What’s your opinion of Jack Chick?
What about Fred “God Hates Fags” Phelps?
1 Timothy 2 1-4
I urge, then, first of all, that all requests, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for everyone-for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. This is good, and pleases God our Saviour who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth.
I don’t think that’s what FriarTed’s saying, H4E. He seems to be talking about universal salvation through eventual conversion. At least, that’s what I understand about Universalism. Correct me if I’m wrong, please.
It seems to me that there’s the same kind of tension between Universalism and ultimate perdition as there is between Calvinism/Arminianism. There’s Scripture that you can quote for both, if you want to proof-text.
slinks back to MPSIMS
JMHO. I think Jack Chick is truly concerned for lost souls and desires people to be led out of falsehood and into the truth of Christ. Note: Please don’t start another thread about Jack Chick. I’m just answering a question here, don’t want involvement in another Chick debate.:rolleyes:
As to Fred Phelps, I skimmed part of the page, and even though I agree with him on what the Scriptures say about homosexuality, (Note: same as above, insert homosexuality in place of Chick) I’m appalled at some of the things on his site such as listing the number of days certain people have been in hell. It sounds as though he’s happy about people going to that awful place.
I think I might go back and read more on that site. Even if Phelps believes that h is an abomination in God’s eyes, which I agree with, the manner in which his site is set up leaves much to be desired.
Please, as stated above, I desire no further involvement in debates about homosexuality or Jack Chick.
Also, I don’t think I agree with Phelps that Jesus died only for those who believe, a select group of people. My biblical understanding is that He died for everyone who has lived or will ever live. But He leaves it up to he individual person whether to accept and trust in Him and His sacrifice. Many will not, but His death was for everyone. We can accept or reject it.
How about the parable of the Good Samaritan? He wouldn’t have been a Christian. Heck, he wouldn’t have even have been a Jew.
How can we be sure his true meaning when he said “no man comes to the father except by me” wasn’t “no man comes to the father except through doing as I have done?” Bear with me on this for a second while I explain.
A good deal of Christ’s message is railing against what he saw as the adherence to dead laws and rules as a religious tradition ala the Pharisees; he called them “white washed tombs” [Matt 23:27] and self righteous lovers of display [Matt 6:1-6, 16-18]. The Pharisees loved rules and insisted on strict adherence to the letter of their law without regard as to the spirit. This Christ saw as an complete 180 of how the process should be, and that the only way to know God was to do it as he had done it, by a direct and personal relationship with God instead of adhering to dead religious dogma. He thus instructed his disciples to pray in the Lord’s Prayer addressing God as “abba” which is the personal and intimate name a child would give to one’s own father. he invited everone to share in this privilege.
Even C.S. Lewis had to admit to this possibility in the Chronicles of Narnia, that when a boy from another country had been dutifully worshipping a false idol and seeking a direct and intimate knowledge of God, that he had unknowingly been seeking the God of Christianity all along.
I was asking FriarTed about Jack Chick and Fred Phelps, just to be clear.
Not that I mind getting you or anybody’s two cents, that’s fine.
Yeah, apologies to FriarTed for any hijacking, just had to pipe in.
His4Ever- hiya! I hoped you would chime in (and for the record, let me say that I’m happy you stick around SDMB considering the major abuse you get)
Ephesians 1: 10. That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:
Colossians 1: 19. For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;
20. And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.
and yes, Lissla is right, I would appeal to the I Timothy scripture & she does indeed give an accurate definition of Christian Universalism- that it teaches that all will eventually come to God thru trusting Jesus.
About possible rescue from Hell (be it Sheol or Gehenna, the Holding Cell or the Final Fiery Dump)-
I Peter 3: 18. For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the spirit:
19. By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;
20. Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water
and I Peter 4: 6. For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.
and MAYBE just -
Revelation 22: 14. Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
15. For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.
16. I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.
17. And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.
Just suppose that V 17 might be addressed to those sinners excluded from the Heavenly City in V 14.
There are only two Scriptures that seem to indisputably teach Eternal Torment-
Matthew 25: 46. And these (the “goats” who are judged for ignoring the needy) shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.
The Greek for “everlasting punishment” is “aionian kolasin” which can just as easily be translated “aion-long correction”.
- The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:
- And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.
VV 10b-11a can just as easily be translated “he (the Beast-worshipper) shall undergo the Touchstone-Ordeal with Fire and Divine Sulfer in the presence of the holy messengers and in the Presence of the Lamb (Christ) and the smoke of their ordeal goes up for aions of aions…”
While “they shall have no rest” by itself causes a problem for the belief they will ultimately reconcile to God/Jesus, it does not insist they exist to be tormented forever but can well mean they cease to exist while in a state of restlessness (after which they may well be raised by God for the Invitation of Rev 22).
Revtim- I agree with H4E regarding Jack Chick’s sincerity. Trouble is he’s a sucker for every Conspiracy-mongering “Christian” con artist that comes his way- John “ex-Illuminati Grand Druid” Todd, Alberto “ex-Jesuit” Rivera, the bad scholarship of the KJV Only bunch, “Dr. Rebecca Brown”- the de-licensed physician & occult investigator, and now William “ex-Wiccan/Satanist/(Gnostic) Catholic priest/Vampire/Mormon” Schoenbelin (btw, he actually does seem to have been involved in all these things but that does not follow that all his claims are accurate- esp since for a long time he implied he was a ROMAN Catholic priest, not a Gnostic one.) Also, Jack just seems to much to enjoy depicting the sufferings of the damned.
Then again, I used his non-anti-Catholic stuff when I was a regular Evangelical teen in the 1970s & there are still a few of his tracts that give a decent presentation of Christ. His Anti-everything ferver has certainly not helped him financially but has caused most Christian bookstores to have no dealings with his materials.
Fred Phelps is a jerk. Ironically, he was a lawyer committed to black civil rights in the 1960s- he even joked to CHRISTIANITY TODAY magazine “See, I was a good guy once.” One can even believe that homosexual activity is a damnable sin without delighting in that damnation (I certainly believe it will not escape Divine judgement, but then again there is totally different stuff in my life that will earn me some Jesus-smacks).
Pravnik - No problem with the hijack. Btw, CSL- tho not a Universal Salvationist certainly advocated a more inclusive application of salvation thru Christ than do many Evangelicals. His best “defenses” of Eternal Hell are in THE LAST BATTLE (Narnia VII) in which faithless Dwarves exist in New Narnia (Heaven) but don’t perceive any of its beauty & blessings and in THE GREAT DIVORCE in which Redeemed Spirits evangelize the Sinful Ghosts of their earthly loved ones in Sheol-Hell. I think he could be called a Hopeful Universalist tho he didn’t believe that hope would be completed.
Yay! I got something right! In Great Debates, even!
happy dance
From The Great Divorce and other CSL works, I think his final stand was. “Goodness, I don’t know who will be saved. Why not trust God?”, and Kathleen Norris’ assertion, “The only hypocrite I have to worry about is myself.”
And now back to the thread.
FriarTed, where do you fall in the “surety of salvation” debate? And what do you think about the authority of church tradition?
Sorry, didn’t realize your question was directed to him. My apologies.
It would be just wonderful if everyone in the world would eventually trust in Christ as Savior, but I don’t really see it happening. God desires everyone to be saved, of course, but will never force anyone. He might do all He can to reach someone by sending people who will share the gospel or putting that person in a situation to hear the gospel, but He will not force anyone to believe. I truly don’t think the Scripture teaches salvation after death or the possibility of getting out of hell but anyone who wants to believe and hope for that, that’s okay.
I would, tho, humbly advise anyone who’s thought or is thinking about making a decision to accept Christ not to put it off. None of us knows how much time we have or if we’ll be here tomorrow.
John 3:16
John 3:36
**
Congratulations, you’ve officially broken me out of lurker mode, so I’ve registered just to reply to you. Feel special. I find it very funny that you would ask questions like this, given the threads and battles you have been involved with recently. My question to you would be, why should anyone answer your questions, when you steadfastly refuse to answer the questions of others.
Questions like: Where is the teaching in Scripture that you can divorce and remarry?
its a typo for bump which i picked up
the author is God who gave it to??
But I say unto you, That whosover shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery. Matthew 5:32
It looks like it’s allowed, if fornication is involved. I find it rather interesting to note that it says whosoever puts away his wife causes her to committ adultery.
All that says is that divorce is allowed, not that you can remarry. Everytime the Jesus mentions remarriage in the New Testament, he speaks of it as being sinful – adultery. You hold others to standards you do not hold yourself to. Therefore all of your opinions are to be rejected as hypocritical.
Lissla- do another happy dance- you pretty much nailed CSL’s Salvation stance! Kathleen Norris is one I must read sometime- heck, I’ve just recently encounted Anne Lamott!
Now “surety of salvation”- do you mean the issue of Eternal Security vs Losing Salvation? If so, then I’ll say this- I’ve known people who seemed VERY saved & committed to Christ who now seem VERY lost and antagonitic to Christ or at least Christian faith. Since New Testament Scripture warns of falling away, rejecting the Faith, etc. & coming under God’s Judgement, then it does indeed seem possible. How this works from a Universalist perspective is that a fallen away ex-Christian may well lose the immediate After-death benefits of Salvation to lanquish in Hades & then repent & trust Christ before or during the Final Judgement.
Re the authority of Church Tradition- it depends on the tradition. Obviously, I think the Western orthodox tradition of Eternal Torment for nonChristians is erroneous while I am totally convinced of the Trinity. I don’t put full reliance in any of the big Three- Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy or Protestantism (Reformed or Anabaptist) but I see their Creedal consensus (the Nicene Creed for intance) as essential to Biblical Christian faith.
Is this making sense? S Because sometimes it seems I tapdance too much around these questions but I really do feel there are essential grains of truth hidden among large ambiguities.
Sdrawkcab- in situations where divorce is permissable, remarriage is also permissible. I believe Jesus was condemning the practice of divorcing in ORDER to marry another as an adulterous violation of the Spirit of the Law, tho it was techically allowable within the Letter of the Law. I Corinthians 7 allows divorce & remarriage for the innocent spouse if the other breaks the vows/obligations of fidelity & provision & living peacefully. This is the consensus of the historic Christian Faith- Catholic (which substitutes Annulment for Divorce), Orthodox & Protestant.
Now get off your friggin high horse & hijack not this thread further on this subject.
You haven’t read Kathleen Norris yet? Eeek! I love her stuff. My mother’s an associate at an Anglican Benedictine convent, so her writing is very interesting and close-to-home for me.
Your beliefs about salvation do seem very Great Divorce. Interesting. I don’t know much beyond the basic about CSL’s theology, although I really like the writing of his spiritual father, G.K.Chesterton.
As to “surety of salvation” I was asking about whether one can be eternally predestined to salvation/damnation, but I suppose as a Universalist, it’s almost a moot point. In a way that seems almost as deterministic as Calvinism, although backwards, if one lacks the freedom to damn oneself. What do you think?
oh, yeah. happy dance 