Given that the bible has been with us for so long now, what did people do before we had all these apologists writing books and trying to find nicer explanations for all the nasty parts in the bible? Was god quite happy for them to believe everything that was in the bible and it was only from the late 20th century onwards that he planned for it all to become clear to us, i.e. that he's really nice and cuddly and not the nasty piece of work that he seems to be?

Universalists go back to Early Christianity.

Maybe it's the human heart that's at fault for the wrong spiritual emphasis.

Spirituality is all about trusting your heart to God. Not following the interpretations of the herd. God makes the man. Man doesn't make God.

Proverbs 21

1The king's heart is in the hand of the LORD, as the rivers of water: he turneth it whithersoever he will.

Splendour,

From your Universalist point of view, if there is no hell, then why did Christ have to die?

Man I love to watch Christian disagreements on Christian dogma...

Aren't sin and death enough? He saves us from death.

Death is the last thing Christ will put under his feet.

He saves us from something he himself imposed on? I don't think that act should be called saving someone...

If you didn't have an answer you could just have ignored my post rather than posting something irrelevant.

I understand you asked a question to another Christian, but I just have to point out what an enormous red herring this is. Christ didnt have to do anything. Jesus is lord, he could have saved humanity in anyway he saw fit

Sure, he could... and I wonder why he didn't use his magic to do so, instead he sent his only son(himself???) to earth and create more misery , pain and suffering in order to "save"(don't really agree this should be called that way, since he is the one who imposed the rules he now needs to correct in the first place) everyone.

And you can stop making erroneous statements if you don't know the history of various theological views.

My impression from reading scripture is it's His nature.

It says "God is love." Of course, nature usually affects one's choices.

Sure it says God is love, but it also says that God is a consuming fire,
Hebrews 12:29.

To believe the Universalist position, you have to throw out the
Bible, or be dishonest with it's texts, there is no other option.

Just like the Church fathers did with the texts they found inappropriate... its all circular

Read 1 John. Belief in hell is not an essential doctrine. What's essential is knowing Jesus Christ came in the flesh.

There's a huge case made by the Universalists against traditional hell doctrine.

It's quite strong.

I think a lot of believers are more accepting of the authority of God than unbelievers and never check out enough specifics on the doctrine. Also a law and order mentality is something we encounter in the real world so we apply it to the spiritual world unquestioningly. We're more afraid of peer pressure and being heretics then we are at understanding this question and defending God's reputation.

Is Hell Real?:
http://www.tentmaker.org/ifhellisreal.htm

What do you mean by his nature? Can his nature be different? Is he the way he is because the nature imposed qualities on him, or his nature exists the way it does because he made it that way? And if he made it that way then , can he change his nature any time he wants?