Surely you have noticed that even in English, two different words are often used for the same concept.
To aid in settling your own cacophony of confusion let’s apply Paidion’s principle, with which I agree…
Thank you, Davo. I think I found it. I went through all the posts. I noted that you agreed with Chad that “all are saved.” Then in reply to the question,"What are we saved from? you replied, “From a Godless eternity.”
So if Jesus hadn’t died to save everyone, would God have sent everyone to a Godless eternity? However, since Christ did die for all, NO ONE goes to a Godless eternity? This seems to imply that a Godless eternity doesn’t even exist. Or WOULD it exist if Jesus HADN’T died for everyone?
Or does God hate mankind so much that He normally would send them to a Godless eternity, but now He won’t since He satisfied His wrath by taking His anger out on His Son—having His Son crucified, so that we all get off scot free, and get to spend eternity with God no matter how we live here on earth, whether we are loving and provide for needy people or whether we murder or torture little girls. For God doesn’t hold any wicked actions against anyone as far as eternity is concerned. Concerning eternity with God, it doesn’t matter whether people sacrificially serve others at their own expense, or whether they serve only themselves at everyone else’s expense. Is that what you believe? If not, please spell out your beliefs about salvation more precisely.
Evidence of what…reading one’s theology into the Bible instead of taking one’s theology from it?
Your other two Pantelistic proof texting “witnesses” were shot down in flames. This is strike three:
“Here “the coming of the Lord” (like simply “the Lord” in Philippians) is said to be “at hand”. What does this mean? We have seen that the term “coming” is used in different senses in Scripture. The Old Testament prophets often speak of the Lord “coming” in judgement upon a particular nation (e.g., Isa. 19:1; 31:4; 35:4; 66:15; Mic. 1:3-5). These comings in judgement occurred centuries before Christ, and did not involve a literal coming of God from heaven to earth. It is possible, therefore, that “the coming of the Lord” spoken of in James (and implied in Philippians) is a coming of Christ’s judgement upon his enemies.”
“We have also observed that the prophet Daniel uses the term “coming” in a specific context to which the New Testament often alludes. Daniel speaks of the “coming” of “One like the Son of Man”, but this coming is a coming of the Son of Man up to the Ancient of Days to receive his kingdom (Dan.7:13-14). Jesus alludes to this passage a number of times in the Gospels. If Philippians and James are also alluding to Daniel 7, then they are referring to something connected with Christ’s ascension and reception of his kingdom. In this case, they would probably be referring to the destruction of Jerusalem, an event that would vindicate Jesus’ messianic claims and prove that he had received his kingdom.”
“A third kind of “coming” is the return of Jesus to earth that is described in Acts 1:11. In this passage, two men in white tell the apostle that Jesus will come in the same manner that they saw him go into heaven. The emphasis in this passage is on a visible, bodily, and personal return of Jesus from heaven to earth to be with his people. This coming has not occurred yet, so it is unlikely that either Philippians or James is referring to the return of Jesus. However, it must also be remembered that the Old Testament prophets regularly used terms implying “nearness” to describe events that did not occur for centuries.” 63
“…There are a number of possible interpretations for some of these texts, but regardless of which exegetical option one considers to be most likely, there is nothing in any of these texts that demands hyper-preterism”.
“63. See chapter 3 of this volume for more on the idea of prophetic delay.”
“When Shall These Things Be? A Reformed Response To Hyper-Preterism”, ed. Keith A Mathison, c 2004, 376 pags, p.201-202)
“…this book is a good starting point for people who are finding themselves tempted by the quasi-Gnostic, neo-Hymenaean, anti-authoritarian, hyper-spiritualizing, history-ignoring gangrene which is hyperpreterism and all of its attendant bleak outlooks on the (lack of) this world’s redemptive future.” amazon.com/When-Shall-These … 0875525520
I concur.
Rev 1:7 indicates that when Jesus returns EVERY eye will see Him. In A.D. 70, NO eye saw Him.
Straight from the horse’s mouth seems to explain your true position on this better…
Just for the exercise I thought I might try YOUR trick of cut n’ paste…
Marvellous… as per usual you are devoid of any real knowledge yourself and typically RELIANT on others. Of the entire post above a whole 2 lines of mind-numbing thought are yours — bravo good going! HOWEVER… of the entire post the ONLY part making any logical sense is where you quote ME, again — bravo good going!
You Pantelists here aren’t giving me the impression you take Scripture or life seriously. Why should you when you accept & or lean to the position that everyone - even child molestors - goes straight to heaven at death? And labour continually to oppose the post mortem consequences for how people live this life that Scripture clearly teaches.
Ultra Universalism Refuted:
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=7508
Such puerile foolishness… perhaps it is you who actually has myopia. Let me repeat my reply to you on the very first page of your link above…
Do you have a point? The same page of your quote refers to your “leaning” to no after death punishment & by “you” my comment was obviously referring to Pantelists (plural), not just davo. viewtopic.php?f=12&t=7508#p113655
It is hardly reasonable nor scholarly of you to list a series of claims against my position demanding I then clarify YOUR contentions when you have not produced ANY evidence to back up said assertions. I have considerable written material on this site so there is ample evidence to draw from, so please furnish direct quotes that claim as you do above.
Again… if you are going to make such statements, back them up — but don’t expect me to unravel your mess of assumptions — I would expect this from the likes of Origen, not you. Feel free to pull your above paragraph apart and jot-point each assertion against an argument made by me to the contrary; again… quotes NOT assumptions.
MY assumptions? Your post indicates YOUR presumptions!
I was not suggesting that that which I included in my post was your position. I was ASKING you whether those concepts indicated your position. Indeed I was attempting to understand your position. Those thoughts occurred to me as POSSIBLY being your position. That’s why I set them forth. I was not accusing you of anything, and truly believed I was asking you these questions in all humility in order that I might better understand you.
However, if you cannot answer, or are unwilling to answer, that also tells me something.
Actually, it’s NOT the scholars, that reach the most people.
Take something like the Calvinist site, Got Questions. They answer a HUGH variety of questions. They put the responses, in SIMPLE terms (even if it has, a Calvinist slant - at times). And they have A LARGE CONTINGENCY - of Google and Bing juice.
Folks here (and elsewhere), can take a lesson from them.
Or let’s take the BEST, direct response copywriters. They NORMALLY talk, to an eight-grade, educational level. And they give you psychological reasons, to buy a product. And they talk like they are speaking to a friend - in a bar.
And guess what? The BEST make millions in royalties.
Even if I’m trying to sell, the tribulation and Zombie Apocalypse. I try to keep it simple.
Zombies BAAAD. Christ GOOOOD. 
It’s NOT criticizing ANY PARTICULAR person here, mind you. Just SHARING some wisdom and insights. 
Ok duly noted.
So starting at the start… can you then point to a post of mine where you have attained this idea or suggestion that of God’s rancid hatred toward mankind?
Origen said
That is kind of the quagmire that you continue to propagate.
First of all, we have to look at what HEAVEN really is. The post mortem part will unfortunately be an everlasting source of confusion, because to be honest the scriptures have little to say about it and much of our debate is simply conjecture.
But you said something that was interesting. You said that certain people 'labor continually to oppose the post mortem consequences for how people live this life that Scripture clearly teaches ’
You are acting like a fool. The pantelist view is that God understands and Christ came to take away sin for all of us. For Israel first and then the rest of us.
It all really comes down to if you believe Christ really took the sins of the whole world and man has been reconciled to God.
Nut shell bible stuff. You either believe it or you don’t. The Pantelist position is that He has. Yep, child molesters, serial murderers, adulterers, thieves, white liars, those who cheat on their taxes… All are in the right way with God. And he deals with them in HIS WAY.
Good luck to you, because your path is tough. My path is an understanding of a God who loves me and He and His son solidified the deal.
You certainly haven’t STATED that God hated mankind. But here is what I just discovered about your beliefs and that for which I have been searching for a long time:
- Everyone is saved. (Chad stated this, and you agreed)
- We are saved from a Godless eternity.
These beliefs are what led me to ask the questions that I asked. For we couldn’t be saved from a Godless eternity unless there were a possibility of undergoing a Godless eternity. If there were no such possibility, then there would be nothing from which to be saved!
And unless I misunderstand you, you believe that if Christ hadn’t died for all mankind as the substitute for every person, then every person would be assigned to a Godless eternity. But what would be God’s motivation is so assigning everyone if Jesus, the Anointed One, hadn’t died for all? Would it not be hate? Or at least strong displeasure? But displeasure with WHAT? Would it be the evil doings of mankind with which He would be displeased? But now (as I think you understand it), God no longer hates or is displeased with mankind, so that no one is assigned to a Godless eternity. But WHY? Why should Jesus’ death and/or resurrection remove God’s wrath or displeasure?
As I see it, the only way to remove God’s displeasure with our wrongdoing is for us to cease from our wrongdoing, and this we cannot consistently do through mere self-effort, but we CAN consistently live righteously by receiving the enabling grace of God, made available through the death and resurrection of Christ. And this enabling grace is appropriated through faith.
For the grace of God has appeared for the salvation of all people, training us to renounce impiety and worldly passions, and to live sensible, righteous, and devout lives in the present age, expecting the blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of the great God, and of our Savior Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own who are zealous for good works. Declare these things; encourage and reprove with all authority. Let no one disregard you. (Titus 2:11-15)
“Good luck to you, because your path is tough.”
Jesus and Scripture never said it would be a cake walk. Quite the contrary, my friend.
As for your thing with Pantelism, i’m happy for you that it makes you happy & appears to be having a positive influence on your life, towards Love Omnipotent, i.e. the Creator.
Of course Purgatorial Universalists also believe in salvation for the wicked through Christ. We just don’t quite see exactly eye to eye on how that will play out in the after life.
You make some massive, though misguided, leaps of logic concerning my position… I suspect based entirely off your own presuppositions… given as you now affirm… “You certainly haven’t STATED that God hated mankind.” — thankyou.
What I find a little odd however is this newly “just discovered” evidence you say… “I have been searching for a long time” when that which I’ve stated on this you yourself just acknowledged further back up the page RIGHT AFTER my post where I provided you the direct hyperlink — just look at your opening paragraph following my post; so like what gives? 
And yet, even so, it’s been a mere 6wks since when I answered (yet again) the same that you keep saying no-one ever answers; again what gives? As per…
Now, as to your objectionable rationale…
What’s in red seems a given. However… the “lost eternity” from the pantelist perspective has naught to do with some apparent hatred or displeasure on God’s part toward His good creation of man (a little revealing you automatically conclude this as your first option), but this…
Man in the Garden in his fallen state had the ability to reach out, grasp and imbibe of the ‘Tree of Life’ and thus in consequence… “live forever” — HAD THAT occurred then ‘the SIN condition’ would have been immortalised and upon death man lost forever, separated from his Maker in the Sheol. Jesus removed and destroyed the sin CONDITION, i.e., Jn 1:29…
It is absolutely voluminous that by your own mindset you rank hatred and displeasure together… “Would it not be hate? Or at least strong displeasure?” and yet seek to pin such to my position WHEN by your own words such fits more in-line with your theology as stated right here by your words…
Surely if the cap fits, just where it.
Paul’s words to Timothy have nothing to do with nor say anything about “a free pass to heaven” as you have mentioned elsewhere — all such enabling grace is 100% pertinent to THIS LIFE, thus… to deliver us from wrongdoing and to train us to live “self-controlled, upright, and godly lives.”
Sometimes certain debates, can go on for centuries (like those HERE, between Full Preterism and its derivatives vs ALL other positions) . As the following cartoon illustrates. 
In case you are wondering…It’s from a question today, on particle physics at https://www.quora.com. 
