Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
Heaven, God, Prophets. What evidence?
-
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:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The Restitution Of All Things
- Thread starter FineLinen
- Start date
The ultimate evidence cannot be found in facts, or declarations of faith, or lack thereof.
The evidence must happen as a spiritual awakening of change & transformation within you.
Houston we have a problem !
Science cannot define the scope of the universe.
The universe is moving in a continuous expansion in all directions.
Pi cannot be defined to within one digit 3.14.159 to infinity.
One Million Digits of Pi On One Page!- [Plus Guides And Information] | Pi Day
Our Father who is the Source of Pi & the expanding universe, declares He will fill the universe with the knowledge of Himself.
He climbed the high mountain,
He captured the enemy and seized the booty,
Is it not true that the One who climbed up also climbed down, down to the valley of earth? And the One who climbed down is the One who climbed back up, up to highest heaven.
Our glorious Father/ Pater fills the universe with Himself.
He is the Ending of the All.
Science cannot define the scope of the universe.
The universe is moving in a continuous expansion in all directions.
Pi cannot be defined to within one digit 3.14.159 to infinity.
One Million Digits of Pi On One Page!- [Plus Guides And Information] | Pi Day
Our Father who is the Source of Pi & the expanding universe, declares He will fill the universe with the knowledge of Himself.
He climbed the high mountain,
He captured the enemy and seized the booty,
Is it not true that the One who climbed up also climbed down, down to the valley of earth? And the One who climbed down is the One who climbed back up, up to highest heaven.
Our glorious Father/ Pater fills the universe with Himself.
He is the Ending of the All.
Last edited:
Welcome to Andrew Murray
If God wills the salvation of all, why is it not happening? What about the doctrine of election, as Scripture teaches us? And, what about the Omnipotence of God, which is surely equal to His love that wills the salvation of all? As to election, remember that there are mysteries in God and in Scripture which are beyond our reach. If there are apparently conflicting truths which we cannot reconcile, we know that Scripture was not written, like a book of science, to satisfy the intellect. It is the revelation of the hidden wisdom of God, which tests and strengthens faith and submission, and awakens love and childlike teachableness.
If we cannot understand why His power does not work what His will has purposed, we will find that all that God does or does not do is decided by conditions far beyond our human comprehension. It requires a Divine wisdom to grasp and to order God’s ways....
https://www.christianuniversalism.co...l-restoration/
If God wills the salvation of all, why is it not happening? What about the doctrine of election, as Scripture teaches us? And, what about the Omnipotence of God, which is surely equal to His love that wills the salvation of all? As to election, remember that there are mysteries in God and in Scripture which are beyond our reach. If there are apparently conflicting truths which we cannot reconcile, we know that Scripture was not written, like a book of science, to satisfy the intellect. It is the revelation of the hidden wisdom of God, which tests and strengthens faith and submission, and awakens love and childlike teachableness.
If we cannot understand why His power does not work what His will has purposed, we will find that all that God does or does not do is decided by conditions far beyond our human comprehension. It requires a Divine wisdom to grasp and to order God’s ways....
https://www.christianuniversalism.co...l-restoration/
let me suggest a few annotations in red color:
If there are apparently conflicting truths which you, dear proponents of Universal Reconciliation, cannot reconcile, stop your teaching, please.
Don't just insert contradictions into the Bible. We know that Scripture was not written, like a book of science or ideology, to satisfy your intellect/ opinions.
let me suggest a few annotations in red color:
If there are apparently conflicting truths which you, dear proponents of Universal Reconciliation, cannot reconcile, stop your teaching, please.
Don't just insert contradictions into the Bible. We know that Scripture was not written, like a book of science or ideology, to satisfy your intellect/ opinions.
Thomas: The Christian Scriptures are not a science manual, but the articulations of those who have been inspired by the living God. They will not inspire your intellect or opinions and are not intended to do so.
The "dear proponents" of the reconciliation encompass remarkable individuals like Andrew Murray and others with impeccable stature.
“This much is certain, that we have no theological right to set any sort of limits to the loving-kindness of God which has appeared in Jesus Christ. Our theological duty is to see and understand it as being still greater than we had seen before.” - Karl Barth-
still, no need to insert things that don't fit in, I think.
I can't understand how you guys continue your teaching despite the difficulties that you note yourselves. You have the impression that your doctrine openly contradicts scripture? yet you continue? I can't understand this. This is not how scripture should be dealt with, in my opinion.
Bible only please.
of course not, I never did.
Thomas: The Scriptures are one continuous flow of God's Reach for what has been disrupted by disobedience and sin. That disruption is summed up in one large equation. Adam1 = all mankind "constituted sinners" & the Last Adam = the identical all mankind "constituted righteous."
"Us guys", of whom I rejoice to be a wee part, behold our Father prevailing in His Plan of at-one-ment in the Lord Jesus Christ !
"God is love. His will is love. As He makes His sun to shine on the good and the evil, so His love rests on all. However little we can understand why His love is so long-suffering and patient, we can believe in and be assured of the love that God gives to us-a love whose measure in heaven is the gift of His Son, and on earth every child of man. His love is nothing but His will in its Divine energy doing its very utmost in accordance with the Divine law. Thus, His relationship to mankind is regulated to make men partakers of His blessedness. His will is nothing but His love in its infinite patience and tenderness delighting to win and bless every heart into which it can gain access." -Andrew Murray-
Your whole doctrine hinges on these two groups being identidal. However, there is no hint in the text that would support your theory.
The first group is mentioned by "all" in Romans 5:18.
The second group is called "many" by Romans 5:19.
Now, the proponents of Universal Reconciliation desperately need these two groups to be identical, so you guys sit on the sofa and simply convince yourselves that "all" HAS TO mean "many". With no scriptural evidence at all.
I never denied Jesus's plan of atonement. I don't share your interpretation of it, that's all.
The problem that I see with Universal Reconciliation is that it's all based on presumption.
However, when it comes to safety, one should not merely presume that a victim's contact to former criminals is surely safe.... that's my point. God also sees the needs of the former victims, I think!
Your approach is so one-sided! God is love, your Andrew Murray says, but his love isn't restricted to former perpetrators. There are victims, too!
And I stay with my opinion: once you have the impression of and openly admit to pursuing a doctrine that has contradictions... stop it, please. Don't just carry on pretending that contradictions don't matter.
Thomas: There is no desperation involved in what is proclaimed as the Father's goal in the restitution of the radical all of pas, and super radical ta panta!
It matters diddly regarding the Divine equation proclaimed by St. Paul being all or many/polus. Both sides are equal!
All = all...some = some...polus = polus
Last edited:
“Who, after all, is saying something more objectively atrocious, or more aggressively perverse? The person who claims that every newborn infant enters the world justly under the threat of eternal dereliction, and that a good God imposes or permits the imposition of a state of eternal agony on finite, created rational beings as part of the mystery of his love or sovereignty or justice? Or the person who observes that such ideas are cruel and barbarous and depraved? Which of these two should really be, if not ashamed of his or her words, at least hesitant, ambivalent, and even a little penitent in uttering them? And which has a better right to moral indignation at what the other has said? And, really, don’t these questions answer themselves?
A belief does not merit unconditional reverence just because it is old, nor should it be immune to being challenged in terms commensurate to the scandal it seems to pose. And the belief that a God of infinite intellect, justice, love, and power would condemn rational beings to a state of perpetual torment, or would allow them to condemn themselves on account of their own delusion, pain, and anger, is probably worse than merely scandalous. It may be the single most horrid notion the religious imagination has ever conceived, and the most irrational and spiritually corrosive picture of existence possible. And anyone who thinks that such claims are too strong or caustic, while at the same time finding the traditional notion of a hell of everlasting suffering perfectly unobjectionable, needs to consider whether he or she is really thinking clearly about the matter at all." -David Bentley Hart-
A belief does not merit unconditional reverence just because it is old, nor should it be immune to being challenged in terms commensurate to the scandal it seems to pose. And the belief that a God of infinite intellect, justice, love, and power would condemn rational beings to a state of perpetual torment, or would allow them to condemn themselves on account of their own delusion, pain, and anger, is probably worse than merely scandalous. It may be the single most horrid notion the religious imagination has ever conceived, and the most irrational and spiritually corrosive picture of existence possible. And anyone who thinks that such claims are too strong or caustic, while at the same time finding the traditional notion of a hell of everlasting suffering perfectly unobjectionable, needs to consider whether he or she is really thinking clearly about the matter at all." -David Bentley Hart-
Thomas: Acquaint yourself with a remarkable man (Andrew Murray).
Again: God in essence IS LOVE, it is not a characteristic!
English please. This is an English site.
Don't resort to a different language when you're running out of proper arguments...
Your equaltion only exists in your head, as does your conclusion.
It's like this:
many=many
al=all
both sides of the equation are equal
.Keep it simple. And please stick to English.
When you depict the other side's arguments in a wrong manner, like this man is doing,... it may look like as if your stance is less dangerous.
but this is not what I am doing.
never claimed otherwise.
I don't think my concept of God has become impoverished, mythical, and incredible for modern persons.
I don't think my stance on the matter is scandalous.
My view is not "the single most horrid notion the religious imagination has ever conceived, and the most irrational and spiritually corrosive picture of existence [...]."
I don't think I "need to consider whether he or she is really thinking clearly about the matter at all."
Don't just throw around nor quote empty claims, please.
English please. This is an English site.
Don't resort to a different language when you're running out of proper arguments...
Your equaltion only exists in your head, as does your conclusion.
It's like this:
many=many
al=all
both sides of the equation are equal
Keep it simple. And please stick to English.
Thomas: This will most likely be a shock for you, but the New Covenant is written in koine, not English. This means in order to get to proper translation we must explore the meaning in koine, not English or German etc.
The fact remains: the many/polus were "constituted sinners" in the first Adam, the many/polus were "constituted righteous in the Last!
“Any authentically Christian system is going to have to keep off the kick of human merit and demerit and stick resolutely to a universalism of grace that overrides the subject of human works.”
― Robert Farrar Capon,
I stay with my opinion concerning the many and the all as stated in the Bible.
Please don't write mixed sentences of Greek and English. That was my point. If you post in Greek, provide the translation into English.
Please don't write mixed sentences of Greek and English. That was my point. If you post in Greek, provide the translation into English.
Thomas: Our opinions are exactly that, opinions. The words of Spirit & life reach into the Realm of the Living God, not opinion.
I do not intend to do your homework for you. The words of English are there in numerous translations. The on-line tools for koine are also there for those who desire to grasp what the Spirit of the Lord is saying in any articulation of Scripture. But Thomas, more importantly, every one of us must know for ourselves the majesty of union & communion within Him. I wish you well on your journey!
Please welcome some of those who grasp the Restitution of all
Christian Universalism: Universalist Thought Through Church History
Christian Universalism: Universalist Thought Through Church History