place of eternal torment, a lake of fire, or any such thing. It is a state of emotional anguish the wicked experience upon realizing the impact of their choices while in mortality, and the realization that there really is going to be "hell to pay" (pun intended). During the time Jesus spent in the Spirit World, He visited both those for whom existence was now like paradise and those for whom it was like being imprisoned. He was there in spirit form (i.e. no physical body); everyone else there was also in spirit form.

On Easter Morning, Jesus was resurrected from the dead. (I state this as fact, but I do understand that from a non-Christian perspective, this is merely a myth.) What this means is that His spirit once again entered His physical body, which lay dead in the tomb. When that happened, His body was given new life. But this time, He was made immortal. He could no longer be killed again, or die or natural causes or by any other means. He would live eternally from that moment forward. When He first saw Mary, He said, "Touch me not, for I am not yet ascended to my Father." I have always been taught that, since His body was no longer in the tomb, Mary was looking at the physical, resurrected Christ. If that is the case, Mary would have been able to touch and feel His body. She would have ended up embracing Him, not herself, as would have been the case had she tried to hug a spirit. Jesus didn't actually explain to her why she shouldn't touch Him; He only tells her not to because He hasn't yet been back to His Father's presence (His Father being in Heaven).

Later on, He tells His Apostles to touch the wounds in His hands and feel, and points out that He has a body of flesh and bones and is not merely a spirit. The Bible doesn't tell us precisely when the situation changed, but apparently He did at some point go to Heaven and then return to Earth. After all, we know He wasn't here constantly after His resurrection, and His Apostles and others always seem surprised to see Him among them. According to the biblical account, He remained on Earth at least some of the time for the next 40 days, at which time He told His followers that He would be leaving them and sending the Holy Ghost to be with them. He was seen ascending into Heaven at that time, where He has been ever since.

I can count three different worlds here:

1) the physical world
2) the spiritual world
3) heaven

You counted correctly. Most Christian deny that the Spirit World (the spiritual world) exists today as a place where the dead await the resurrection, even though they acknowledge that it clearly did exist at the time Christ died. The Bible does not indicate that it has since ceased to exist, and Mormons believe it continues to exist today.

So, if I am mistaken. In which world was Jesus when He allegedly resurrected at Easter day?

He was resurrected into the physical world, after having spent three days in the spiritual world. He evidently at least went to Heaven temporarily at some point between when Mary saw Him and when His Apostles did, since His allowing people to touch Him appears to be contingent upon that action.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

"Saved from what !"
Saved from sin.
Does one want to be saved from sin? Please
Regards

In my view ' sin ' equals: troubles. Sure some ' sins ' are temporary fun, but in the long run can lead to troubles.
To me, we want to be saved (delivered/rescued) from such troubles.
Since according to Romans 6:23 'death' is the price we pay for sin, then we want to be saved from: death.
Those healthy physical resurrections which Jesus' performed while on Earth where a preview, or a coming attraction, of what Jesus will be doing on a grand-global scale during his coming millennium-long day of governing over Earth.
So, to me the bottom line is: saved from wrong leanings (/sin) and enemy death.
I understand 1 Corinthians 15:24-26 to say Jesus will bring an end to enemy death. No death equals: No more sin.
No more sin equals No more deliberate wrongdoing besides No more death on Earth as Isaiah said at Isaiah 25:8.
Who wouldn't want 'perfect health coupled with upright leanings' for your best interest and of everyone around you.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

So how is destruction, an irreversible and eternally lasting act, justified for any temporal crime real or imagined?

I would say justified (justice) because of first being: forewarned.
Just as Adam and Eve were told what would happen before hand. Told what would happen before it happened.
In some minds some crimes are considered small crimes such as driving through a red light.
The person who has a driver's licence knows before hand that going through a red light is breaking the law.
That is often considered as a small crime, instead of saying the person sinned against the motor-vehicle code.
Other crimes so serious that it carries with it capital punishment, or an execution death for the 'sake of justice'.

In my view of 2 Peter 3:9 we are ALL forewarned that if we do Not ' repent ' we will ' perish ' (be destroyed).
In Noah's day the people were judged as being past reform, past repenting, so the executional Flood came.
If there was No justice for righteous Noah and family then all righteous people would have been killed off by those violent people who did Not value life in Noah's day and reached the point, so to speak, of No return.
As in our day, Noah warned people before the Flood came, today people are forewarned before the coming ' time of separation ' comes upon those of us still alive on Earth at that coming time of Matthew 25:31-33,37.
It isn't people who do the judging, but rather Jesus decides who are the humble ' sheep'-like people, and who are the haughty ones beyond repenting. So, as in Noah's day, if God would Not take decisive action only violent people would end up on Earth and they would be violent against each other with No regard for the sacredness of life. God's purpose for Earth is that humble meek people inherit the Earth, and Not violent or wicked people.
So, to me, such destruction is justified because otherwise there would be No justice for righteous people.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Wow, that is a bit complicated.
Let me see if I understood. When Jesus resurrected, He was in the spiritual world. And that is why He asked Mary not to tough Him. To avoid that effect that happens when you hug a spirit. You know, you end up just embracing yourself. Like in that Ghost movie. Right?
I can count three different worlds here:
1) the physical world
2) the spiritual world
3) heaven
So, if I am mistaken. In which world was Jesus when He allegedely resurrected at Easter day?
Ciao
- ciole

In my view, before God sent Jesus to Earth to be born to a human, Jesus had a heavenly spirit body.
When God resurrected the dead Jesus out of the grave, Jesus got back his previous heavenly spirit body.
So, God resurrected dead Jesus back to life in the spirit world of angelic creation.
We do Not see spirit persons, so that is why the resurrected Jesus used different materialized bodies to appear to his followers before his later ascension to heaven. Heaven being God's home where Jesus appeared before his God - Hebrews 9:24. We are Not talking about the mid-heavens where the birds fly, but the spirit-world heavens.

Before God created the physical world, the material world, first God created the spirit world.
Later, when God created the Earth, according to Job 38:7, those angelic spirit angels shouted for joy.
Jesus came from the invisible heavens and returned back to the invisible heavens.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Which it is depends on context, interpretation, and agenda.
If the bible was a clear, concise, consistent 20 page guide, it wouldn't be nearly as useful of a tool.

To me the Bible in context, interpretation, and agenda is clear at Psalms 92:7 the wicked will be destroyed forever.
In my understanding the executional words from Jesus' mouth will rid the earth of wickedness as mentioned at Isaiah 11:3-4; Revelation 19:14-16.

 

[Super Universe]

I always understood the passage in 1Ti. 2:4 to mean that god had a strong desire for everyone to be saved, past, present, and future. But the rest of the Bible does not support universalism. Jesus makes it clear that the vast majority will enter into the wrong gate.

I also thought god's will was inviolable. What god wants, god gets. Nothing can stand in the way of his will. No amount of human free will can change that. So if even one person goes unsaved, it has to be because god didn't want that person to be saved. How much more true does that have to be if most people will not be saved?

All of that is before you get to the declaration in Romans 9 that some are created to be vessels of destruction. This means the Bible offers two opposing views of god's will for salvation. One view is that god wants everyone to be saved. And the other view is that there are some created who were never intended to be saved. Which is it?

No. If God wants something that thing happens instantly.

If someone is not saved it's because they chose to quit. There is no hell, they simply cease to exist.

If you need to get your car fixed do you take it to a tribal person who's ideas about things are based upon thousands of years old ideas? Probably not.

If your child gets sick do you take the child to a tribal witch doctor who's ideas about the world are thousands of years old? Nope.

So why do you now think that two to three thousand year old ideas about God are somehow correct?

You can't figure out God from only reading the bible. The bible is primitive and ignorant humans attempt to explain things that were way beyond their ability to comprehend.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

"Sort of dying" is like being "kind of pregnant." Jesus didn't sort of die. He died, was laid in a borrowed tomb, and rose on the third day.

Until clinical death was a thing, yes, you could be "sort of dying". I don't see the gospels noting they confirmed with an EKG and EEG or whatever.

I would have ate the fruit and blamed it on the woman!! But knowing what I know now, would I make the same mistake twice and listen to the devil, rather than heed God's warning of the second death? Perhaps.

Yeah, but since the serpent was just a serpent and not a demon or a devil or a specific devil ...

Since according to Romans 6:23 'death' is the price we pay for sin, then we want to be saved from: death.

Well, that sucks, since graveyards are filled with the corpses of people who wanted eternal life.

 

[Sleeppy]

Until clinical death was a thing, yes, you could be "sort of dying". I don't see the gospels noting they confirmed with an EKG and EEG or whatever.

Not to mention, Genesis 2:17;

"...dying, you shall die."

@Katzpur

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Is that like being stoned "with stones"?

 

[Kilgore Trout]

To me the Bible in context, interpretation, and agenda is clear at Psalms 92:7 the wicked will be destroyed forever.
In my understanding the executional words from Jesus' mouth will rid the earth of wickedness as mentioned at Isaiah 11:3-4; Revelation 19:14-16.

Indeed, "to you," and "in your understanding." Others mileage may, and does, vary - often by a considerable margin. Your views are just one of thousands of subjective views, with no objective basis for why yours is more, or less, correct than the others.

 

[Katzpur]

Until clinical death was a thing, yes, you could be "sort of dying". I don't see the gospels noting they confirmed with an EKG and EEG or whatever.

You're right. I should have worded it differently. Viole said that Jesus "sort of died." I agree with you that a person can be "sort of dying." But it's impossible to have "sort of died."