Argument for Universalism

[vern_humphrey]

jimmy:

Vern, you can’t say they died unrepentant. The grace of God can change someone in an instant. We do not know how they were when they died.

But I can’t say they DID repent, either (and if I were a betting man, I’d go with “no repentance.”)

And “I can’t say” isn’t strong enough to establish a belief.

jimmy:

The Church does not reject the idea that all could concievably be saved.

There’s a big difference between “conceiveably” and “are.”

The Church does not accept Universalism.

 

[TNT]

jimmy:

Vern, you can’t say they died unrepentant. We do not know how they were when they died.

I can.

*I do. They’re in the very hub of hell! God gave them up to their wickedness. A’sta la vista, baby.

 

[jimmy]

vern humphrey:

But I can’t say they DID repent, either (and if I were a betting man, I’d go with “no repentance.”)

And “I can’t say” isn’t strong enough to establish a belief.

There’s a big difference between “conceiveably” and “are.”

The Church does not accept Universalism.

They may very well be in hell, but no one knows and we can not be sure. The Catholic Church recognizes that God will continue to pour his graces on his people till death. If they change due to the graces, then they may not be in hell.

I agree though that there are probably many people in hell. I just think it is very possible that they could repent in the end of there life.

 

[jimmy]

TNT:

I can.

I do. They’re in the very hub of hell! God gave them up to their wickedness. A’sta la vista, baby.

Well you are making a judgement only God can.

 

[vern_humphrey]

jimmy:

They may very well be in hell, but no one knows and we can not be sure. The Catholic Church recognizes that God will continue to pour his graces on his people till death. If they change due to the graces, then they may not be in hell.

I agree though that there are probably many people in hell. I just think it is very possible that they could repent in the end of there life.

“We can’t be sure” is no basis for belief. The Church doesn’t accept Universalism.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

TNT:

I can.

I do. They’re in the very hub of hell! God gave them up to their wickedness. A’sta la vista, baby.

Try not to sound too pleased. Having said that, universalism is a huge heresy. As has been pointed out, it totally contravenes our free will. There is a question I would like to ask, however. I’ve been Catholic for seventeen years and I only recently heard that the Church teaches that there are degrees of suffering in hell. Can anyone elaborate? Of course, no matter how little you might suffer, relatively speaking, it is for eternity and God is not there.

 

[Ahimsa]

Without doubt even in the demonic depths the creature remains the work of God and the traits of divine design are never effaced. The image of God, obscured by the infidelity of sin, is nevertheless preserved intact, and that is why there is always, even in the abyss, an ontological receptacle for divine appeal, for the grace of God.

– Father Georges Florovsky, Eastern Orthodox theologian

 

[jman507]

Ahimsa:

A common argument against Universalism (the idea that all will eventually be saved) is that God doesn’t reject us – rather, we reject God, and God cannot override our freedom to reject him.

But ponder this quote from If Grace is True:

**In my obsession with defending human freedom, I forgot a far more important truth: God is free…I believed in God’s power to do anything, except that which God desired most – to redeem the world.

I defended our freedom to reject God but denied God’s freedom to reject our rejection.

Most of us reluctantly acknowledge God’s freedom to love those we’ve rejected. What we find objectionable is the suggestion God loves even those who’ve rejected him.
**

Then is God also free to reject our faith in him?

God is not free to be whatever God wants to be, God is only able to be God. God is the Way, the Truth, Justice, Mercy, and Love. While I’m sure that God can love Satan and all those in hell, I doubt they are able to find their way into heaven.

 

[Zooey]

Ahimsa:

A common argument against Universalism (the idea that all will eventually be saved) is that God doesn’t reject us – rather, we reject God, and God cannot override our freedom to reject him.

But ponder this quote from If Grace is True:

In my obsession with defending human freedom, I forgot a far more important truth: God is free…I believed in God’s power to do anything, except that which God desired most – to redeem the world.

I defended our freedom to reject God but denied God’s freedom to reject our rejection.

Most of us reluctantly acknowledge God’s freedom to love those we’ve rejected. What we find objectionable is the suggestion God loves even those who’ve rejected him.

God cannot be other than God…This quote is like the old nonsense about, “If God can do anything, can He make a rock too big for Him to lift?”
Universalism would (1) Make God a liar;(2) Make God unfair to His faithful people;(3)Make Jesus Christ a liar;(4) Make Jesus Christ a fool for dying on the cross–to save people who were not lost;(5)Make God the Father a sadist for requiring the death of Christ;(6) Make a mockery of all Christian martyrs of all periods of the history of Christianity;(7) Turn the Bible into a book of fairy tales;&(8) Reward Hitler & Stalin for the mass murders they presided over.

And for what?? So somebody could smile & nod, & not have to deal with the reality that there are actually such things as moral laws, original & personal sin, and that Hell is a real place.

Other than that, it’s a dandy idea.I can see it all now… .Hitler & :getholy: St. Teresa having:nope: :nope: teacakes in Heaven. I think NOT!!!

 

[Ahimsa]

From MysteriousFaith:

One of my more nagging questions revolves around the actualization of man’s free will. I asked a pastor friend of mine this question: will we still have our free will in heaven? If so, why will we not continue to choose wrongly? For some, the answer to this question is that in fellowship with God we experience a reality where sin has lost all its pleasure. This poses a problem for me: was this not the same reality that Adam and Eve had in the Garden of Eden? And yet they denied this relationship seeking their own pleasure, wisdom and self-actualization. We are even taught that a being not of our physical reality – Satan – also participated in the glories of heaven and yet chose to rebel against God.

It appears to me that the Bible teaches even proximity to the Divine is no insurance that our free will does not get the better of us. In fact, we can look no further than the record of Genesis and see man after man to who God physically appeared proceeded to grossly sin afterwards – yet another reminder that closeness to the Divine is no guarantee of freedom from sin.

Surely the answer to this is not that in heaven our free will is removed from us? If that is so, would we not become the automatons we claim God never wanted in the first place? And if this reality of a sinless heaven was possible initially, why was it not the subject of the original creation? If heaven is a reality of such a construct where sin loses all its appeal, why was this not the essence of the original creation? Why create the need for hell if point zero in the creation of man could have been only that of heaven?

We may then rightly ask what purpose all that we know as creation – time, the universe, humanity’s need to experience death and intense suffering – what could all of this serve? My answer: have you ever been forgiven? Have you ever known the soul crushing guilt of having wronged another? Have you experienced forgiveness for this wrong? What if the story of humanity is but an object lesson in God’s sovereignty and the ultimate revelation of His love – something forgiveness articulates with a power all its own? If He created out of an act of pure love, can we assume His ultimate plan ends in pure love? And what better ending than that of all of creation bound up, rejoicing in a Creator who gave them complete freedom and allowed them to stray, only to bring them back to Him in the ultimate act of redemption and love. I can imagine a spiritual reality of all of man-kind, across all of history, gathered worshiping at the feet of our shared Maker – a Maker who had no need for us, but chose to make us so that we could know as much of a fellowship with Him as created beings could. Universalism rests in the belief that such a communal and eternal reality is for all to ultimately share – a hope I have as well.

 

[TNT]

jimmy:

Well you are making a judgement only God can.

Nah, only recognizing the obvious.

BUT, you can pray for these human flesh predators if you want to. For if they were saved, then they most certainly in the bottom of purgatory, along with Nero, Caligulous, etc.

BTW, when was they last time you found it suitable to pray for them, I mean by name?