Peter from Extol's religious views

1. Its a pretty direct questuon, do you still believe in the Lord and do you still follow their and Jesus's teaching and if so to what degree.
2. Do you still believe in Heaven?
3. Do you still believe in the lyrics you wrote and sang on blood red cover, a gift beyond human reach, and Open the Gates?
Those are my 3 favorite extol songs(blood red cover has helped me thtough alot and is my favorite song).

I mainly ask because it would be hard for me to still enjoy those songs if the words no longer mean somethibg to the person that wrote them. If that makes sense. No judgement if you dont, but it would be hard for me to enjoy them.

4. What is the meqning behind the lyrics to the new extol songs?

Thank you for the time and info. Love Extol and the songs mean alot to me.

Hey friends. Here is an attempt to address some of the questions I have read in this thread and other threads on this forum, concerning my "religious views" (as this thread is called). Happy reading! 

In the super diverse landscape of Christian theology, there a mainly two prominent perspectives during my life that has offered distinct understandings of salvation, divine justice, and the nature of God – namely Christian conservative evangelicalism and Christian universalism. 

While conservative evangelicalism has been the influencial Christian thought throughout my upbringing, Christian universalism started presenting compelling reasons for reconsideration to me some 15-ish years ago. This, when the image of God that conservative evangelicalism had given me suddenly stood in stark contrast to my real life experiences. 

So through a lenghty process (which is by the way still onging, and I suspect will be continuing til the day I die) my beliefs more and more went in the direction of what one I guess can call Christian Universalism. 
Here are the most prominent perspectives that led me to deconstruct a lot of the conservative evangelical beliefs and reconstruct into the thoughts and beliefs I have today. I´m simplifying it immensely to keep it as short and readable as possible, but hopefully still including enough to try to answer your questions.  

A More Compassionate Vision of God:
Christian universalism emphasizes the boundless love and grace of God. It asserts that God's love is truly unconditional and all-encompassing, extending to every individual without exception. This vision of God resonates with the biblical portrayal of a loving Father who desires that "none should perish but that all should come to repentance" (2 Peter 3:9). In contrast, conservative evangelicalism often presents a more conditional view of God’s love, contingent on one's acceptance of specific beliefs during their earthly life, which to me, seem at odds with the concept of unconditional divine love.

A Just and Merciful Outcome for All
The doctrine of eternal damnation central to conservative evangelicalism poses challenging questions about divine justice. How can infinite punishment be just for finite sins? Christian universalism addresses this by positing that God’s justice is restorative rather than retributive. It holds that all souls will eventually be reconciled to God, reflecting a justice that heals and restores rather than one that punishes eternally. This perspective aligns with the biblical themes of redemption and reconciliation found in passages such as Colossians 1:20, which speaks of Christ reconciling all things to himself.

Inclusivity and Hope
Christian universalism offers a message of inclusivity and hope for all humanity. It proclaims that no one is beyond the reach of God’s saving grace, fostering a more inclusive and hopeful worldview. This contrasts with the exclusivity often found in conservative evangelicalism, which in my view and experience, often lead to division and judgment within and outside the Christian community. The universalist perspective encourages believers to see every person as a beloved child of God destined for eventual redemption.

Biblical Foundations
Christian universalism is grounded in a robust scriptural basis. Numerous biblical passages suggest the eventual reconciliation of all people to God. 

Colossians 1:19-20
"For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross."
This passage speaks to the universal reconciliation achieved through Christ, emphasizing that all things are brought into harmony with God.

1 Corinthians 15:22
"For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive."
Here, Paul draws a parallel between the universality of death in Adam and the universality of life in Christ, suggesting an inclusive scope of salvation.

Philippians 2:10-11
"That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."
This verse envisions a future where every being acknowledges Christ's lordship, implying a universal recognition and eventual reconciliation.

1 Timothy 2:4
"Who wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth."
This verse directly expresses God's desire for the salvation of all people, reflecting a universalist perspective.

Romans 5:18
"Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people."
Paul here contrasts the effects of Adam's trespass with Christ's righteous act, suggesting that just as condemnation came to all, so too does justification and life.

Ephesians 1:9-10
"He made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, to be put into effect when the times reach their fulfillment—to bring unity to all things in heaven and on earth under Christ."
This passage speaks of God's ultimate plan to unite all things in Christ, underscoring a vision of cosmic reconciliation.

John 12:32
"And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself."
Jesus' words here suggest an inclusive drawing of all people to Himself through His crucifixion and resurrection.

Revelation 21:5
"He who was seated on the throne said, 'I am making everything new!' Then he said, 'Write this down, for these words are trustworthy and true.'"
The vision of God making everything new aligns with the idea of universal restoration and renewal.
These verses collectively present a strong biblical foundation for the idea of universal salvation and the inclusive, compassionate nature of God's love.
 
Philosophical and Theological Coherence
Christian universalism presents a coherent and consistent theological framework. It harmonizes the attributes of God—love, justice, mercy, and sovereignty—in a way that avoids the theological tensions present in the traditional doctrine of eternal damnation. By affirming that God's redemptive purposes will ultimately prevail, universalism offers a theologically satisfying resolution to the problem of evil and suffering.

Ethical and Pastoral Implications
The ethical and pastoral implications of Christian universalism are profound. Believers are called to embody the radical inclusivity and love of God in their interactions with others. This perspective fosters a more compassionate and empathetic approach to ministry and evangelism, emphasizing the inherent worth and dignity of every individual. It encourages a focus on healing, reconciliation, and the transformative power of God’s love in the present life, reflecting the ministry of Jesus.

So, for me choosing the direction of Christian universalism over conservative evangelicalism is a decision rooted in a vision of God’s boundless love, restorative justice, and inclusive grace. It is a theology that offers hope and redemption for all, grounded in scriptural foundations and presenting a coherent, compassionate, and theologically satisfying understanding of salvation. Embracing this perspective invites believers to live out their faith with a profound sense of inclusivity, compassion, and hope, reflecting the heart of the gospel message.
 
Lastly! I want to stress that these are MY beliefs. I don’t expect you to believe the same as me. I don’t think less of you if you believe different. I respect you and love you whatever you chose to believe. One thing I hope though, is that you dare to be true to yourself. That you dare to ask the tough questions when they arise. Questions are not dangerous. God can handle it and so can you.
 
Also, if you want to know more about Christian Universalism here are some books you could read:
The Universal Christ by Richard Rohr
The evangelical universalist by Gregory MacDonald
Her gates will never be shut by Brad Jersak 
That all shall be saved by David Bentley Hart 

This ignores the clear teaching of Jesus in Matthew 25.
When the on of man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne.
32Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.
33And he will place the sheep on his right, but the goats on the left.
34Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.
35For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me,
36I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’
37Then the righteous will answer him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink?
38And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you?
39And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’
40And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers,fn you did it to me.’
41¶“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.
42For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink,
43I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.’
44Then they also will answer, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to you?’
45Then he will answer them, saying, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’
46And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

Thank you for your reply.

I felt like I heard and identified much of where you were coming from but I misread your view of justice. It seemed you had a stronger view in the value of justice and right and wrong in this life with notable concerns for social justice issues (i.e. Betrayal). However, with your views expressed here, radical inclusivity is inclusive of willful racists, rapists, and murderers otherwise it ceases to be consistent with radically inclusive view of God. Further, atheism loses its foundation for justice in that we all go to the dirt but incentizes life for the sake of natural selection and evolution. Ironically, universalism loses its ground in that all go to heaven but ironically incentizes death through suicide, murder, euthanasia, and abortion. Better to die quickly at the hands of another or even yourself at a young age or even before birth than suffer here at all. People just get to heaven faster. Such a view is in conflict with our societal laws and even the natural intuition that such things are to be mourned rather celebrated.

I'm sure there are many ways you have dealt with these thoughts but again I thank you for sharing and appreciate the added clarity.

Frozen Fire wrote:Thank you for your reply.

I felt like I heard and identified much of where you were coming from but I misread your view of justice. It seemed you had a stronger view in the value of justice and right and wrong in this life with notable concerns for social justice issues (i.e. Betrayal). However, with your views expressed here, radical inclusivity is inclusive of willful racists, rapists, and murderers otherwise it ceases to be consistent with radically inclusive view of God. Further, atheism loses its foundation for justice in that we all go to the dirt but incentizes life for the sake of natural selection and evolution. Ironically, universalism loses its ground in that all go to heaven but ironically incentizes death through suicide, murder, euthanasia, and abortion. Better to die quickly at the hands of another or even yourself at a young age or even before birth than suffer here at all. People just get to heaven faster. Such a view is in conflict with our societal laws and even the natural intuition that such things are to be mourned rather celebrated.

I'm sure there are many ways you have dealt with these thoughts but again I thank you for sharing and appreciate the added clarity.

I honestly never thought about that belief like that. But how you worded it is legitimately scary. I agree with you though. For sure.

I believe the Bible passages you mentioned to support universalism are better understood to mean that because of Jesus’s death and resurrection, there is now the OPPORTUNITY for all to be reconciled to God,  by believing in Christ as our savior. John 3:16 “For God so loved the world that He gave His only son, that whoever BELIEVES IN HIM will not perish but have everlasting life.” Yes, God does indeed want all to be reconciled to Him, but He also allows us free will and we can still use that free will to reject His mercy. The Bible also indicates that not all are children of God, but only those who believe:

John 1:12 “ But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.”
1 John 1 also speaks of a contrast between children of God and children of the devil.
Also, it is a false dichotomy to divide Christianity into “conservative evangelical” and “universalist.” “Conservative evangelical” is a very modern label specifically. Our beliefs should be based on the word of God itself, not modern philosophical or political movements.

Lastly, I challenge you to try a different type of “deconstructing.” Strip away any aspect of your beliefs which are based on either your personal feelings or any worldly political or philosophical systems. Anything based on what you feel God should be, or what other people tell you He ought to be. And reconstruct from His word alone. Even the difficult parts you don’t like. Don’t “be true to yourself,” your own mind can easily lead you astray (Jeremiah 17:9). Instead be true to the word of God in its most pure form. It is infinitely more rewarding ultimately to accept hard truths than to cling to pleasant-sounding half-truths or lies.

seth wrote:I believe the Bible passages you mentioned to support universalism are better understood to mean that because of Jesus’s death and resurrection, there is now the OPPORTUNITY for all to be reconciled to God,  by believing in Christ as our savior. John 3:16 “For God so loved the world that He gave His only son, that whoever BELIEVES IN HIM will not perish but have everlasting life.” Yes, God does indeed want all to be reconciled to Him, but He also allows us free will and we can still use that free will to reject His mercy. The Bible also indicates that not all are children of God, but only those who believe:

John 1:12 “ But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.”
1 John 1 also speaks of a contrast between children of God and children of the devil.
Also, it is a false dichotomy to divide Christianity into “conservative evangelical” and “universalist.” “Conservative evangelical” is a very modern label specifically. Our beliefs should be based on the word of God itself, not modern philosophical or political movements.

Lastly, I challenge you to try a different type of “deconstructing.” Strip away any aspect of your beliefs which are based on either your personal feelings or any worldly political or philosophical systems. Anything based on what you feel God should be, or what other people tell you He ought to be. And reconstruct from His word alone. Even the difficult parts you don’t like. Don’t “be true to yourself,” your own mind can easily lead you astray (Jeremiah 17:9). Instead be true to the word of God in its most pure form. It is infinitely more rewarding ultimately to accept hard truths than to cling to pleasant-sounding half-truths or lies.

So many Christians nowadays could benefit heavily from this

I deeply respect the honest reply from Peter and even there are some differences in our views about our faith. It starts with love each other. So Peter, God loves you man.

sounds like a bunch of whiney, bored Protestants.....

all of this has been dealt with and settled centuries ago in the 7 Ecumenical Councils, the Church Fathers, Saints, the Liturgical & Eucharistic experience of the Church (capital C), the Creeds, etc

all proof that Sola Scriptura is untenable and it's all recycled heresies and controversies already dealt with by the Church Fathers who were geniuses and inspired by God

If the councils, creeds etc. don't agree with the Bible, they are wrong. They can be helpful and we Reformed believers have them but it doesn't negate sola scriptura.

jaydeecrawson wrote:sounds like a bunch of whiney, bored Protestants.....

all of this has been dealt with and settled centuries ago in the 7 Ecumenical Councils, the Church Fathers, the Liturgical & Sacramental experience of the Church (capital C), the Creeds, etc

all proof that Sola Scriptura is untenable and it's all recycled heresies and controversies already dealt with by the Church Fathers who were geniuses and inspired by God

Have to disagree with this blatant appeal to authority.

The church fathers themselves identified heresy by comparing doctrines to the scriptures

seth wrote:The church fathers themselves identified heresy by comparing doctrines to the scriptures

How would you know? (Have you read them all?.... it's a LOT)

The Fathers also accepted, believed and taught many doctrines modern Evangelical Protestants reject such as Apostolic Succession, Veneration of the Theotokos, the Eucharist etc

hmmmm.... so where did those doctrines come from and why did they so fervently and passionately believe these sorts of things if they aren't explicitly taught in Scripture?

If the Church Fathers were right about the Canon of Scripture (and the Trinity) then why are they wrong about these other things? (I love asking JW's that!)

And remember: before the Canon was closed many Christians (including many Fathers) considered the Shepherd of Hermas, Epistle of Barnabas, Didache, Apocalypse of Peter, Epistles of Ignatius? etc Scripture

And which ending of Mark is Scripture? Is the story of the woman caught in adultery Scripture too? Who wrote Hebrews? Was Paul's lost letter to the Laodiceans "Scripture" too? Which translation is Scripture since we don't have the original manuscripts? Or should we ask some Jehovah's Witnesses and KJV only Christians since they're SOLA also?

I think we should mind our own business and let Peter from EXTOL believe whatever he wants without judging him since we all evolve and mature spiritually and theologically........

Like Woody Harrelson said in True Detective: "Why do you make me say all that?"

jaydeecrawson wrote:

seth wrote:The church fathers themselves identified heresy by comparing doctrines to the scriptures

I think we should mind our own business and let Peter from EXTOL believe whatever he wants without judging him since we all evolve and mature spiritually and theologically........

No one is saying he cant believe whatever he wants. And it seems everyone has said its cool he spoke up and while they disagree its his right and wish him well. 

But everyone has the right to atleast ask where he stands as The Lord is important to everyone here and many of Extols songs are about the Lord. And im sure they dont want to be listening to something that go against their believes or feel uncomforable with, esp. When it is something as important as that. 

But again no is saying he cant believe whatever he wants and from what i can tell everyone is allowing him to believe any way he sees fit. And they simply responded to what he said when he encouraged discussion.

Maddierecords1 wrote:

jaydeecrawson wrote:

seth wrote:The church fathers themselves identified heresy by comparing doctrines to the scriptures

I think we should mind our own business and let Peter from EXTOL believe whatever he wants without judging him since we all evolve and mature spiritually and theologically........

No one is saying he cant believe whatever he wants. And it seems everyone has said its cool he spoke up and while they disagree its his right and wish him well. 

But everyone has the right to atleast ask where he stands as The Lord is important to everyone here and many of Extols songs are about the Lord. And im sure they dont want to be listening to something that go against their believes or feel uncomforable with, esp. When it is something as important as that. 

But again no is saying he cant believe whatever he wants and from what i can tell everyone is allowing him to believe any way he sees fit. And they simply responded to what he said when he encouraged discussion.

Are you fully aware of the beliefs of every Christian musician, author and speaker that you follow?  Even if you were, beliefs do change over time. Trust in the Lord and let the Holy Spirit guide YOU in what you listen to, read and watch. It is a lot to dissect the beliefs of Christian artists and entertainers.

Guitar Noir wrote:

Maddierecords1 wrote:

jaydeecrawson wrote:

seth wrote:The church fathers themselves identified heresy by comparing doctrines to the scriptures

I think we should mind our own business and let Peter from EXTOL believe whatever he wants without judging him since we all evolve and mature spiritually and theologically........

No one is saying he cant believe whatever he wants. And it seems everyone has said its cool he spoke up and while they disagree its his right and wish him well. 

But everyone has the right to atleast ask where he stands as The Lord is important to everyone here and many of Extols songs are about the Lord. And im sure they dont want to be listening to something that go against their believes or feel uncomforable with, esp. When it is something as important as that. 

But again no is saying he cant believe whatever he wants and from what i can tell everyone is allowing him to believe any way he sees fit. And they simply responded to what he said when he encouraged discussion.

Are you fully aware of the beliefs of every Christian musician, author and speaker that you follow?  Even if you were, beliefs do change over time. Trust in the Lord and let the Holy Spirit guide YOU in what you listen to, read and watch. It is a lot to dissect the beliefs of Christian artists and entertainers.

Im honestly confused what you are upset about. 

He writes music about God. I like songs about God. He no longer writes songs anout God and seems critical of christianity. I asked if he still believes. He answered. There was a discussion. I dont feel comforable with some of what he said but respect him in whatever he believes. But am hesistsnt to listen to songs about God by someone with those beliefs. Its ok thr conversation done and it wss cool he actually answered. 

Yes I trust God to guide me. But that doesnt mean you dont ask questions. Jesus did ya know? 

Edited to sound less hostile. But really nothing else to say about it.

Maddierecords1 wrote:

Guitar Noir wrote:

Maddierecords1 wrote:

jaydeecrawson wrote:

seth wrote:The church fathers themselves identified heresy by comparing doctrines to the scriptures

I think we should mind our own business and let Peter from EXTOL believe whatever he wants without judging him since we all evolve and mature spiritually and theologically........

No one is saying he cant believe whatever he wants. And it seems everyone has said its cool he spoke up and while they disagree its his right and wish him well. 

But everyone has the right to atleast ask where he stands as The Lord is important to everyone here and many of Extols songs are about the Lord. And im sure they dont want to be listening to something that go against their believes or feel uncomforable with, esp. When it is something as important as that. 

But again no is saying he cant believe whatever he wants and from what i can tell everyone is allowing him to believe any way he sees fit. And they simply responded to what he said when he encouraged discussion.

Are you fully aware of the beliefs of every Christian musician, author and speaker that you follow?  Even if you were, beliefs do change over time. Trust in the Lord and let the Holy Spirit guide YOU in what you listen to, read and watch. It is a lot to dissect the beliefs of Christian artists and entertainers.

Im honestly confused what you are upset about. 

He writes music about God. I like songs about God. He no longer writes songs anout God and seems critical of christianity. I asked if he still believes. He answered. There was a discussion. I dont feel comforable with some of what he said but respect him in whatever he believes. But am hesistsnt to listen to songs about God by someone with those beliefs. Its ok thr conversation done and it wss cool he actually answered. 

Yes I trust God to guide me. But that doesnt mean you dont ask questions. Jesus did ya know? 

Edited to sound less hostile. But really nothing else to say about it.

I dunno. doesn't really matter anyway....

Maddierecords1 wrote:

Guitar Noir wrote:

Maddierecords1 wrote:

jaydeecrawson wrote:

seth wrote:The church fathers themselves identified heresy by comparing doctrines to the scriptures

I think we should mind our own business and let Peter from EXTOL believe whatever he wants without judging him since we all evolve and mature spiritually and theologically........

No one is saying he cant believe whatever he wants. And it seems everyone has said its cool he spoke up and while they disagree its his right and wish him well. 

But everyone has the right to atleast ask where he stands as The Lord is important to everyone here and many of Extols songs are about the Lord. And im sure they dont want to be listening to something that go against their believes or feel uncomforable with, esp. When it is something as important as that. 

But again no is saying he cant believe whatever he wants and from what i can tell everyone is allowing him to believe any way he sees fit. And they simply responded to what he said when he encouraged discussion.

Are you fully aware of the beliefs of every Christian musician, author and speaker that you follow?  Even if you were, beliefs do change over time. Trust in the Lord and let the Holy Spirit guide YOU in what you listen to, read and watch. It is a lot to dissect the beliefs of Christian artists and entertainers.

Im honestly confused what you are upset about. 

He writes music about God. I like songs about God. He no longer writes songs anout God and seems critical of christianity. I asked if he still believes. He answered. There was a discussion. I dont feel comforable with some of what he said but respect him in whatever he believes. But am hesistsnt to listen to songs about God by someone with those beliefs. Its ok thr conversation done and it wss cool he actually answered. 

Yes I trust God to guide me. But that doesnt mean you dont ask questions. Jesus did ya know? 

Edited to sound less hostile. But really nothing else to say about it.

I am not upset. Like you I am just asking questions.  Do you dig deeply into every Christian artist that you listen to?  Do you know what they all believe and what they feel about songs that they wrote in the past?  These are valid questions.  You did post your questions on an open forum so do not be surprised if others have comments or questions for you.  Listen to what makes you comfortable, be lead of the spirit.

I’m firmly in the eternal torment camp, but let’s definitely not conflate old-school Christian universalism, like what Origen and Gregory of Nyssa believed, with a crassly heretical “universal Christ” Rohr theology. The universal salvation of all is the least concerning part about his system. He literally says Christ is distinct from Jesus of Nazareth. As the Apostle John says in 1 John, “Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son.”

jaydeecrawson wrote:

seth wrote:The church fathers themselves identified heresy by comparing doctrines to the scriptures

How would you know? (Have you read them all?.... it's a LOT)

The Fathers also accepted, believed and taught many doctrines modern Evangelical Protestants reject such as Apostolic Succession, Veneration of the Theotokos, the Eucharist etc

hmmmm.... so where did those doctrines come from and why did they so fervently and passionately believe these sorts of things if they aren't explicitly taught in Scripture?

If the Church Fathers were right about the Canon of Scripture (and the Trinity) then why are they wrong about these other things? (I love asking JW's that!)

And remember: before the Canon was closed many Christians (including many Fathers) considered the Shepherd of Hermas, Epistle of Barnabas, Didache, Apocalypse of Peter, Epistles of Ignatius? etc Scripture

And which ending of Mark is Scripture? Is the story of the woman caught in adultery Scripture too? Who wrote Hebrews? Was Paul's lost letter to the Laodiceans "Scripture" too? Which translation is Scripture since we don't have the original manuscripts? Or should we ask some Jehovah's Witnesses and KJV only Christians since they're SOLA also?

I think we should mind our own business and let Peter from EXTOL believe whatever he wants without judging him since we all evolve and mature spiritually and theologically........

Like Woody Harrelson said in True Detective: "Why do you make me say all that?"

And Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox reject many doctrines the earliest church fathers taught. Justin and Irenaeus said that only gnostics believe saints die and go straight to heaven, instead of going to an intermediate state in Abraham’s Bosom/Hades.

I absolutely agree that 2nd century almost canonical books Shepherd of Hermas, Barnabas, and Didache are great books. Not sure why it would even be a problem to believe they are cononical, except for RC who have no free will to disagree with Trent on the matter of canon. Irenaeus said Shepherd is Scripture, and he’s a bit more reliable than the pope. All the 2nd century Christian writings from Barnabas, Justin Martyr, etc teach historic premil eschatology, something for some reason most EO and RC’s consider heretical, though there is no evidence of amilennialism until maybe the 3rd century in Alexandria.
 
I think if we escape the RC-EO-Protestant false trichotomy, we’ll be able to understand the faith the Apostles of Christ handed down from a more historically tenable perspective.

There are plenty of sweeping claims you make about what the early Christians taught that could be picked apart, but how about the idea that they all taught the same thing on the Trinity. I’ve heard this repeatedly from other Christians, but as a Trinitarian myself, it is patently false. There is great work by Eastern Orthodox theologians Dr. Beau Branson and Fr. John Behr, as well as Anabaptist David Bercot and Anglican scholar Samuel Clarke, that the definition of the Trinity that Augustine basically invented (and most Christians believe) is not even what the Cappadocians taught in Constantinople 381, much less what the ante-Nicene subordinationist Trinitarians believed.

jaydeecrawson wrote:sounds like a bunch of whiney, bored Protestants.....

all of this has been dealt with and settled centuries ago in the 7 Ecumenical Councils, the Church Fathers, Saints, the Liturgical & Eucharistic experience of the Church (capital C), the Creeds, etc

all proof that Sola Scriptura is untenable and it's all recycled heresies and controversies already dealt with by the Church Fathers who were geniuses and inspired by God

There are both Catholics and Orthodox who hold to Universal Salvation,  "Apokatastasis", so you can cool it with the High Church snobbery!

StevenCressler wrote:

seth wrote:I believe the Bible passages you mentioned to support universalism are better understood to mean that because of Jesus’s death and resurrection, there is now the OPPORTUNITY for all to be reconciled to God,  by believing in Christ as our savior. John 3:16 “For God so loved the world that He gave His only son, that whoever BELIEVES IN HIM will not perish but have everlasting life.” Yes, God does indeed want all to be reconciled to Him, but He also allows us free will and we can still use that free will to reject His mercy. The Bible also indicates that not all are children of God, but only those who believe:

John 1:12 “ But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.”
1 John 1 also speaks of a contrast between children of God and children of the devil.
Also, it is a false dichotomy to divide Christianity into “conservative evangelical” and “universalist.” “Conservative evangelical” is a very modern label specifically. Our beliefs should be based on the word of God itself, not modern philosophical or political movements.

Lastly, I challenge you to try a different type of “deconstructing.” Strip away any aspect of your beliefs which are based on either your personal feelings or any worldly political or philosophical systems. Anything based on what you feel God should be, or what other people tell you He ought to be. And reconstruct from His word alone. Even the difficult parts you don’t like. Don’t “be true to yourself,” your own mind can easily lead you astray (Jeremiah 17:9). Instead be true to the word of God in its most pure form. It is infinitely more rewarding ultimately to accept hard truths than to cling to pleasant-sounding half-truths or lies.

So many Christians nowadays could benefit heavily from this

I've always thought that it's hilarious that different people can have two very different views, yet both are still Christian. Why don't we all follow what the Bible says? If the Bible says it, it's true.

Christian Thrash Rules wrote:

StevenCressler wrote:

seth wrote:I believe the Bible passages you mentioned to support universalism are better understood to mean that because of Jesus’s death and resurrection, there is now the OPPORTUNITY for all to be reconciled to God,  by believing in Christ as our savior. John 3:16 “For God so loved the world that He gave His only son, that whoever BELIEVES IN HIM will not perish but have everlasting life.” Yes, God does indeed want all to be reconciled to Him, but He also allows us free will and we can still use that free will to reject His mercy. The Bible also indicates that not all are children of God, but only those who believe:

John 1:12 “ But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.”
1 John 1 also speaks of a contrast between children of God and children of the devil.
Also, it is a false dichotomy to divide Christianity into “conservative evangelical” and “universalist.” “Conservative evangelical” is a very modern label specifically. Our beliefs should be based on the word of God itself, not modern philosophical or political movements.

Lastly, I challenge you to try a different type of “deconstructing.” Strip away any aspect of your beliefs which are based on either your personal feelings or any worldly political or philosophical systems. Anything based on what you feel God should be, or what other people tell you He ought to be. And reconstruct from His word alone. Even the difficult parts you don’t like. Don’t “be true to yourself,” your own mind can easily lead you astray (Jeremiah 17:9). Instead be true to the word of God in its most pure form. It is infinitely more rewarding ultimately to accept hard truths than to cling to pleasant-sounding half-truths or lies.

So many Christians nowadays could benefit heavily from this

Why don't we all follow what the Bible says? If the Bible says it, it's true.

Because when there are things that have to be interpreted instead of taking it literally there will be people who think about it differently.

For example, Jesus is not an actual door/gate even though he says he is. He is the more of an idea of a door, and not just any random door but a door to a certain place. That's pretty much the easiest metaphor the Bible has and I doubt there is anyone out there who wouldn't understand what that means and who would actually believe that Jesus is an actual literal physical door. That would be very confusing to that person, lol.

But there are plenty of a lot harder metaphors in the Bible, and a lot of places where you might not even know it's a metaphor without someone explaining it to you.

So, "if the Bible says it, it's true" leads to different outcomes for a lot of people.

I apologize if I came across smart aleck or rude.... I'm going through a lot of bad personal stuff right now

Hey Peter, anyone ever tell you that your screams on "Synergy" sound like Sam Kinison?!