Universalism: A Philosophical Defense w/ Andrew Hronich 

Amen

When did he pray that though

You're praying for everyone to be saved? That's quite the heresy.

@@Metarig That makes Jesus a heretic if true.

@@cleverestx If he came back, Christians would just crucify him again.

I agree, and I also have to think that I myself cannot possible be more gracious than God, our creator.. since we are made in HIS image. His grace has to far exceed what our human minds can conjure up.

I too would rather be annihilated rather than a single soul suffer eternal torment

Amen my beloved.... I shared the below extract with another thread further up....when the question was asked why Jesus spoke so much about forms of judgement [wheat/tares, sheep/goats, wise/foolish virgins etc] In essence I believe Jesus is giving you the key for this age....for the age to come is His to restore.... !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Greetings brother - I lean toward all those verses speaking about.... good v evil light v darkness life v death spirit v flesh inner man v outer man... otherwise when we look at Matt 7:13-14 and we do not take this as prescriptive propositional text [teaching for this life/age....] then the vast majority [>90% will be doomed]....that's no saviour... For instance consider the wheat and tares.... [Mat 13:24-25 NKJV] 24 Another parable He put forth to them, saying: **"The kingdom of heaven** is like a man who sowed good seed in his field; 25 "but while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat and went his way. All of scripture is spiritual - the Kingdom of God is everywhere and always, we enter by the narrow gate when we believe and forsake all confidence in ourselves and instead believe in His unconditional love....we are one with Him and in Him - God who is all in all, you need only believe to receive blessing. A day is a thousand years to God...even if you live to 100 you will be like 2.5 hours old to God....a new born infant - this is how God sees us and how He asks us to see each other through His eyes.... Be perfect like our father in Heaven....your will be done Father here on earth as it is in Heaven - Everlasting Life.... Blessings my beloved to you and all whom you love....

Agreed. That's such a huge misrepresentation of biblical universalism and a convenient straw man.

Universalism was condemned at the Fifth Ecumenical Council as Heresy. That does not mean all people might not be saved. It could be a real possibility BUT to definitively say that all WILL be saved is Heresy and is damnable if one continues to believe it.

@@Dandymancan incorrect. You’re confused about the 5th EC. So the Fifth Ecumenical Council condemned Origen, right? No and yes. No, in that it did not directly anathematize him. As St Gregory the Great would later observe, the general synod only anathematized one person-Theodore of Mopsuestia. Yes, in that Origen is named alongside the heretics denounced in canon 11. The canon does not specify which of Origen’s teachings are condemned, nor do the acts record any discussion of them by the council fathers. Origen is simply included among the anathematized. This is where things get tricky. The others in the list were denounced, directly or indirectly, by previous ecumenical councils and their heresies were well known; but those councils had never condemned Origen. Which teachings of Origen, therefore, did the bishops of the Fifth Council believe to be antithetical to the apostolic faith and to which synod or synods were they appealing? We do not know-neither the canons nor the acts of the council tell us. This point needs to be stressed. We may not assume that because the council fathers condemned Origen by name they specifically intended to condemn his teaching on apokatastasis. The establish­ment of conciliar dogma requires more than guesswork and conjectural inference.

@@christianuniversalist hmmmm 🤨 I will definitely get in and read more about that. Now that I think about it you make a God point. I will be doing research on this tonight.

Universalism, infernalism, Calvinism, Catholicism, Protestantism, Pentecostalism, Presbyterianism etc etc etc.... It's not enough to be Christian; you have to decide which denominational sect to be a part of so you can bicker constantly with your other Christian "brothers" over minutia. Sad, I'm so over it. Glad I left the faith and took a much simpler spiritual path. There is real beauty in simplicity.

Parry! Yes!

Dang well put brother!

Beautiful comment! Thank you so much.

Brother this is awesome.... Blessings to you and all whom you love...EVERYONE.

What’s books of Brad Jersak should I read in regards to this topic ?

@@troyford1686 Brad’s book is called “Her gates will never be shut”. It’s a biblical survey of hell and issues surrounding it. Highly recommend

@@Havoc2317 thank you I really appreciate it

@@troyford1686He also wrote a book called “A More Christlike Word” that changed my outlook on a lot of theology. That book and “Simply Good News” by NT Wright changed the way I look at people, salvation, and the end of all things.

P.s. Brad Jersak is also Eastern Orthodox. He is a little more personable than DBH. I love me some DBH but still lol

As an annihilationist, thanks for presenting the fire and river info clearly. I find it one of the hardest to express in a way that someone new to the discussion will get it. Another point to look into is that smoke and fire that "rise forever" in prophecy can be immediately followed by wild animals and plants occupying the area,(Isaiah 34:8-15) so "eternal/forever"l is possibly better translated as unquenchable, as in "until it consumed everything it's supposed to"... This would apply in ETC and eschatology discussions. Also, in Isa.34:9, I noticed double checking the reference that water and fire are connected again, just as you said. I'll have to look into how often this occurs that I haven't noticed before!

Beautiful.

A discussion/debate between Parry and Date would be great, but a full-on cage match between DB Hart and Date would be better...to be honest, though, I don't think it would be much of a fight. Date's a smart, honorable guy and a tough debater, but Hart's in an entirely different league.

Parry is out of Date’s league by light years.

Blaise, I agree, but DBH is even harder to get in contact with than Parry. My other concern is that Hart is sometimes a jerk. Also, his book on universalism contains some incomplete or inadequate arguments (ALONGSIDE rock solid arguments which people ignore), which combined with his *tone* caused the book to be less persuasive than it could have been.

Erik, I agree insofar as I think Parry has better arguments. But I think Date is within the same intellectual league; he’s just badly mistaken and sort of glued to his denial of universalism. Also, and I’m hesitant to say this… Date is often pretty rude himself, and I’ve seen examples of him playing dirty on this topic. But Parry would be able to handle it.

@@TheProdigalMeowMeowMeowReturns it’s those olde English manners

Okay pal. Calvinists go to heaven so it’s not a loss. That’s a secondary issue. At least Calvinists agree God has a plan and we are a part of it. Theres one plan. Not plan A , B ,C D. Because he knows what WILL happen not just what CAN happen. There is only one future that will happen. And God planned it before creation.

@@timetravlin4450 why would god have to plan anything?

@@timetravlin4450 I don’t think having a demonic theology damns you, not at all I never said that

@@timetravlin4450 btw Booooring

@@Super_bus_machine Who is "god"? No true Christian worships "god." We worship the I AM, God, the Self-Existent Necessary Eternal Creator of All Contingent Things. Don't strawman Christianity.

Add Peter Heitt to your digging. And Gods law that places a limit on all punishment

He actually did that to a large extent in the first video.

Jesus is the way.

@@almarasch6061 Yes, and you are BOTH right! :)

@@HarryNicNicholas DBH, Feser, Koons, Flynn, and Rasmussen have offered worthy arguments.

@@TheProdigalMeowMeowMeowReturns Ilaria Ramelli…

He's incredibly intelligent and it makes me feel good about my viewpoint on who God really is. 🎉❤

This is a verse that applies to ourselves.... not something we quote to others. It smacks too much of the pharisees who prayed "thank god I,m not like these sinners" ( or thank God I,m not on the broad path to destruction)

@@DIBBY40 You're being ridiculous.

@@billyhw5492 How so?

@JP I am a pharisee of pharisees!

@JP except universalists don’t believe in reincarnation

@@HarryNicNicholas what?

@@HarryNicNicholas it’s the “Nic” comedy special starring Harry “Nic” Nicholas

What point are you trying to assert with this passage

@@Truthin15 That not everyone will enter the kingdom of heaven.

@@haronsmith8974 yes maybe that’s what that means. Currently I am not a restorationist. Though I am open to the idea and have seen good arguments for it. Nothing in this passage says that the state of these people is permanent and unalterable. What is clear from what He is saying is that many who thought they were saved won’t be because their repentance was not genuine. Therefore they will experience punishment on the day of judgement, but that doesn’t mean that they can’t subsequently repent genuinely and begin to be “he who does the will of my Father”.

@@Truthin15 the only real argument I know is from Origen, that in scripture hell is always written till the end of time and heaven is written as if out of time. So you would only burn in hell till the end of time.

@@haronsmith8974 check out Steve Gregg’s book “All You Want to Know About Hell: 3 Christian Views”. It basically lays out the biblical case for and against ECT, Annihilationism, and Restorationism. The case for ECT biblically is actually the weakest. Although for me it still has enough credibility to remain possible.

Amen brother, Pray for all - our flesh resists the Spirit and it is the Spirit that gives life... We are called to die to self [flesh] not to avoid sinning in the flesh but to stop resisting the Father's will - EVERLASTING LIFE. The bonus is that in this age you are blessed incredibly as you live according to the Spirit and believe on Him for love in all and for all... It is the ultimate destination for all by the power of the Spirit - until then let us have compassion, for i too once resisted with disgust the idea of "universal salvation". PS I prefer the term "absolute reconciliation".... Dictionary Definitions from Oxford Languages · Learn more absolute adjective 1. not qualified or diminished in any way; total. "absolute secrecy" 2. viewed or existing independently and not in relation to other things; not relative or comparative. a value or principle which is regarded as universally valid or which may be viewed without relation to other things. Blessings to you and those whom you love....EVERYONE

Greetings my beloved - yes but what is He talking about... Rightly divide the word... He also said.... [Luk 18:24-30 NKJV] 24 And when Jesus saw that he became very sorrowful, He said, "How hard it is for those who have riches to enter the kingdom of God! 25 "For it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." 26 And those who heard it said, "Who then can be saved?" 27 But He said, "The things which are impossible with men are possible with God." 28 Then Peter said, "See, we have left all and followed You." 29 So He said to them, "Assuredly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or parents or brothers or wife or children, for the sake of the kingdom of God, 30 "who shall not receive many times more in this present time, and in the age to come eternal life." Clearly distinguishing between the ages...v29 & 30... He also spoke about the same thing in John 11.... [Jhn 11:25-26 NKJV] 25 Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live. 26 ***"AND*** whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?" Is Jesus repeating, clarifying or distinguishing....the word AND is a conjunction between two nouns...two states....two types.... And then of course He also says... [Jhn 12:31-32 NKJV] 31 "Now is the judgment of this world; now the ruler of this world will be cast out. 32 "And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all [peoples] to Myself." Now if we read about the narrow gate in Matt 7 [just like Luke's Gospel] you will either read it as prophetic [thus >90% in my view are gone] or you will read it as propositional and prescriptive - how to live in this age so you can receive blessing in this age...the law of love.... Well I believe the entire sermon is a propositional invitation of how to live in this age [in this flesh] - the Kingdom of God is now and everywhere and always.... And then of course we have Paul citing Isaiah when writing to the fellowships in Rome and Philipi about every knee bowing and confessing to the glory of God.... He wont lose one - its not who He is... And for context - to help us understand why we struggle to see as He does.... A day to the Lord is as 1,000 years.... So our average 80 year lives are like a 2 hours old baby to Him - blameless and precious in His eyes.... He wont cast one out.... Blessings to you and yours my friend....

Dahmer and Paul are saved. Hitler was a Christian. Many Nazis were christians and acceptef Christ. In traditional view, Anne frank and all of the victims of the above and everyone else rots in hell for eternity. So what is your point again?

They will undergo righteous judgment. The argument is what that justice and judgment is. Don’t be stupid

Yes, please.

That's your flesh, crucify it, pick up your cross and Read the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John in full in order at minimum, then all the way to revelation 7 times, then the Old Testiment 7 times. You wouldn't starve your body of sustenance to carry on; don't starve your spirit from God's Word, His love letter and warning to us. No Bible = No Breakfast, No Read = No Feed.

@@User-og1te I never said it wasn’t

@@User-og1te Annihilationism is literally what Scripture teaches. Eternal torment is coming from the flesh and is false.

For the whOle world 😂❤

I can't force my kids to love me

@@merlinshorb4324 They can't force you to stop loving them either.

@@DIBBY40 I plan to love my wife even though she's thinking of divorcing me. Doesn't mean she's going to keep being with me.

@@vedinthorn But God is omnipotent. He has the power to make it the case that all persons freely choose him but according to you he doesn't

@@thyikmnnnn no amount of power can break the law of non-contradiction.

You do not love your neighbour AS YOURSELF if you can live with the thought of conscious eternal torment for your neighbour.

@@DIBBY40 if I deserve a circumstance, it's hating myself to try and avoid it.

@@vedinthorn It depends on the circumstance.

God created everyone from their mother’s womb. The devil creates nobody, thus he’s nobody father. You’re quoting what was an analogy to the corruption or holiness of the heart at any given time

Fathers of the Nicaean creed believed in Universalism.

What’s the question?

@@christianuniversalist Luke 16:19-31 ESV ““There was a rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and who feasted sumptuously every day. And at his gate was laid a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores, who desired to be fed with what fell from the rich man’s table. Moreover, even the dogs came and licked his sores. The poor man died and was carried by the angels to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried, and in Hades, being in torment, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham far off and Lazarus at his side. And he called out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am in anguish in this flame.’ But Abraham said, ‘Child, remember that you in your lifetime received your good things, and Lazarus in like manner bad things; but now he is comforted here, and you are in anguish. And besides all this, between us and you a great CHASM has been fixed, in order that those who would pass from here to you may not be able, and none may cross from there to us.’ And he said, ‘Then I beg you, father, to send him to my father’s house- for I have five brothers-so that he may warn them, lest they also come into this place of torment.’ But Abraham said, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them hear them.’ And he said, ‘No, father Abraham, but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent.’ He said to him, ‘If they do not hear Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be convinced if someone should rise from the dead.’”” Emphasis mine.

@@OldThingsPassAway While the story of Lazarus and the rich man is referred to by some Christians as if it were an actual historical account of two men’s post-mortem fates, both the context and the content of the story indicate otherwise. When examined more closely, it is evident that both Jesus and Luke intended this story to be understood as a parable by their listeners/readers. This fact has been noted by a significant number of mainstream NT scholars both past and present. For example, Robert W. Yarbrough (an “evangelical” Christian and advocate of the traditional doctrine of an “intermediate conscious state” between death and resurrection) concedes in his essay, “Jesus on Hell,” that it is “widely accepted that this story is parabolic and not intended to furnish a detailed geography of hell.” He goes on to refer to the story as a “parable” in the same paragraph (Hell Under Fire, pg. 74). But what is a parable? Answer: The word “parable” is a transliteration of the Greek para bole’ (“cast beside”), and is essentially a short and simple tale based on familiar things meant to convey a more profound spiritual truth. As a parable, it is neither literal nor historical; as soon as we try to make a parable literal, it ceases to be a parable, and loses its intended purpose and meaning. Any objection that this story is not specifically called a parable is invalid, since only 11 of the 26 parables recorded in Luke’s gospel are actually named parables by Luke. But what about Christ’s use of a person’s name (“Lazarus”) in this sixth and final parable? Answer: There is no rule that says a parable can or cannot contain the mention of an identifiable person. A named character is simply not the test of a parable. Furthermore, the rich man is never identified by name, which should tell us that Jesus is not simply recalling an actual event with actual people. His use of the name “Lazarus” is not to provide a historical detail, but to convey something that is important to the message of the parable. If one seeks to understand this story literally, however, and as describing the actual historical experience of two people’s “disembodied souls” after death (though the word “soul” is not even used in this passage), one would have to admit that they can be “carried” by angels (though they are often spoken of as being “immaterial” in nature by those who believe in their existence); that they have eyes, bosoms, fingertips and tongues (and apparently nerves if they can experience a burning sensation); that, in spite of the “great gulf” that is said to be between them (evidently so wide that no one could cross it), Lazarus and the rich man were close enough to see and converse with each other; that Lazarus was literally in “Abraham’s bosom” (even though Abraham was said to be dead, buried and sleeping with his ancestors in the grave - Gen 15:15; 25:8). Furthermore, one must wonder whether it is even conceivable that our Heavenly Father would “reward” the righteous by confining them to a place where, for ages, they would have to see the agony, smell the smoke, and listen to the shrieks of condemned souls as they begged for relief while being burned in fire (though exactly how an immaterial soul can be burned with fire is a mystery). For those who have been made perfect in agape love, the very act of having to watch people writhe and moan in fiery torment without any hope of relief would itself be a punishment. Fortunately, since this is a parable, there is no need to interpret this passage as teaching that this has ever been, or ever will be, the case…

What is the context of the rich man and Lazarus parable? This parable is closely connected to the preceding parables Jesus told, beginning in chapter 15. There, Luke tells us the reason for these parables: “Now the tax collectors and sinners were all drawing near to hear him. And the Pharisees and the scribes grumbled, saying, ‘This man receives sinners and eats with them!’ So he told them this parable, saying…” (Luke 15:1-2) Jesus then proceeds to give them a series of parables. Each story pertains to the original situation in Luke 15:1-2, to which Jesus is responding. Given this context, it is likely that the parable of the rich man and Lazarus should be viewed in a similar manner. Now, being true to the nature of a parable, all of Christ’s parables were based on things with which his first-century Jewish audience would have been very familiar, and contained recognizable elements of first-century Jewish society, culture and beliefs. Though the “spiritual message” of the parable was hidden to those without eyes to see and ears to hear, it was, on the surface, a story to which his audience could immediately relate. This is a significant point to keep in mind when reading this parable. This means that Christ told the story of the rich man and Lazarus with the full understanding that his target audience (i.e., the Pharisees) would have been well acquainted with the details and imagery of the story. In other words, it was a story to which they could relate, with specific details they would understand and certain happenings with which they would be familiar. But this fact begs the question: How could they have been familiar with a story like this? How is it possible that they could relate the fantastic imagery and details of this story to something of which they were already knowledgeable? There is nothing in the Old Testament that speaks of Sheol (the Hebrew equivalent to Hades) as containing a place of conscious torment for the wicked, and a place of comfort for the righteous. There’s not a word in the books of the Law and Prophets about the grave having two compartments for good and bad people that are separated by an un-crossable gulf, or about angels whisking anyone off to a place called “Abraham’s Bosom” after they die.

In light of what the Hebrew Scriptures taught (and especially of what they’re silent), how could the Pharisees have been acquainted with the content of this unusual story told by Jesus? Jesus knew the Old Testament scriptures, and never strayed from them. Since he certainly didn’t get the content of the parable from anything in the Old Testament, did he just pull the content out of his head? Did he make it all up? Or did he perhaps reveal something to them that was completely new to their ears? No, the Pharisees knew what Jesus was talking about. They were very familiar with the imagery and subject matter. However, their knowledge was not based on anything in the inspired Scriptures. And that is precisely the reason why this fictional story proves their understanding of the afterlife as being unscriptural and of non-divine origin. The content of this story was based not on God’s inspired word, but was derived from extra-biblical sources and traditions that became part of the Jew’s religious tradition after their inspired Hebrew scriptures were completed.

How would you begin to consider universalism to be Christian? Why would Jesus talk about wheat and tares? Why would he say what he did in John 17:9? Why would Jesus say about the right hand sheep, the left hand goats? How many ways does Jesus need to say it over and over to make it 100% clear that some go in to the furnace and are burned and some are gathered in to the barn? These people can not possibly be serious. I wonder why they don't just go get a different religion instead of making a cult and keeping a Bible around?

@@br.m you know there are 30,000 denominations and the first schism was about the source of the Holy Spirit.

@@michaelbrickley2443 k

@@br.mRemember universalists don’t necessarily deny hell. They simply deny an eternal hell. So appeal to language of fire doesn’t help your case. In 1 Corinthians Paul tells about two groups, those whose works withstand the fire, and those whose works are burned up but they themselves are saved but through fire.

@@bman5257 OK I don't want to waste my time arguing. Whatever Google tells me about universalism, it is silly and not Biblical and is a departure from scripture. Therefore it is false and not worthy of discussion or consideration. It seems like something Oprah would promote.

All very well while we think we are the ones saved. Anyone who can live with their loved ones who don't believe suffering eternal hell without end has clearly not contemplated the issue deeply enough.

@@DIBBY40 if they consciously choose to stay in that state, the most loving thing is to leave them be in it.

Salvation by works ? Bro your not in line with truth

@@vedinthorn who would consciously choose that state? It would be insane. Assuming you are of sound mind would you choose to jump in front of a train?

Shall a man be more merciful than God?

And proof that materialism is true… and…. GO !!!

You asking for evidence? Or proof? Lots of evidence … but… you’re the juror… about of the caliber of one’s on the OJ Trial. Cochran and Kardashian LOVE jurors like you…. So gullible…

I thought the topic here was “universalism” not theism vs materialism… Any comments on the main topic here “Seeker”???

@@mkl2237 I will say that to my knowledge it materialism the only thing we have good evidence of. If you have evidence of something immaterial existing I am open to that. I understand that we can think of concepts and some may call that immaterial, but that is simply a brain state and descriptors we are using to convey thoughts, which is an entirely physical process that I would call material.

GO ?!?!? Sure… it’s worth a lot of time and energy spoon-feeding a closed minded person )one self-tltled “truth seeker”)…. Yeah. That’s a great use of time. Never ending “nope… not enough… nope… not enough… nope… not enough…”.

The translation is more literally something like "the punishment of the age" and Andrew addressed the seeming problem of the co-eternality of heaven/hell in the last video he did.

@@exquofonte the word age must mean the same in both phrases. I suppose then that eternal life doesn't last forever either. Shame.

@@vedinthorn What do you do with Habakkuk 3:6? "the everlasting mountains were scattered, The perpetual hills bowed. His ways are everlasting." Are mountains eternal or are God's ways finite?

@@exquofonte different verse in a different text hundreds of years apart can lend itself to a different intention of the word. Same word by the same author in the same sentence almost NEVER does.

What is the purpose of punishment?

Not a Christian but interested in the philosophy on this. That verse could be interpreted as hyperbole for the regret (woe) one would feel when eventually receiving salvation. Such hyperbole/metaphor is common to the style and writing of the new testament. Eg. You must hate your parents compared to your love for, Jesus cursing the fig tree, etc. If you take everyone's words literally the bible is incoherent from a literary standpoint, and the way the gospels are written it is clear they employ a loose, frequently non literal style in dialogue, the order of events and the content of events.

@@perplexedon9834 still wouldn’t make much sense on Universalist doctrine. Even if it’s hyperbolic. Hell is almost like an extremely painful cleansing process in that view. We already experience suffering here on earth. I just don’t see how the scriptures make Unitarian doctrine clear. It’s like trying to put a square peg through a round hole.

If I gave you a choice between a piece of bread and a little water, or a sumptuous banquet of food to which you are freely invited what would you choose?

@@DIBBY40 depends. If I hate your guts to absolute death and back I might reject both and spit on you.

@@DIBBY40 to quote from the movie Open Range, "there's things that gnaw at a man worse than dying".

@@vedinthorn Yes. So?

@@DIBBY40 So plenty of people will choose death and suffering if they think it will spite someone they hate. As someone who would gladly go to prison in payment to kill someone who hypothetically murdered my family, I know that's true. For some people it's not about winning: it's about making the other person lose at all costs. It's morally insane. It's also undeniably real.

Yep

I’m sorry I didn’t get to cover that aspect (or my thoughts on Molinism and open theism). Perhaps if I’m invited back we could look at those and some more fun arguments!

No disrespect but I believe lfw is a fiction and I’m not a universalist. Either God planed everything or he didn’t. Are you not part of Gods plan? Imagine if the Bible was written differently. Obviously God knows every possibility but he also knows what you were going to do before creation. And that was all according to his plan. He created every human with a purpose. we may not like that purpose but morality is a fiction if God doesn’t exist so us not liking some things God does doesn’t make him immoral.

A pound of LFW is better than a pound of anti-pain But 16 pounds of anti-pain is better than an ounce of LFW

Talbott, Parry, and Reitan have covered this in their writings. LFW is *not* a problem for Christ-centric universalism.

We deserve it because of our sins, not the mere lack of a certain psychological state. Fortunately it's all paid for on the cross. You can reappropriate that pardon of sins any time by becoming a Christian again.

We all deserve hell. None of us are perfect. Just because you don’t believe some of the things you do are wrong doesn’t mean they aren’t. The wages of sin is death. And Jesus paid your debt on the cross. You can either accept or reject that.

@@timetravlin4450 so imperfections merits torture 100s of trillions of universes, each with lifespans of 100s if trillions of years as punishment for finite crimes. This is purely punitive punishment with no redemption. Sorry, this is delusional. Not biting the hook.

@@stuntman3495 What crime would you punish a child for till the end of time then restart time to continue the punishment? You are selling a delusion.

I want to add more on hell aside from the infinite, timeless punishment. The punishment isn’t really because of sin. Some atheists behave worse than Christians yet some atheists behave better. Under Christianity sins are forgiven so sins alone are not the path to the jail cell. What sends a person for torture is a lack of belief. Accepting a belief is outside the control of a person. Evidence either merits acceptance or it doesn’t . I can’t force myself to believe in Bigfoot or that rocks have souls. I can’t force myself to believe prayers are effective when I know they are not. So people are sent to hell, forever, for the inability to accept a thought, a belief. They can’t think in a certain way thus are doomed. Hell is like a runaway version of Orwell’s 1984 thoughtcrimes. A simple thought or lack of a thought dooms a person .

Satan has been in the presence of Yahweh. Satan has free will. Satan is roaming around free. Job 1:7 The Lord said to Satan, “Where have you come from?” Satan answered the Lord, “From roaming throughout the earth, going back and forth on it.” LOL

The title of the video tells you that this is a philosophical case for universal salvation. He did a video previously on the scriptural case.

@@thyikmnnnn Fair enough I missed that. Thank you for pointing it out. I was very taken back when I never saw reference once God's word.

AN EXAMPLE of plainly stated text in the bible. Leviticus 25:44 "‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly."

What a nasty, stupid, ignorant comment.

Bruh do you truly believe that your suggestions are remotely similar to these arguments? Is your incredulity an argument at all? Just because you believe in your interpretation of scripture and think nothing can challenge that does not make it so...

@@gideonwiley8961 critics of universalism complain about the few rude universalists, but are silent when it comes to the CONSTANT nastiness and bearing of false witness against universalists.

@@TheProdigalMeowMeowMeowReturns well that and I don’t understand why people are unable to engage PHILOSOPHICALLY with PHILOSOPHICAL ideas...

They already had an episode where they argued for UR scripturally, but that aside, how do you think we understand anything?-LANGUAGE, and language represents ideas. Scripture doesn’t exist in a vacuum.

On what planet did universalism lead to the reformation? It's been almost non-existent since Augustine and has only reappeared with any significance quite recently.

He had Catholics on before

@@Returnality my point is just the opposite! He should stop with these interviews on what every orthodox Christian agrees is heresy and go back to the foundations.

@@Christian-ut2sp Except that is not true at all. Not every orthodox Christian agrees that universalism is heresy. Perhaps the universalism of the sort where Christ is not involved in the way to Heaven, but there is a very good chance the majority of the early church was universalist for quite some time. The majority of schools were Origen's schools at one point.

@@Christian-ut2sp Universalism IS the foundation. Reformed is a bastardized form of the gospel that got its first legs with the gnostic Augustine.

Is this a Village atheist statement?

@@therougesage7466 Xtians get really SAD when you point out their "MAKE YOUR OWN ADVENTURE" religion. LOL

@@sanjeevgig8918 so then what have you done? Not sought your own understanding ? I think not. However you lean on your own understanding..quite foolish because it’s built on sand and without proper guidance -reason is a gift not a given.

@@therougesage7466 EVERY propaganda book tells you not to believe anyone else. You blithering Xtian. LOL

@@sanjeevgig8918 do some homework before you throw rocks in a glass house

When we die you'll see my friend. You annihilationst are wrong and give God a terrible name, annihilationsim is the primary reason why people don't submit to God.

@@daMillenialTrucker so, follow me here... Just because I'm not a universalist, you think I'm then an annihilationist?.. I'm neither

@@Joelthinkerwhat are you then?.. please don’t say a traditionalist

That’s a misunderstanding of Mark 9:48

@@christianuniversalist So, what is the right way to understand this passage?

@@LeoPriester a few quick points 1. The verses Christ is referring to are prophecies from Isaiah and Daniel which were fulfilled with the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD 2. Jesus also never mentions the soul or spirit which many Christians have errantly read into the text, and there was no need to because He was using imagery about bodily destruction 3. The worm that does not die is metaphorical and parabolic not literal. I would direct you to David Bentley Hart and Robin Parry who go into much greater detail on these cluster of verses in Mark. I’m also attaching a short informative video. m.ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-iq_IfyP701w.html