Snippets from the hard copy Universal Reconciliation library of Rodger Tutt TEMP CLOSED BY MODERATOR

rodgertutt's picture

-------------------------------------------------------------
Thread temporarily set to read only by Moderator.
After dialogue with everyone intersted in this thread, I will decide whether not later than this Saturday to reinstate the thread for contributions or delete it entirely.

Two points:
1. The purpose of the Interdenominational Discussions room is to provide a moderated place for comparisons between Christian belief systems where that "discussion" is held to the posting guidelines. The posting guidelines are summed up in "love your neighbor as yourself" and I am the final decision maker as to who is and is not doing that. Please see the room description at http://www.ccel.org/forum. I get the impression that the purpose here is really about Roger pasting posts here as he has in numerous other websites, without ownership or explanation supporting his own position on the subject he introduced. That isnt a discussion. A discussion requires some ownership of the subject material and the ability to cogently articulate it, not just paste what others have said. Hence there is no discussion but rather mere pasting of other people's thoughts, carefully and appreciatively cited. If you look at the discussions on Seventh Day Adventist and Reformed Theology, tough dialogue took place and those who did not concur with those belief systems discussed them; but there was far more there than just pasting from a book. That isnt a dialogue but rather using ccel to advertise one's belief system. It becomes impossible for anyone to respond/refute/discuss all the assertions made when the person is merely pasting other people's works in shotgun fashion. Roger and all participants - I can be reached at dfugett2010@gmail.com for further discussion so I understand where you all stand.

2. Munga and Lee - take a litte time to cool off. The topics addressed are belief you each care about in your heart and beliefs you view the other to hold in disdain. Step back and prayerfully contemplate the fruitfulness or futility of continued discussion of belief systems worlds apart, literally and spiritually. While seeking to be understood are you spending as much time seeking to understand what the other person is saying?? I am not saying blindly agree for the sake of some compromising ecumenical peace BUT are you asking enough questions to understand what the other is saying before responding positive or negatively. While an active poster here, Michael Legna and I spent hours discussing and debating and clarifying what we thought the other believed and what they actually believed. Having a setting where some dispute with careful listening occurred sharpened what and why I believe what I believe, and showed me those of Michael's faith can and often do love the same Jesus as I do. Such careful seeking to understand also allowed us to see where we were worlds apart, and precisely on what points having laid aside all the myths we believed about each other. I can and do call Michael friend and brother while disagreeing with the major points of his theology at the same time. The proponents and opponents of the view under discussion, like dozens of others, need to stop trying to save the world from the other belief system and talk to each other.

Some thoughts how the discussion might go from here. How do those of us who believe in eternal punishment reconcile that with God who claims He is love? How do those of us who dont believe in eternal punishment reconcile that with a God who claims He is Holy? What is a or the biblical definition of holiness and love and how do those attributes in God interface with those of us in the human realm? Where does biblical teachings of man's nature and sin condition fit in with the idea of universalism? Is there a difference in universal atonement, universal reconcilation and universal salvation; and does man's sinful nature impact what God has said He will do? To what extent, if any, has God limited his desire to save those who reject Jesus Christ? If God can save those who accept a "Messiah" but reject Jesus as that Messiah, as some hold, then can he not also just save all people? What is the biblical doctrine of election and does univesalism reconcile or negate that doctrine as we understand it and is there a logically and scripturally consistent way to reconcile the two doctrines?

CAUTION/WARNING - I DONT KNOW YOU ROGER SO I AM NOT SAYING YOU WOULD DO THIS BUT DONT BEGIN POSTING THESE SNIPPETS ANYWHERE ELSE ON CCEL EXCEPT THIS FORUM THREAD IF I DECIDE TO REOPEN IT.
-------------------------------------------------------------

Hi everyone. I'm Rodger Tutt in Toronto, Canada. Every day or so I would like to post a snippet from a different hard copy book in my Universal Reconciliation library. I hope you enjoy them.

#1 - A SNIPPET FROM REDEMPTION ALL IN ALL - RAY PRINZING (my earthly hero and mentor)

“Aionian punishment means of the age, or age during. It is a period of time designated by God for the bringing to naught that which is wrong. God will mete out exactly the amount of time necessary for correction, but it will not be prolonged beyond that which is needed. All of God’s punishments are corrective in nature, motivated by His love, and used to work into our good and His praise.”

JeffLogan's picture

They are willingly ignorant

Roger,

Your cause was brought to my mind today. Though I haven't written much in response to your postings you may recall that I too do not believe the Bible teaches eternal torment in hell fire. But you are probably also aware that I do not go so far to the other side as to embrace Universal Reconciliation. I find a resting place in the middle. I see lots of problems with the teaching of eternally burning hell fires but I also see problems with Universal Reconciliation. And not just scriptural discrepancies, but logical ones. For example, it promotes the idea that one may live as one wishes for we all end up in the same eternal abode of bliss in the end; That both those who have lived wickedly and despised God's grace and those who have embraced God's grace and shunned evil will both reap the same reward of eternal life. And this despite Bible verses which clearly delineate between the rewards of each group, e.g. "the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life." Universal Reconciliation would prefer to grant eternal life to both groups.

Another passage which seems to be willingly ignored is found in 2 Peter, chapter 3, where Peter writes about the flood as an example of what is coming upon the wicked at the time of the end. In Noah's day the wicked perished in a lake of water whereas in our day they will perish in a lake of fire. He specifically writes, "Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men." This one passage would correct a lot of thinking concerning both Universal Reconciliation and Eternal Fires if it weren't for our willing ignorance, I guess, because it not only speaks of the punishment but also suggests its duration by way of association with the earth--which we know will be made new for the meek to inherit by way of God's promise.

But the passage also addresses the long-suffering of God; that He waits because He is unwilling that any should perish. The very fact that He has tarried so long suggests that some are still lost. Else, would He not have come by now? On one hand He has the pleas of the martyrs who cry out for vengeance day and night. "How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?" On the other hand is His long-suffering which forbids Him to close the door of probation before every soul has decided one way or the other and there is no changing their minds.

The fact of the matter is that there will simply be some souls who would never choose to live in heaven where all is righteous and pure. In fact, to take such an individual and place them in a pure environment would not be joy to them but a living hell. Scripture tells us that at Christ's coming many will cry for the rocks and mountains to fall on them to hide them from the face of Jesus. Billy Joel summed up one perspective when he wrote the lyrics, "I'd rather laugh with the sinners than cry with the saints, the sinners are much more fun." Some people would simply never choose to go to heaven and be "confined" to a righteous life.

Yes, the Lord is extremely long-suffering. And it is His desire to save every soul. But the notion that every soul wants to be in heaven is merely wishful thinking and is probably born more of a faulty human characteristic that is intolerant of people who are different than from a godly love which extends freedom to each person to be a unique individual. It is said in the Bible that God is love. The very essence of love is liberty. And there is no love greater than God's love. Therefore, there is no liberty that is greater than that found in God. The depth of love can be measured by the breadth of liberty. And it is because of God's great love that some souls will perish. Love that is not freely given is not love. Love cannot be coerced. Therefore, God can not accept a forced allegiance from us but rather allows us, by means of our intellect, to appreciate His worthiness to receive our affection and allegiance. This is summed up in the old adage, "If you love something, set it free. If it comes back to you, it's yours. If it doesn't, it never was." All of which, with our definition of rape, proves humans understand the relationship between love and liberty. This doesn't mean that you let it go as in 'stop loving it.' It simply means that you cannot contain nor control love. It must be freely given in order to be love.

Well, I'll leave you with those thoughts.


_______ _______ ______ ______ ______

“Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you."




Advertisements