A PHONE CONVERSATION WITH A MUSLIM MISSIONARY

[rodgertutt]

A PHONE CONVERSATION WITH A MUSLIM MISSIONARY

A Muslim missionary called me on my ministry phone in response to my newspaper ad “HELL IS NOT ENDLESS.”
(I have sent out many hundreds of packets of literature to people who responded to these ads that I have put in two of Toronto’s largest newspapers since 1981.)

The Muslim missionary said “Unless you convert to Islam you WILL go to hell.”

I said, “That’s what some Christians say if I don’t convert to Christianity.”

He said, “But the difference is that Islam has the truth.”

I said, “That’s what some Christians say about their beliefs.”

He said, “After you die you will learn that the Koran is the word of God and Islam has the truth.”

I said, “I guess I’ll just have to wait until then to find out for sure.”

He said, “But it will be too late for you then.”

I laughed and said, “That’s exactly what some Christians say.”

I don’t think he thought it was funny.

I then expected him to say what a Mormon missionary said to me in Montreal. “At the judgment, as you are being cast into hell, I will point my finger at you and say, ‘I told you so. I gave you a chance but you didn’t take it and now it’s too late’.”

It seems that we are supposed to believe that millions of Muslims, by sheer “accident” of birth, are born into a belief system that teaches their children that even to consider Christianity to be the truth will land them in an eternity of suffering in hell.

I believe that the horrific false doctrine of endless suffering in hell causes more suffering here on earth than any other idea that people believe. That is why it gives me such great pleasure to offer people the urls that contain evidence that the Bible does not support such a concept of God.

Just Google up TENTMAKER and use the search engine at the top of the front page. Type in a key word from any argument or Bible verse and ten articles will appear refuting the idea that the Bible teaches eternal torment or annihilation. Then click to the next page and ten more articles will appear, and so on and so on for many pages. Or click on
http://www.tentmaker.org/

Also Google up
THE SAVIOUR OF THE WORLD SERIES
or
ABSOLUTE ASSURANCE IN JESUS CHRIST
Or
UNIVERSAL SALVATION UNIVERSITY
to find A LOT of scriptural evidence that God has both the ability and the intention to eventually save all fallen creatures from everything from which they need to be saved. Or click on

http://www.tentmaker.org/articles/savior-of-the-world/index.htm
or
http://www.tentmaker.org/books/Absolute-Assurance-in-Jesus-Christ.html
or
http://richardwaynegarganta.com/universalsalvation.htm

[Senator Ben]

Oy vey.

[Meeker]

k

[Grad Students are the Worst]

Hey Rodger,

Welcome aboard.  Just to let you know, we really don't generally smile upon those who create topics without contributing or defending.  I appreciate that you're not blog-spamming, but I get the impression this may be a mast copy-paste.  I don't mean to be presumptuous, and by all means you'll be a welcome presence if you plan to contribute more than just copy-pastes.

Thanks and, again, welcome.

[rodgertutt]

Hey Rodger,

Welcome aboard.  Just to let you know, we really don't generally smile upon those who create topics without contributing or defending.  I appreciate that you're not blog-spamming, but I get the impression this may be a mast copy-paste.  I don't mean to be presumptuous, and by all means you'll be a welcome presence if you plan to contribute more than just copy-pastes.

Thanks and, again, welcome.

So far Alcon, what there is to respond to is "oy vey" and "k"
Difficult for me to know how to "contribute" to, or "defend" those two remarks don't you think?  :-)

I'm just sharing info that was a big help to me!
The idea that God would let anyone suffer forever caused me to have a twelve year nervous breakdown 1966-78 over my inability to love a god who would allow endless suffering to happen to anyone. I'm 70 years old now.

I'm not sure what else you would want me to "contribute" in order to make you "smile"?
I am certainly willing to "contribute" or "defend" anything I have said if anyone says anything that seems to require that kind of response. Is that OK with you?

[Grad Students are the Worst]

Sorry man, the deal is we get lots of people who just come in here, paste stuff they've written, link their blog, etc.  Then, without bothering to read the ensuing comments, they do it again.  And do nothing else.  You didn't do anything wrong (and I should have been clearer about that) but I was thinking it might be one such case.  Evidently it wasn't.  Accept my apologies if my tone was presumptuous.

And now that we know you aren't just copy-pasting, I imagine you'll get substantive applies.  (Once bitten, twice shy and all)

[rodgertutt]

Are there any "Christians" on this forum?
If so, are there any who can relate with my "former" problem?
Just wondering.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Are there any "Christians" on this forum?

depends on how you define your quotations

---

If so, are there any who can relate with my "former" problem?
Just wondering.

not just former, but also current

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

The idea that God would let anyone suffer forever caused me to have a twelve year nervous breakdown 1966-78

that's one mighty long nervous breakdown.  I hope it didn’t include constipation.

BTW, you wouldn't happen to be related to Mike Naso, would you? 

[rodgertutt]

Are there any "Christians" on this forum?

depends on how you define your quotations

definition of "Christian": "a truster in Jesus Christ" (Ephesians 1:12)

If so, are there any who can relate with my "former" problem?
Just wondering.

not just former, but also current

definition of "former": "not being able to love God within the theological concept of Him that I was taught during my childhood."

[Scam of God]

Get off your meds.

[rodgertutt]

The idea that God would let anyone suffer forever caused me to have a twelve year nervous breakdown 1966-78

that's one mighty long nervous breakdown.  I hope it didn’t include constipation.

BTW, you wouldn't happen to be related to Mike Naso, would you? 

My recovery was so long because it took me twelve years to "unlearn" the way I had previously been taught that God is like.

My breakdown consisted of continual panic attacks night and day (an indescribable state of terror) over being afraid of what a god I could not love would do to me in the afterlife for not being able to love him.
Here are testimonies similar to mine
http://www.tentmaker.org/articles/hells_fruit.html
Also see
http://greater-emmanuel.org/Hope4You/consequences.html    
(copy and paste into browser address bar if necessary)

I don't know who Mike Naso is. Is he a member of this forum?

[rodgertutt]

Get off your meds.

I take tylenol for arthritus. That's about it.

[titaniumtux]

@rodgertutt:
Welcome to Atlasia! Ignore Einzige, he's an atheist who trolls the religion & philosophy threads to ridicule believers of any Faith. You are by no means expected to take his posts seriously.

Are there other "Christians" on this forum you ask? There are all kinds, of a range of denominations. You'd have to be very exclusive to consider none of the self-declared Christians on Atlasia to be "Christian", so I would say yes there are.

[rodgertutt]

@rodgertutt:
Welcome to Atlasia! Ignore Einzige, he's an atheist who trolls the religion & philosophy threads to ridicule believers of any Faith. You are by no means expected to take his posts seriously.

Are there other "Christians" on this forum you ask? There are all kinds, of a range of denominations. You'd have to be very exclusive to consider none of the self-declared Christians on Atlasia to be "Christian", so I would say yes there are.

Thanks for the welcome titan.
I'm convinced that God loves atheistic ridiculers too. :-)

I am hoping that some of the info I posted on my first post on this thread will help other Christians on this  forum in a similar way that it helped me.

[Grad Students are the Worst]

It does strike me that these arguments constitute a good argument against the rationality of faith.  Is that not a claim you make?

(I don't want to be an argumentative atheist type.  I'm just curious about your epistemology.  Anyone who is A] so concerned with love and goodness that they'd have nervous breakdowns over them; and, B] able to annoy Einzige; is a-OK with me.)

[rodgertutt]

It does strike me that these arguments constitute a good argument against the rationality of faith.  Is that not a claim you make?

(I don't want to be an argumentative atheist type.  I'm just curious about your epistemology.  Anyone who is A] so concerned with love and goodness that they'd have nervous breakdowns over them; and, B] able to annoy Einzige; is a-OK with me.)

I really only have one motivation for posting.
Some Christians believe that the Bible is the word of God, or at least it contains the word of God to mankind.
Some of these same Christians are unable to successfully emotionally cope with the idea that the Bible, in which they have put their trust, seems to teach  the idea that God will let some of His creatures suffer forever.
Many of these same Christians are very glad to learn that there is evidence that the Bible correctly (literally, not interpretively) translated does not teach that God will let anyone suffer forever.
e.g.
CHART OF GOD’S PLAN FOR THE AGES OF TIME
THE EONS OF THE BIBLE WITH CONCORDANCE
http://www.saviourofall.org/Tracts/Eons2.html
Also see
AN ANALYTICAL STUDY OF WORDS
http://www.tentmaker.org/books/asw/index.html
(especially note the quotes by the many Greek scholars in chapters three and twelve)

[Citizen James]

Sounds like a straw man spiel made up by pseudo-christian fanatics.   I will admit that I have little to no experience with Muslim evangelists (I didn't even realize that there were such things), but this sounds more like a shallow parody of a Christian evangelist than any Muslim I've ever heard.

This "Tentmaker" site looks a bit cultish to me.   

Charismatic leaders who hold the "truth"? [urlhttp://www.tentmaker.org/aboutus.html]check[/url]
All other sects are evil?  Check
Heavy dogma - oy.

Far off from not only mainstream Christianity, but even distant from your standard fundamentalism as far as I can tell.

[rodgertutt]

Sounds like a straw man spiel made up by pseudo-christian fanatics.   I will admit that I have little to no experience with Muslim evangelists (I didn't even realize that there were such things), but this sounds more like a shallow parody of a Christian evangelist than any Muslim I've ever heard.

This "Tentmaker" site looks a bit cultish to me.   

Charismatic leaders who hold the "truth"? [urlhttp://www.tentmaker.org/aboutus.html]check[/url]
All other sects are evil?  Check
Heavy dogma - oy.

Far off from not only mainstream Christianity, but even distant from your standard fundamentalism as far as I can tell.

Type MUSLIM MISSIONARIES into Google. You might be surprised at the results. I sure was!

IMO, rather than being a "cult," TENTMAKER exists, almost exclusively,  to provide evidence that a correctly (literally, rather than interpretively) translated Bible actually teaches universal salvation, rather than "eternal hell," or even annihilation.
THE SCHOLARS CORNER THE CENTER FOR BIBLE STUDIES IN UNIVERSALISM
http://www.tentmaker.org/ScholarsCorner.html

UNIVERSAL SALVATION UNIVERSITY exists for the same reason
http://richardwaynegarganta.com/universalsalvation.htm

[Χahar]

Extended typing in all-caps that way is the province of spammers.

[rodgertutt]

Extended typing in all-caps that way is the province of spammers.

I mostly reserve typing in caps to titles only.
I don't perceive that as spamming.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Ok, let’s get this out of the way…From my experience dealing with Armstrongism (though I realize this may not be associated with Armstrongism), here is the foundation of this type argument:

Some of these same Christians are unable to successfully emotionally cope with the idea that the Bible, in which they have put their trust, seems to teach  the idea that God will let some of His creatures suffer forever.

First, the individual is asked to sit in the judgment seat and judge God in order to determine what should and shouldn’t be proper behavior of a loving god.  So, basically, the individual is asked to judge God outside of the context of the bible, as if humans have the ability to know the mind of God apart from scripture.

---

Many of these same Christians are very glad to learn that there is evidence that the Bible correctly (literally, not interpretively) translated does not teach that God will let anyone suffer forever.

Second, having already determined what the ways of God should be, they embark on taking all the foreshadowings (symbolism) of the bible and define the future event of what is being foreshadowed (symbolized) on the literal nature of the shadow.

Example:  the burning of Sodom and Gomorrah foreshadows (symbolizes) people being thrown into the lake of fire forever.  

But, according to this Rodgertutt’s argument, eternally burning in the lake of fire can not be taken literally since Sodom and Gomorrah were not literally burned forever.

But the fallacy of such an argument is obvious:  if the literalness of what is being foreshadowed (e.g. hell) depends on the literalism of the shadow (e.g. the burning of Sodom and Gomorrah), then all analogies and foreshadowings have no purpose.

That is why Rodgertutt mentions “Many of these same Christians are very glad to learn that there is evidence that the Bible correctly (literally, not interpretively) translated does not teach that God will let anyone suffer forever”

---

So, the whole basis of the argument boils down to this: 1) predetermine what you think the proper behavior of a loving God would be, and 2) base the interpretation of what is foreshadowed on the literalism of the shadow.

[rodgertutt]

So, the whole basis of the argument boils down to this: 1) predetermine what you think the proper behavior of a loving God would be, and 2) base the interpretation of what is foreshadowed on the literalism of the shadow.

Of course I strenuously disagree with your assessment of the Christian Bilblical Universalist position. The important issue as I see it is: 1) Find out what the Bible actually says in its literal meaning, period.

For the first 500 years after Christ, universalism was the prevailing doctrine believed and taught by the Christian church.
These online books also explain why and how this changed.
http://www.tentmaker.org/books/Prevailing.html
http://www.tentmaker.org/articles/how_hell_became_eternal_vincent.htm
http://www.thetencommandmentsministry.us/ministry/free_bible/whence_eternity
http://www.tentmaker.org/books/time/Time_13.html
http://www.gtft.org/Library/miscellaneous/ChurchFathers.htm  
http://www.tentmaker.org/books/OriginandHistory.html
http://www.tentmaker.org/books/DoctrineOfRetribution.htm  

Universalism The Prevailing Doctrine Of The Christian Church During Its First Five Hundred Years

The author, J.W. Hanson wrote “The purpose of this book is to present the evidence of the prevalence in the early centuries of the Christian church, of the doctrine of the final holiness of all mankind. The author believes that the following pages show that Universal Restitution was the faith of the early Christians for at least the First Five Hundred Years of the Christian era. He has aimed to present irrefragable proofs that the doctrine of Universal Salvation was the prevalent sentiment of the primitive Christian church.

The salient statements and facts in all which will be found in these pages show that the most and ablest of the early fathers found the deliverance of all mankind from sin and sorrow specifically revealed in the Christian Scriptures.”

And they were reading the Bible in its original language.

[rodgertutt]

CHURCH LEADERS WHO BELIEVED AND TAUGHT UNIVERSALISM DURING THE EARLIEST CENTURIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH

1.   THE SIBYLLINE ORACLES – 150 A.D. – composed by universalist writers
2.   THE BASILIDIANS – 130 A.D.
3.   THE CARPOCRATIANS – 140 A.D.
4.   IRENAEUS -- 130A.D.
5.   CLEMENS ALEXANDRIUS – 150 A.D.
6.   THEOPHILUS – 169 A.D.
7.   ORIGEN – 185 A.D.
8.   GREGORY THAUMATURGUS – 220 A.D.
9.   EUSEBIUS OF CAECAREA – 265 A.D.
10.   ATHANASIUS – 296 A.D.
11.   MARCELLUS OF ANCYRA – 315 A.D.
12.   DIDYMUS OF ALEXANDRIA – 300 A.D.
13.   GREGORY NYSSEN – 332 A.D.
14.   HILLARY OF POICTIERS – 354 A.D.
15.   ISADORE OF ALEXANDRIA – 370 A.D.
16.   EVAGRIUS PONTICUS – 390 A.D.
17.   AMBROSE OF MILAN – 339 A.D.
18.   JEROME – 340 A.D.
19.   TITUS OF BOSTRA – 340 A.D.
20.   JOHN CASSIAN – 360 A.D.
21.   DIODORE OF TARSUS – 370 A.D.
22.   GREGORY OF NANZIANZUS – 370 A.D.
23.   THEODORUS OF MOPSUESTIA – 380 A.D.
24.   RUFINUS – 390 A.D.
25.   THEODORET OF CYPRUS – 393 A.D.
26.   THE MONKS OF NITRIA – 399 A.D.
27.   PALLADIA OF GALLATIA – 400 A.D.
28.   CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA – 412 A.D.
29.   MAXIMUS OF TURIN – 422 A.D.
30.   THE MONKS OF CESAREA IN PALESTINE  - 430-450 A.D.
31.   PETER CHRYSOLOGUS OF RAVENNA – 435 A.D.
32.   GENNADIUS OF CONSTANTINOPLE – 458 A.D.
33.   BARSUDAILI HIEROTHEUS – 490 A.D.
34.   ALEXANDER OF ABYLA – 540 A.D.
35.   MAXIMUS – 645 A.D.
36.   CLEMENT OF IRELAND – 740 AD

Quotes by these Christian church leaders are recorded in Bob Evely’s book called
AT THE END OF THE AGES – THE ABOLITION OF HELL

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

So, the whole basis of the argument boils down to this: 1) predetermine what you think the proper behavior of a loving God would be, and 2) base the interpretation of what is foreshadowed on the literalism of the shadow.

Of course I strenuously disagree with your assessment of the Christian Bilblical Universalist position. The important issue as I see it is: 1) Find out what the Bible actually says in its literal meaning, period.

ok, let’s take a biblical analogy from scripture:

Gal 3:23His son by the slave woman was born in the ordinary way; but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a promise.  24These things may be taken figuratively, for the women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar. 25Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. 26But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother.

Though Paul believed Hagar and Sarah were real historical figures, Paul also “interprets” their “symbolism” as foreshadowing two covenants:  the old covenant and the new covenant.

Are we on the same page so far, and do we agree that the bible can be BOTH historically literal and prophetically figurative?