-Peacemaker-
.45 Cal
If it exists I certainly don't know what it is. Whaddaya guys think?
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
If it exists I certainly don't know what it is. Whaddaya guys think?
It may be helpful to define what you mean by universalism. According to Wikipedia,
Universalism can refer to the beliefs that all humans either may or will be saved through Jesus Christ and eventually come to harmony in God's kingdom.
There is no basis for such a belief in the Bible. Jesus words in his public talk on the mountain sums up the Bible's teaching: "Go in through the narrow gate; because broad and spacious is the road leading off into destruction, and many are the ones going in through it; whereas narrow is the gate and cramped the road leading off into life, and few are the ones finding it." (Matthew 7:13,14)
Rather than universal salvation, 2 Thessalonians 1:7-9 speaks of "the revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven with his powerful angels in a flaming fire, as he brings vengeance upon those who do not know God and those who do not obey the good news about our Lord Jesus. These very ones will undergo the judicial punishment of everlasting destruction from before the Lord and from the glory of his strength."
I look at universalism as the belief that there are multiple ways to be in the good graces of God apart from believing in his son Jesus
I look at universalism as the belief that there are multiple ways to be in the good graces of God apart from believing in his son Jesus
I look at universalism as the belief that there are multiple ways to be in the good graces of God apart from believing in his son Jesus
I would like to mention that the UU church is a marriage of two sects. Universalists and Unitarians.
This is not the only groups however. Universal life is different from the UU church as well, but has many similar beliefs.
You asked:Jesus said to him, I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me. (John 14:6)
For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself a ransom for all (1 Timothy 2:5)
Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved. (Acts 4:12)
He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him. (John 3:36)
whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. (John 3:15-16)
Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I am He, you will die in your sins. (John 8:24)
And this is the testimony: that God has given us eternal life and this life is in His Son. He who has the Son has life; He who does not have the Son of God does not have life. (1 John 5:11)
Then He said to them, Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day, and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations (Luke 24:46)
I answered the question adequately in my post. Regardless of what these passages say.Christians: is there a biblical defense for belief in universalism?
There are several problems here. First, we need to define universalism. Does it mean "all will be saved?" For that is how I use the term. Or, does it mean, "there are many paths to salvation?" For that is how I think you're using the term.Jesus said to him, I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me. (John 14:6)
For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself a ransom for all (1 Timothy 2:5)
Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved. (Acts 4:12)
He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him. (John 3:36)
whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. (John 3:15-16)
Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I am He, you will die in your sins. (John 8:24)
And this is the testimony: that God has given us eternal life and this life is in His Son. He who has the Son has life; He who does not have the Son of God does not have life. (1 John 5:11)
Then He said to them, Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day, and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations (Luke 24:46)
Many Muslims view Christianity as polytheism. The trinity seems to be the point of contention. If I am not mistaken, it was around 300 years after Christ died before the trinity was really established as doctrine.Since Judaism and Xy are both monotheist<snip>
sojourner said:First, we need to define universalism. Does it mean "all will be saved?" For that is how I use the term. Or, does it mean, "there are many paths to salvation?" For that is how I think you're using the term.
That all humankind will be saved simply because God is too good and loving to damn anyone to hell is the central belief of the Universalist Church's universalism. So, I suppose it would also be correct to say that "many paths lead to God," certainly as present-day Universalism is practiced although I'm uncertain that the earliest Universalist Church would have upheld that, too. It's primary reason for declaring that all would be saved was a rejection of the Calvinist belief that there was an elect group who would go to heaven. Even if someone was a fervent Christian of another denomination, read the Bible, went to church regularly and did good works, that person couldn't go to heaven unless God somehow saw fit to select him or her. And even that person couldn't be certain of heaven until after death at the judgment.
I can sleep at night knowing the God of Abraham and Issac will be just and fair and hears our prayers no matter if we use Jesus name or not when we pray.
.
In other words, this whole thread isn't about the biblical support of universalism. You didn't really want to know that. All you wanted was to construct a platform for bashing Muslims.Luke: 8Whatever city you enter and they receive you, eat what is set before you; 9and heal those in it who are sick, and say to them, The kingdom of God has come near to you. 10But whatever city you enter and they do not receive you, go out into its streets and say, 11Even the dust of your city which clings to our feet we wipe off in protest against you; yet be sure of this, that the kingdom of God has come near. 12I say to you, it will be more tolerable in that day for Sodom than for that city.
I think the NT is pretty clear that those who reject the message of Jesus face damnation. I think the Bible is fairly quiet when it comes to how people will be judged who never heard the Gospel. I think it's possible that 1 Peter implies that one can accept Jesus after death:
18 For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive in the Spirit. 19 After being made alive,[d] he went and made proclamation to the imprisoned spirits 20 to those who were disobedient long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built.
It's important to not dilute the Gospel because one's particular understanding it doesn't doesn't mesh with their sense of justice and fairness. I don't think there's biblical evidence to support a belief that everyone who doesn't hear the Gospel will burn in Hell. I do think there's more than sufficient evidence to support a belief that out and out rejection of the message of Jesus results in a trip to Hell. Regarding Muslims, I take them at their word when they say they believe Jesus is below Muhammed. I take them at their word when they say they don't think he is worthy of worship. I take them at their word when they say they believe the Gospels have been corrupted. How much trust can one have in Jesus if they reject him as Lord and don't find our account of him trustworthy? I also believe the NT when it says that God wasn't please with the worship of the Jews. Keep in mind the Jews also believed they were worshipping the father while rejecting Jesus as his son. I don't think we can select which parts of the trinity we worship and which ones we don't.
John 14
6 Jesus answered, I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. 7 If you really know me, you will know[b] my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him.
8 Philip said, Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us.
9 Jesus answered: Dont you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father.
Hebrew 1:3 The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.
It's important to remember that the God of the OT didn't fully reveal himself until Jesus came. From my pov, if you reject Jesus, you can't plead that you worship the God of the OT (the Father) but not Jesus. On the contrary, now that Jesus has come, you know exactly what the God of the OT looks like, as much as any human can know anyways.
In other words, this whole thread isn't about the biblical support of universalism. You didn't really want to know that. All you wanted was to construct a platform for bashing Muslims.