u/Light1209

"He has made everything beautiful in its time. He has also set eternity in the human heart; yet no one can fathom what God has done from beginning to end." NKJV

Reading the chapter as a whole is quite interesting too. Especially in how the chapter doesn't favour one man above the other, but calls all men equal, and says all men will go to the same place.

The argument against universalism is always about free will. That there are people out there who use their free will to reject God even if they see him, and therefore, because God respects their choice, they go to hell.

This would have to mean that those who are saved, are saved because they used their free will to make the right choice.

Now the bible says we are only saved by grace through faith (in him and his grace). It also says that we only have that faith because He draws us near. So this means our ability to make the right choice is only possible because of his power.

It also says that God desires that none should perish. So this means that God will attempt to draw every single person to himself, and if the ONLY reason we chose Christ is because he draws us near, then every single person will have to be saved once they are drawn.

The only way to believe otherwise is to have to either believe that our salvation does come from us because we were good/special/humble enough to choose him, or that God only draws some but leaves others to destruction.

Both of these beliefs would also contradict much of the bible.

Also when it comes to my faith before I looked into universalism I always believed that God came into my life in a way that made it so that I had no choice but to give my life to him. I think this is what a lot of the non universalists believe too... So even in this earth we have free will, but God's intervention in our lives made it so that we have no choice but to believe in him. This is how God saves all, whilst still respecting their free will. He's already doing it. I could never have chosen God with my free will if it wasn't for the power of his love.

God desires that none should perish. He also constantly weeps and grieves his people turning away from him. He mourns the death of the wicked. He mours evil nations like Moab meeting destruction.

Then our picture of the end is this:

And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes; there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying. There shall be no more pain, for the former things have passed away.” Revelation 21:4 NKJV

If there is no more pain or crying this can't just apply to us, but to God as well. If he desires for none to perish, then his sorrow could only be no more if none do perish.

Sorry if this is old news but I'm new here and just realised this.

This parable which shows a poor beggar going to heaven and a rich man who didn't share his wealth with the poor man going to hell is usually something people might point to as proof against universalism, but it's so obviously more proof that it's the only possibility.

Once in Hades the rich man is in torment, the roles are reversed, and the rich man begs Abraham to give him comfort, and asks for mercy! He then says if he can't be saved, though he begs for mercy, he wants his brother's to know the truth so that they will repent.

Now here we have him begging for mercy, and also acknowledging his own evil by saying his brothers would repent. So he basically is repenting himself.

Abraham tells him that there is a chasm between hell and heaven that neither side can go to the other. He also says his brother's wouldn't listen to him, they still wouldn't listen if they saw a man rise from the dead!

Now!!! (Sorry I'm excited) The chasm shows us that the sinners can't go to a place of heaven (relationship with God) and the saints can't go to a place of hell (seperation from God). That makes sense. And also, if his brothers are ones who'd reject Christ even if they saw him raised from the dead, then we can assume the rich man would have been the same in Abraham's eyes right??? That's why he's in hell...

But!! In this life does God not have mercy on the repentant? And does he not have compassion on those who suffer and eventually give them his comfort. Does he not come to those who call on his mercy?

And... Isn't God the same yesterday, today, and forever??????

So!! This parable, if anything, reinforces universalism massively! It shows that hell is a place where sinners repent! And if you believe God's merciful heart suddenly turns them away for ETERNITY!!! What kind of view do you have of God?

Wow! Wow! God is good!

"But the mercy of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting upon them that fear him, and his righteousness unto children's children;"— Psalm 103:17 (KJV)

So even if this chasm seperates the two men, it never says that God's mercy can't fall on the rich man, making him a new creation. It never says he can't eventually have fellowship with God through this mercy and become a saint who now can't go from heaven to hell like Lazarus!

Wow! Let's rejoice!!!!!!!

I'm an ex muslim and ever since being saved 5 years ago I believed that only those who accept Jesus as their saviour would escape hell... I also lost my dad a couple months after being saved to COVID. I believed that during his coma the Lord came to him and saved him. Thinking about my dad as a baby boy, growing up, making bad choices and mistakes, and at the end when he went to the hospital seeing his scared face... I just couldn't take it... At the time I went to God with this pain and he told me that however much I loved my dad, God loved him even more. At the time I thought this to mean God understood my pain and had even more than me.

Now his mother, my grandma is staying with me for while... And she's gotten so old. She needs looking after to do anything. She doesn't fully remember. She's basically like a child right now. And seeing her I began thinking the same things. How she's had such a long and tough life. Seeing 3 of her children pass, her husband pass, and even though she is a Muslim, she believes in God and has hope for him. The thing is that she grew up in a culture and an age where there is nothing else. Becoming Christian is basically an impossibility for her unlike for me. And I just couldn't imagine that a good God who died on the cross to show his love for the world when they didn't deserve it, would reject my grandma after this life when she comes hopeful to see him... Even though she didn't have the right path, she was looking for the same thing.

And I know you could believe she'd be in heaven with just inclusivism but then I began to think how I came to the Lord. It wasn't because I was extra special or good or smart. The Lord drew me near and I also had experiences in this life that made it easier for me to accept Jesus. Some people don't have the privilege of those experiences, but does that exclude them from God's grace? No way! If I'm only saved because God drew me near and it's by his grace then he will draw everyone near. His love isn't partial.

Also thinking about how small this life is in comparison to eternity. If God would go through all the effort to come into the world to die for the sins of all mankind, why would he exclude people just because they didn't come to accept him in this life? None of the things I believed before, which I believed just because it was thought to be normal, make sense to me anymore.

Lastly the thing that comes to mind is that God is love and he wills that none should perish. And that "(Love) bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never fails." So how could God, who is love, give up on those who choose to reject him? He wouldn't stop trying to redeem them. He would never give up hope in their salvation, even in eternity. And if his love is a will that none should perish, then his love will never fail. All things will be reconciled.

I'm a Pakistani man born and living in England and all my best friends are Argentinians. They're the kindest people I know who are basically my family.

I was rooting for Argentina over England haha. The last 15 mins of that game are my favourite 15 minutes of football ever! I still love the team even if not all of them have acted with grace, they play incredible football and they're so passionate and genuine. The final really upset me and the comments afterwards have also really upset me. It's so clearly a hate campaign by FIFA to give people a villain.

I just wanted to say that I love Argentina and it's people. I've never been there, but I can't wait to have an asado there one day and drink maté all day with all my Argentinian buddies!

Hey. So I've been having a bit of a tough time in my life. I have a friend who I really love and care about, but I have something called an anxious attachment issue which means I can get quite panicky and anxious and insecure about our friendship. It's causing my friend a bit of pressure so to help ease him of that pressure and to also help me have a bit more peace I was thinking it would be nice to have another friend to casually chat to.

I mostly use WhatsApp and I'm a man who's 29. Lemme know. :)

edit: I'm also from the UK and it would make more sense to speak to someone from a similar time zone haha.

I'm so sick of this. Life is so pointless. My existence didn't matter at all. I wish I could never have existed. Nothing good in life is ever as joyful as bad things are painful. And I don't want to go through pain for whatever crappy reason. I just would rather not exist. Love is so fake. I've never witnessed love in my life it's all fake. Even when I thought I saw love or that I was loved I dont believe it anymore. Love isn't real. I don't want to continuously enter these moments of misery and then go through all the nonsense of trying to get better in so done with it all... Why!!! Why couldn't I just not exist! I don't care anymore I'm so tired! I can't do it myself I can't hurt people like that. I just want to have not existed so that I have no thoughts no feelings no nothing. I just am not. That's what I want.

There's a popular theory that Dany's childhood was a fabrication by Ilyrio and that the house with the red door and lemon tree which she reminisces about is actually in Pentos, not Braavos. Meaning her childhood was a manipulation by Ilyrio to keep her and her brother under his thumb.

Now I wondered why this theory would be significant to her character arc and I realised that if Dany were to figure this out it would actually impact her quite significantly.

Let's say she goes back to go forwards like Quaith said and she learns of her childhood, the home she once longed for becomes the place of betrayal, lies, and abuse. Her own memories there being a manipulation. This realisation would make her feel even more alone, and without a home. And maybe it'll bring a surge in wanting to go to westeros more than she ever had. In search of a place that might finally feel like home.

RTD created a show called Tip Toe that released a few months back and I just saw it...

How is this the same writer???!!

Almost everything that doesn't work in RTD2s era of Who works in this show.

The pacing is great, every storybeat lands emotionally, the dialogue can be great, the ending works!

I know many people say in RTD2 Russel was the same writer as before with the same flaws but that is so not true. Basic storytelling mistakes are on full display in this era of Who, which weren't in the first era. And you can say RTD had full creative control this time and that's why it was flawed but basically every other project Russel has created doesn't have the issues that Doctor Who series 14 and 15 have. And I'm pretty sure Russel has more creative control on things like Tip Toe and Years and Years than he had this era of Who.

It's just insane, and sad, that most of Russell's biggest qualities as a writer were totally missing in Who this time around. I don't understand what happened, but the only thing that makes sense is that RTD was trying to do too many things outside of just telling a good story that got in the way of the story. Wanting the show to be viral, trying to please fans in the worst way, and trying to spite critic's of previous era's of Who.

Idk if this is already a popular theory but with the latest trailer it really seems to me that Peters "mutating genes" is the X gene. And this being the movie introducing Jean Grey potentially it could make sense.

I'm still left quite bamboozled by this movie. Not only because of how bizarre the movie itself was, but because there were random flashes of brilliance here in a sea of messy writing.

As the movie began reaching it's climax I couldn't help but feel the ending required a different build up to it to make it more effective. There were so many ideas floating about and none of it was developed well and so it really felt like the script was a first draft.

I think a significant portion of the problems with how empty the movie felt would be fixed if it focused more on Emily Blunt. Making her the sole main character, and getting rid of Jane. Give Emily Blunt the religious background, show her scenes with her father in the past to help us connect with her more, and build up much more significantly the mystery of what happened to her as a child. By giving her the religious background I think you'd be asking much more interesting questions too, showing her struggling with her faith and her repressed memory, as well as the newfound powers she garners. Have Josh O Conner come to her and save her in a chase away from the cooperation. And build up to the scene at the end with her recreated house to make us feel what she felt at that moment.

Another issue is with the villain. He clearly needed a lot more depth, and maybe connecting him more directly with the other main characters. Maybe he was a third vessel chosen by the aliens but it went wrong with him or his reaction wasn't the same as the others etc...

I still think there's a lot of issues outside of these problems like how Emily Blunt and Josh O Conners abilities mattered at all to the ending of the movie, but I think emotionally this would make things more cohesive.

So Hal is clearly not in the best place right now from what we see in Lanterns. He seems to be at his lowest point, which in the comics is when Coastal City was destroyed and Hal eventually became Parallax. So what do you think could've happened to Hal before this show begins? Do you think it'll be something small or do you think it'll be something as big as it was in the comics?

Considering we were about to get a Sargent Rock movie set in world war 2 and how much history there already seems to be in the DCU, what projects are you hoping to get from the DCU's past?

I'd absolutely love if we could get movies of Hal Jordan set in the 80s and 90s.

Im a bit confused about how this show ended as I heard it got cancelled but also that the show ended in an area that is supposed to have a break or something... If I start this show and finish it. Will I have a satisfying complete experience?