Could God's plan for the lost be this simple?

[Mister E]

>Alfred Persson said:
>I agree. But we likely disagree about postmortem evangelization. That the torments of Hell do more than punish for sin, they refine by burning away all self delusion and bondage to sin, so the dead can repent and confess belief in Christ for salvation. Then on Judgment Day they rise to a resurrection of life:

>Hopeful said
>I can't agree with that, as it is written..."And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: " (Heb 9:27)
>Were your POV correct, it would read..."And as it is appointed unto men once to die, then the second chance, but after this the judgment:"
>If there was a second chance, why not a third and fourth?

That would be redundant as those who go through the trial after death then eagerly wait for Christ's second coming FOR salvation.


>Alfred Persson said:
>28 "Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice
>29 "and come forth-- those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation. (Jn. 5:28-29 NKJ)

>Hopeful said
>This verse refutes any second chance.
>Death, resurrection, judgement.

On the contrary, Jesus said these hear His voice while still in the grave = hell. Those who obey what they heard, do good and rise to a resurrection of life.


>Alfred Persson said:
>For this reason the gospel was preached also to those who are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit. (1 Pet. 4:6 NKJ)


>Hopeful said
>The "dead" of this verse are those of 1 Peter 1:9-12; the prophets of the OT and those who heard them.
>"Prison" is the word used for "grave".

Not according to context. Its the same dead God judges:

5 They will give an account to Him who is ready to judge the living and the dead.
6 For this reason the gospel was preached also to those who are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit. (1 Pet. 4:5-6 NKJ)


>Alfred Persson said:
>3 For I indeed, as absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged (as though I were present) him who has so done this deed.
>4 In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when you are gathered together, along with my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ,
>5 deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.
>(1 Cor. 5:3-5 NKJ)

>Hopeful said
>"spirit" (small 's') is the word Paul used to describe the "church"

That's eisegetical. "to the spirits of just men made perfect" (Heb. 12:23 NKJ)

In context Paul says Satan will kill this sinner, destroy his flesh. Paul hope this leads to his salvation, "that his spirit may be saved". The day of the LORD Jesus is Judgment Day, when all appear before the throne of Christ:

I charge you therefore before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who will judge the living and the dead at His appearing and His kingdom: (2 Tim. 4:1 NKJ)



>Alfred Persson said:
>27 And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment,
>28 so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. To those who eagerly wait for Him He will appear a second time, apart from sin, for salvation. (Heb. 9:27-10:1 NKJ)

>Hopeful said
>There is no purgatory.

Scripture speaks of the refining fire, purgatory is a Catholic term.

And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried: they shall call on my name, and I will hear them: I will say, It is my people: and they shall say, The LORD is my God. (Zech. 13:9 KJV)

Alfred-- can I point you to a feature this site offers to make your posts and replies more easily readable? Rather than the jumbled mess above, consider using the quote feature (multi-quote). To do this, simply highlight a section of text that you would like to respond to, and click the "Quote" button that pops up. You can do this line by line and even quote text from different posts to include as one. Then, when you are ready to reply click the "Insert quotes" button that is bottom right of this reply box where you are typing, and it will insert the quotes you highlighted. It should look something like this>>>

We will never fully understand God's transcendent eternal perspective. To say what God "surely" would or would not have done is human pride. God wasn't building a factory and humans aren't products. We are beings with free will in what seems to be an environment that was intended by God to be morally challenging. The thesis I've set forth above is plausible - awful as this world often seems to us from our finite human perspective, God may know from his transcendent eternal perspective that it's the world that will achieve the maximal good. We will never explain mysteries like this in a logical, connect-the-dots sort of way, and it's futile to try.

When our LORD was asked if few would be saved, He replied few of that generation who rejected Him would be, but the SAVED would pour in from all four corners of the earth:

23 Then one said to Him, "Lord, are there few who are saved?" And He said to them,
24 "Strive to enter through the narrow gate, for many, I say to you, will seek to enter and will not be able.
25 "When once the Master of the house has risen up and shut the door, and you begin to stand outside and knock at the door, saying,`Lord, Lord, open for us,' and He will answer and say to you,`I do not know you, where you are from,'
26 "then you will begin to say,`We ate and drank in Your presence, and You taught in our streets.'
27 "But He will say,`I tell you I do not know you, where you are from. Depart from Me, all you workers of iniquity.'
28 "There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, and yourselves thrust out.
29 "They will come from the east and the west, from the north and the south, and sit down in the kingdom of God. (Lk. 13:23-29 NKJ)

It will make your responses and who you are quoting (as well as from where) much easier for readers to follow.

 

[Edward]

No kidding .

I am going to torture you till you love Me ? ! ? Edward , eddif , have you ever heard anything like this ?

Yes I have lol.

 

[for_his_glory]

Alfred Persson might I also suggest making your postings a little shorter if possible as not to many will read through such long postings. Break your post down as much as you can as it makes it easier for others to reply.
Thank you.

 

[Consecrated Life]

There is a reason that the prophet of God and a man after God's own heart, King David, expressed a sense of calm relief at the death of one son:
" David said unto his servents, 'IS THE CHILD DEAD ?'
And they said, he is dead.
Then David arose from the earth, and washed ,and anointed himself, changed
his apparel, came into the House of the Lord and Worshipped....
....I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me.
( 2 Samuel 12:19-23 )

And yet at the death of his other son , no sense of calm or future hope at all expressed.
Just the inconsolable grief of no future hope or of ever seeing his son again:

" And the king said unto Cushi, ' is the young man Absalom safe? '
....And the King was much moved, and went up to the chamber over the gate
and wept, and he went, thus he said ' O my son Absalom, my son, my son, Absalom !
Would God I had died for thee,
O Absalom. my son, my son !
..The people heard say that day how the king was grieved for his son.
( 2 Samuel 18:32-33, 19:1-4 )

As a Christian I cannot listen to the stark difference, (reversal it could be said) in David's response at learning of the death of two different son's without believing that David clearly understood that one son he would see again and, be with for eternity , and the other son he would never see again.
For me I will trust what the man after God's own heart understood above all others as to what our eternal fate after death entails .

 

[hawkman]

Christianity is rife with huge mysteries that aren't easily explained away.

I trust God in all things , so just maybe God wanted it to remain a mystery or we would not understand even if the mystery was explained to us . After all we are finite creatures with finite brains .

The fate of those who never heard or will never hear the Gospel message is one of them. In addition, many technically "hear" the Gospel message but, due to circumstances of upbringing and culture, are unlikely to hear it in any meaningful way or to respond positively. I'm content to live with this mystery. If I had to guess, my guess would be that our understanding of Christian exclusivity, of what it means for Jesus to be the only way by which people come to the Father, is flawed.

My understanding is there is only one way to the Father and I have never seen it any other way from what I have read in God's Word .
I believe all of mankind will be given an equal chance at redemption through Jesus Christ .
But how is that going to be accomplished you might ask .
I don't have the foggiest notion .
Just as I don't have the foggiest notion about a lot of things God has accompished !
Like , how are we alive on this spinning mass of rock , molten rock and water , hanging on nothing with a environment perfect for life ?

 

[Mister E]

Surely Omniscient God would not create if most of those who come into existence, are lost forever. If a man built a factory that lost over 90% of its product, he would be labeled a fool.

Did God have a sure fire plan that did not rely on humans for success? Could it be this simple, He makes all things work together to save His Beloved, every one of them:

And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose. (Rom. 8:28 NKJ)

Now let's work through this other jumble.... beginning with your premise.

-First, -did you produce that video? It speaks in the first person, so I gather that it's your own work and that the website it points toward (endtimenews.net) is also your own. I read and enjoyed your testimony and conversion story from a JW theological perspective to your call into a Baptist Radio preacher. From there it seems you have adopted Calvin's views and much of his terminology (from your vid) as well as his cessationist doctrine as your own- certainly you've been heavily influenced. Your views diverge from 'mainstream orthodoxy' where it concerns this particular eschatology and what you call postmortem evangelism.

So let's look at that.

Paul commended the Bereans-- who many might consider the original skeptics, but I do not. They didn't set out to prove new ideas false, but were open-minded (Paul says "noble-minded) enough to examine the unfamiliar concepts he taught "to see if they might be true."

Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so. (Acts17)

That's vastly different than rejecting an idea because someone doesn't agree with it. It's much different than picking apart an idea with the intent to disprove it. So with that frame of reference and attitude of heart, I'd like to examine your premise.... reiterated here>

Surely Omniscient God would not create if most of those who come into existence, are lost forever. If a man built a factory that lost over 90% of its product, he would be labeled a fool.

Surely?

 

[eddif]

We just don't see eye to eye on this topic.
There are many more topics though, so TTYL.

@Hopeful
The quote of eddif is missing my answering hawkmans question in post 13.
And the thing like (this) is about a post by Alfred.
Which the question was:
"Edward , eddif , have you ever heard anything like this ?"
The (this is Referring to a previous post, and not my following statement.)

Hopefully I am agreeing with Hopeful. LOL
The rich man and Lazarus story comments by eddif INHO details the true grave condition.

I agree it is fact not a parable.

eddif

 

[Mister E]

Let's set aside 'omniscience" for the moment. Can we talk about a loving God? Doesn't that personalize the conversation in a better frame of reference? Who cares is God is all knowing, if He isn't loving. That's the crux of your premise in my estimation-- Would a loving God create people knowing that most of them would be destroyed?

Asked and answered-- No.

But, using your analogy- "God" built a factory and called it Earth and the product produced was people. Ah.... that's where you slipped. The product is not people, it's fruit. Reimagine your analogy like this. God didn't build a factory- He planted a garden. In it he buried a seed in the soil and from that soil came a tree-- and on it grew lovely peaches....

The peaches were harvested at the end of the growing season, and distributed in jars-- 'canned peaches.' The product was not the containers, but the peaches.

Did you know that the fruit is sweet, and for pure enjoyment-- and the container is thrown away? Having served it's purpose it's discarded. It was only designed to carry the fruit. What you are asking above is really-- would an all knowing (or loving) God make fruit containers with the intent that they would be destroyed- or recycled (ashes to ashes, dust to dust)? And the answer to that question is unequivocally- Yes.

 

[eddif]

Thanks for the lengthy response. I'll just offer some general comments and move on.

• Neither Revelation nor End Times speculation is a big part of my Christian life. As Bob Dylan said, "You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows." I believe Jesus gave enough guidance In Matthew 24. For whatever Revelation may be worth - it's inclusion in the Bible was controversial - I believe it receives way too much attention and is mostly a distraction from what Christianity should be about.
  
  
• You've obviously put a great deal of effort and thought into constructing your theology. I respect the effort and am experienced enough to realize debating it would go nowhere. Perhaps selfishly, I concern myself with my own salvation and my own relationship with God and mostly let others worry about theirs.
  
  
• Christianity is rife with huge mysteries that aren't easily explained away. The fate of those who never heard or will never hear the Gospel message is one of them. In addition, many technically "hear" the Gospel message but, due to circumstances of upbringing and culture, are unlikely to hear it in any meaningful way or to respond positively. I'm content to live with this mystery. If I had to guess, my guess would be that our understanding of Christian exclusivity, of what it means for Jesus to be the only way by which people come to the Father, is flawed.
  
  
• My Christianity is, to the maximum extent possible (which is certainly not 100%), rational and evidence-based. I'm rational enough to recognize that naturalistic atheism could be ontologically true, as could Buddhism or any other ism. The mainstream understanding of Christianity - my understanding, for that matter - might be only 70% or 40% ontologically true. I thus don't believe that trying to construct a connect-the-dots theology is productive. To paraphrase Thoreau, I prefer my Christianity with wide margins.
  
  
• Your theology does eliminate some of the problems, but I believe it does so at too great a price. If the opportunity to turn to God continues after death, it makes this lifetime almost pointless. If God were going to allow conversion after his existence and the reality of Hell were 100% evidential certainties, why would he not have made these things 100% certainties from the day of the Fall? I guarantee you, if these things had been made 100% certainties from the day of the Fall, the number of lost would be miniscule and God would have resolved his "dilemma" far more successfully than your theology posits. The reason God didn't and doesn't do this is obvious: It would be coercive, and the supposed "free will" decisions to turn to God would be coerced ones. The same would be true of a post-death, sitting-in-Hell "conversion."
  
  
• As with Once Saved Always Saved theology, Universalism and the progressive theology that posits a warm-and-fuzzy, endlessly tolerant Jesus, your theology is dangerously misleading if it isn't true. If people believe they have a post-death opportunity at conversion, it's a simple fact that they are likely to take the importance of a decision in this lifetime far less seriously. I'm wary of any theology with this potential, not to mention any theology that is far outside the mainstream of what Christianity has been for 2,000 years. Hence, my preference is just to live with the mystery.

BTW, my reference to "orthodox" theology was in the sense of "mainstream." I'm very familiar with Orthodox theology, which does have a universalistic strand as exemplified by nominally Orthodox theologians like David Bentley Hart - but this is a fringe strand, and your theology couldn't be described as conventionally Orthodox.

With that, I'll bow out and wish you we

Mysteries are a part of the things of God.
Romans 1:20 kjv
20. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, evenhis eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
Matthew 13:35 kjv
35. That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world.

Jesus spoke in parables so that hearing they might not hear
Matthew 13:15 kjv
15. For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.

The mysteries are for those with open ears and eyes. We struggle with the mysteries, but the Holy Spirit will lead us into all truth.

eddif

 

[Hopeful]

I dont agree that it was a parable. It doesn’t follow the standard parable pattern. I believe Jesus was giving us a glimpse for our edification

If that edifies you, then God be praised.
It makes me thankful I got the rich man's "message" before it was too late.

 

[Hopeful]

@Hopeful
The quote of eddif is missing my answering hawkmans question in post 13.
And the thing like (this) is about a post by Alfred.
Which the question was:
"Edward , eddif , have you ever heard anything like this ?"
The (this is Referring to a previous post, and not my following statement.)

Hopefully I am agreeing with Hopeful. LOL
The rich man and Lazarus story comments by eddif INHO details the true grave condition.

I agree it is fact not a parable.

eddif

It seems like I accidently got part of your post glued onto the other write's post.
It was too late to edit, so it stays there forever... LOL
That being said, I don't believe parables are to be taken literally, as the "moral of the story" is what Jesus presented.
I mean, was there an actual unjust steward?, an actual wayward son?, actual children sitting in the market?
I don't believe Abraham will be sitting by and giving instructions to the dead.
For the dead, it is too late.

 

[Cnkw3]

If that edifies you, then God be praised.
It makes me thankful I got the rich man's "message" before it was too late.

Aren’t we built up in our knowledge of life after death thanks to the information jesus gave us? I think so. We learn that hades has two compartments. One bad, one good and there’s no crossing over. Also we learn that those in hades have no awareness of what is happening here on earth. So, no your long lost relative is probably not looking down on you right now. We learn that the word God gave us is sufficient for us to make it to the good part of hades, and we dont need the miraculous that people today claim they have. We also learn that salvation will not be available after death. If so, it would have been offered. We learn also that IF your long lost relative died under a false doctrine they most definitely would want you to change and not continue to do the same.
I’d say that’s all pretty edifying to me.

 

[Alfred Persson]

Now let's work through this other jumble.... beginning with your premise.

-First, -did you produce that video? It speaks in the first person, so I gather that it's your own work and that the website it points toward (endtimenews.net) is also your own. I read and enjoyed your testimony and conversion story from a JW theological perspective to your call into a Baptist Radio preacher. From there it seems you have adopted Calvin's views and much of his terminology (from your vid) as well as his cessationist doctrine as your own- certainly you've been heavily influenced. Your views diverge from 'mainstream orthodoxy' where it concerns this particular eschatology and what you call postmortem evangelism.

So let's look at that.

Paul commended the Bereans-- who many might consider the original skeptics, but I do not. They didn't set out to prove new ideas false, but were open-minded (Paul says "noble-minded) enough to examine the unfamiliar concepts he taught "to see if they might be true."

Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so. (Acts17)

That's vastly different than rejecting an idea because someone doesn't agree with it. It's much different than picking apart an idea with the intent to disprove it. So with that frame of reference and attitude of heart, I'd like to examine your premise.... reiterated here>


Surely?

Yes, God's ways are perfect. In fact, I don't believe God would have created if He would lose even ONE of His Elect, to damnation.

 

[Alfred Persson]

Let's set aside 'omniscience" for the moment. Can we talk about a loving God? Doesn't that personalize the conversation in a better frame of reference? Who cares is God is all knowing, if He isn't loving. That's the crux of your premise in my estimation-- Would a loving God create people knowing that most of them would be destroyed?

Asked and answered-- No.

But, using your analogy- "God" built a factory and called it Earth and the product produced was people. Ah.... that's where you slipped. The product is not people, it's fruit. Reimagine your analogy like this. God didn't build a factory- He planted a garden. In it he buried a seed in the soil and from that soil came a tree-- and on it grew lovely peaches....

The peaches were harvested at the end of the growing season, and distributed in jars-- 'canned peaches.' The product was not the containers, but the peaches.

Did you know that the fruit is sweet, and for pure enjoyment-- and the container is thrown away? Having served it's purpose it's discarded. It was only designed to carry the fruit. What you are asking above is really-- would an all knowing (or loving) God make fruit containers with the intent that they would be destroyed- or recycled (ashes to ashes, dust to dust)? And the answer to that question is unequivocally- Yes.

Can't set aside God's Omniscience, its the foundation of my argument. AND the product is people, only humans are made in the image and likeness of God, and then given dominion over the crown jewel of creation, earth:

26 Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth."
27 So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.
28 Then God blessed them, and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth." (Gen. 1:26-28 NKJ)

You don't do that for "containers" you plan to discard.

 

[Mister E]

Can't set aside God's Omniscience, its the foundation of my argument. AND the product is people, only humans are made in the image and likeness of God, and then given dominion over the crown jewel of creation, earth:

26 Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth."
27 So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.
28 Then God blessed them, and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth." (Gen. 1:26-28 NKJ)

You don't do that for "containers" you plan to discard.

The flesh counts for nothing friend.

The Gardener carefully prunes the tree, not because He hates certain branches, but because He loves the tree He loves the fruit.

Your eyes are fixed on the wrong thing.

 

[Alfred Persson]

The flesh counts for nothing friend.

The Gardener carefully prunes the tree, not because He hates certain branches, but because He loves the tree He loves the fruit.

Your eyes are fixed on the wrong thing.

Incorrect, They are fixed on the text = exegesis.
While yours are focused on an idea not found in the context = eisegesis.

 

[Mister E]

Incorrect, They are fixed on the text = exegesis.
While yours are focused on an idea not found in the context = eisegesis.

So you say. Generally, when I encounter someone stuck in their own ideas and needing to always have the last word- I leave them be and let them have it.

I’ll catch the next cab.

 

[Hopeful]

Aren’t we built up in our knowledge of life after death thanks to the information jesus gave us?

Yes. (Thankyou Jesus)

I think so. We learn that hades has two compartments.

It could have thirty "compartments", but they are all still hades...and permanent.

One bad, one good and there’s no crossing over. Also we learn that those in hades have no awareness of what is happening here on earth. So, no your long lost relative is probably not looking down on you right now. We learn that the word God gave us is sufficient for us to make it to the good part of hades, and we dont need the miraculous that people today claim they have. We also learn that salvation will not be available after death. If so, it would have been offered. We learn also that IF your long lost relative died under a false doctrine they most definitely would want you to change and not continue to do the same.
I’d say that’s all pretty edifying to me.

As long as that info has made you change your past ways...good.

 

[Alfred Persson]

Alfred-- can I point you to a feature this site offers to make your posts and replies more easily readable? Rather than the jumbled mess above, consider using the quote feature (multi-quote). To do this, simply highlight a section of text that you would like to respond to, and click the "Quote" button that pops up. You can do this line by line and even quote text from different posts to include as one. Then, when you are ready to reply click the "Insert quotes" button that is bottom right of this reply box where you are typing, and it will insert the quotes you highlighted. It should look something like this>>>





It will make your responses and who you are quoting (as well as from where) much easier for readers to follow.

Thanks for the tip, I'll do that.

 

[Alfred Persson]

So you say. Generally, when I encounter someone stuck in their own ideas and needing to always have the last word- I leave them be and let them have it.

I’ll catch the next cab.

Opposite of what I said. Exegesis is expositing the meaning of the author. Eisegesis is encountering someone stuck in their own ideas, and you try to help them see the truth of scripture via Exegesis.

By the way, I own a cab company. You might catch one of mine.