Скачать с ютуб Eschatology: ECT/CI (Me) & Universalism (Tarek) Issue в хорошем качестве

Eschatology: ECT/CI (Me) & Universalism (Tarek) Issue

This is an ecclectic talk with Tarek from Lebanon. I'm glad Tarek came on to discuss these issues of extreme importance. There was another mini part addition to this video, but waveroom logged us out, so that last segment is not included. I want to respond briefly to some more of Tarek's points. And I'm sure Tarek could easily respond more also. This type of material we discussed has so much going on, so many questions and replies and we only scratched the surface. Yet, since this is an apologetics channel, I need to respond to several things Tarek said. During our talk, I didn't take notes. My goal was not to have him on and treat him as a thing, but as a person. It would not be speaking the truth in love to go all out in polemics. I wanted to know where he was coming from and give some pushback to his views, which I did to some degree. While this is not an exhaustive reply by any means, it will suffice. Since Tarek is Word of Faith, something I see as very problematic on many points, a question I'd have for him in the future, "Do you see Benny Hinn as a Charlatan?" Because it's obvious that Benny Hinn is a charlatan. Also, since the CUA accepts LGBT ministers (and Tarek) disagrees with that position and believes in calling people to the gospel and to repentance, yet these LGBT ministers aren't repentant, "why align with them?" He said at one point in the video, there is evidence for universalism, ECT, CI. Yet, later on said ECT is not acceptable for him. A question I'd ask, "If ECT is true, would you still want to worship that God or not?" Tarek mentioned being ecumenical, but that's not the issue per se. There needs to be a Biblical line in the sand. And obviously by allowing LGBT ministers, CUA is way beyond Biblical Unity, Biblical unity based on Gospel doctrine and repentance. Tarek said the issue for non universalist is preaching a false gospel. There is only 1 gospel, and Galatians 1 makes that clear. Universalism entails post mortem salvation and post mortem repentance. There isn't even 1 verse in the New Testament explicit about post mortem repentance. I shall ask next time, "where is one explicit verse regarding post mortem repentance?" Because if universalism is Biblical, and if it were gospel, surely we'd see many verses for post mortem repentance. Paul wouldn't hold back the gospel on us, would he? Thus, universalism should be seen as a false gospel. When I asked about many are called, few are chosen. The response was towards people being called for tasks. I don't see this response as sufficient. People called most of the time in NT is called unto salvation, contextually. Also, part of Tarek's response was calling for a nation, corporately. Yet, individuals make up corporate groups. Also, if we change the word called for elect (perhaps, they are the same in Greek? I'd have to go check, but it's overall irrelevant), then Ephesians 1 elect are clearly individuals. Obviously I mentioned the more traditional passages by using the term, "traditional," without explicitly mentioning Daniel 12:2 and the other passages in agreement. I enjoyed Tarek's objectivity in saying the word perish is a seemingly problem for universalism. I'd totally agree. Not going into much detail but not merely that word, but how's it's used in a whole hosts of other contexts denies universalism. If not, are we to make perish, actually mean, to be saved? That's switching language as to make black white. Tom Talbott once used a case about the man in Corinthians, destruction of the flesh but yet saved on the day of judgment....no problem because the destruction is used there is explicit, but how it's used in other contexts can't make exegetical jump into universalism, unless fallicious. Philippians .........their end is destruction. Not sure how universalism is applied unless an ingenious interpretaation. I did not get around to asking, "what if universalism ends up not being true, are you able to stand up to God on day of judgment with this belief and teaching other's this belief?" How would you reconcile that with what Jesus said, "It better a millstone hung around the neck than.........." Also, Tarek mentioned shouldn't have fear of God, yet mentioned Matthew 10:28 where Jesus said, "Fear Him....." The Him is God, thus there should be atleast some fear of God. I didn't get around to talking about what he meant or maybe I misunderstood him, on sin is not against God? Psalm 51:4, Against you only God have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight....... There was a ton more to respond, but I hope for Tarek's own benefit and the benefit of others, he'll repent and at the very least be grabbing on to conditional immortality. I hoped others enjoyed this discussion that's needed in our day. There is too much of the games and cookies non sense that some naively think will bring others into the kingdom.