DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Religious Convictions
HTML https://religiousconvictions.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Religious Discussions
*****************************************************
#Post#: 474--------------------------------------------------
Re: Salvation~for some or for all?
By: HappyHeretic Date: December 16, 2014, 8:52 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Users signatures set to off - I won't see it again.
Kind regards,
Mike HM
#Post#: 478--------------------------------------------------
Re: Salvation~for some or for all?
By: A nonny mouse Date: December 16, 2014, 1:22 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
It was me that appended Al's signature.
He said he would make it his signature if it wasn't so long so I
thought "well I don't object to its length so here goes".
As admin I have that option but I'm full of interfering old crap
and open to being knocked into submission when I trespass too
far.
#Post#: 479--------------------------------------------------
Re: Salvation~for some or for all?
By: Alfie Date: December 16, 2014, 1:28 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=A nonny mouse link=topic=20.msg478#msg478
date=1418757756]
It was me that appended Al's signature.
He said he would make it his signature if it wasn't so long so I
thought "well I don't object to its length so here goes".
As admin I have that option but I'm full of interfering old crap
and open to being knocked into submission when I trespass too
far.
[/quote]
i actually have no problem with it ;
in FACT I LIKE IT ; SO THANK YOU
#Post#: 483--------------------------------------------------
Re: Salvation~for some or for all?
By: Kerry Date: December 16, 2014, 3:57 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=HereticMouse link=topic=20.msg470#msg470
date=1418736443]
Err - this wasn't aimed at you particularly, DM, rather I was
asking Al, as it was in his sig.
And maybe I shouldn't have questioned it - its inaccuracy and
negativity did annoy me, though.
Regards,
Mike
[/quote]I don't always read people's signature lines since as a
rule they are repetitive. Sometimes I read them but most of
the time I skip over them. I did not know Al had that in his
signature line. I did however recognize the quote. I
originally wrote that in the thread, Covenants
HTML http://religiousconvictions.createaforum.com/general-discussion/covenants/?message=455.<br
/> :)
In case you didn't read it (and it was a rather long post so I
can see why you might skip over it), I then gave an example
from the NIV to show to what outrageous lengths some people will
go by discussing how the NIV translated 7:22.
Was my statement inaccurate? In part, I'm sure it is; but in
general, I'm sure it isn't. Was it negative? It may seem so,
but sometimes honest assessments of reality come across as harsh
and negative. I think if you went to a Baptist forum and tried
to convince them that eternal damnation was not the only way the
Bible could be read, you could easily get banned; and I doubt
you'd change even one mind. I really do. I was reading one
forum and people were saying it was to the glory of God that
people be eternally damned. There is a barrier there to
thinking that I doubt you or I could break through. For one
thing, they may fear being eternally damned themselves if they
doubted it.
When we Christians read the Bible, we are apt to think of the
Jews as being stubborn. We say they are "God's people" but
they were stubborn and needed to be chastised. We don't see
that as negative or untrue. However it's another matter if
we're talking about ourselves. I see little difference between
the Jews in Jesus' day and the Christians of today. And my
bold assumption is that if all Israel will be saved as Paul
says, then so too will all the Christians even if they are
arrogant and stubborn. I see God working through it all even
if it does look dismal at times.
#Post#: 492--------------------------------------------------
Re: Salvation~for some or for all?
By: A nonny mouse Date: December 17, 2014, 7:50 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Danger Mouse link=topic=20.msg467#msg467
date=1418734388]
I believe I may offended Ezra so much he may not be back.
[/quote]
That's forgivable so long as you pull in a few replacements from
true2who.
#Post#: 495--------------------------------------------------
Re: Salvation~for some or for all?
By: HappyHeretic Date: December 17, 2014, 8:32 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Danger Mouse link=topic=20.msg483#msg483
date=1418767035]
I don't always read people's signature lines since as a rule
they are repetitive. Sometimes I read them but most of the
time I skip over them. I did not know Al had that in his
signature line. I did however recognize the quote. I
originally wrote that in the thread, Covenants
HTML http://religiousconvictions.createaforum.com/general-discussion/covenants/?message=455.<br
/> :)
In case you didn't read it (and it was a rather long post so I
can see why you might skip over it), I then gave an example
from the NIV to show to what outrageous lengths some people will
go by discussing how the NIV translated 7:22.
Was my statement inaccurate? In part, I'm sure it is; but in
general, I'm sure it isn't. Was it negative? It may seem so,
but sometimes honest assessments of reality come across as harsh
and negative. I think if you went to a Baptist forum and tried
to convince them that eternal damnation was not the only way the
Bible could be read, you could easily get banned; and I doubt
you'd change even one mind. I really do. I was reading one
forum and people were saying it was to the glory of God that
people be eternally damned. There is a barrier there to
thinking that I doubt you or I could break through. For one
thing, they may fear being eternally damned themselves if they
doubted it.
When we Christians read the Bible, we are apt to think of the
Jews as being stubborn. We say they are "God's people" but
they were stubborn and needed to be chastised. We don't see
that as negative or untrue. However it's another matter if
we're talking about ourselves. I see little difference between
the Jews in Jesus' day and the Christians of today. And my
bold assumption is that if all Israel will be saved as Paul
says, then so too will all the Christians even if they are
arrogant and stubborn. I see God working through it all even
if it does look dismal at times.
[/quote]
Thanks for the explanation. I haven't followed the covenant
thread - I read the first couple of posts and decided the thread
wasn't for me - I don't have the time nor inclination to read
everything on here.
The first itme I saw it was as a signature - so out of context.
I giess that's why I reacted to it the way I do.
UR is a banned topic on CF (except in the "unorthodox theology"
section where it can be discussed alongside proper heresy - JW,
Mormonism and any other bonkers-ism you care to name. It really
makes one feel welcome.
One of the changes in theology I aluded to was changing from a
eternal-conscious-torment-ist to an Evangelical Universalist. I
used forums to ask questions as I was on the journey. It was
interestng that the people who answered gently were, in the most
part, supportive of EU. Those who didn't support it were in the
main, quite intolerant towards the theology. Than in itself
helped me decide. If we are growing to be more and more like
Him and our image of Him is vengeful and vindictive, then I
guess there is a tendency towards becoming vengeful and
vindictive ourselves. And vice-versa. EU promotes even more
grace than the trad. view - and there is a tendency for EU-ists
to show more grace to people. Well, that's my perspective.
I understand your quote in context. Maybe its not so great out
of context.
Kind regards,
Mike HM
#Post#: 531--------------------------------------------------
Re: Salvation~for some or for all?
By: HappyHeretic Date: December 19, 2014, 8:36 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Florence Nightingale was a Christian Universalist.
In regard to God, and the traditional church doctrine of Hell,
Florence Nightingale
HTML http://age-during.com/florence-nightingale-on-the-traditional-church-doctrine-of-hell/<br
/>had this to say:
“I can’t love because I am ordered. Least of all can I love One
who seems only to make me miserable here to torture me
hereafter. Show me that He is good, that He is loveable, and I
shall love Him without being told.
But does any preacher show this? He may say that God is good,
but he shows Him to be very bad; he may say that God is ‘Love’,
but he shows him to be hate, worse than any hate of man. As the
Persian poet says; ‘If God punishes me for doing evil by doing
me evil, how is he better than I?’ And it is hard to answer, for
certainly the worst man would hardly torture his enemy, if he
could, for ever. And unless God has a scheme that every man is
to saved for ever, it is hard to say in what He is not worse
than man; for all good men would save others if they could…
It is of no use saying that God is just, unless we define what
justice is. In all Christian times people have said that ‘God is
just’ and have credited him with an injustice such as transcends
all human injustice that it is possible to conceive.”
Mike HH
#Post#: 534--------------------------------------------------
Re: Salvation~for some or for all?
By: Helen Date: December 19, 2014, 1:32 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Yes for sure...I really like that...it makes good Godly sense..
I agree for sure. :)
#Post#: 585--------------------------------------------------
Re: Salvation~for some or for all?
By: HappyHeretic Date: December 24, 2014, 5:39 am
---------------------------------------------------------
It does to me, too, Helen.
So well written, too. A few short paragraphs saying so much.
Blessings,
Mike HM
*****************************************************
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page