₦airaland Forum

I'm guessing Oyaks got his PhD from where most of them get their degrees:

Oral Roberts University

Oga sir,

There are too many topics on tithes/tithing available on this board.
It's becoming sickening for you and some others to keep putting up topics like this
on a regular basis.
If you honestly have any issues about tithing/tithes, put it up within one of the existing threads on tithes.

Unfortunately, image123, I think you're not seeing this thing clearly and are being hasty in ur judgement.
If you look closely,anonimi made use of the word "churches" when he said God isn't found therein.
Now, we ought to know that there is a difference between the church and churches.
The church which is one body is the body of Christ;made up of christians the world over.
When it becomes plural a.k.a "churches",you should know it is in reference to places/buildings/spots where people go to/gather to "worship", and not the church.
So,there is a difference which u failed to pick up or discern before u concluded.
This is in line with the verse he quoted refering to "the place where men ought to worship".

Image123:
^i find no fault with your post above. But truth remains that anonimi feels God is not to be found in church, and his ilk usually imply that it's better to give to beggars than to give in church, unlike what you've stated above.
But i'm still not fully agreed with you that Jesus' my brethren refers to just anybody. BTW, how many hallmageriis have you personally taken in so far?

I do not get why you and some others think when people here mention giving to the poor; you assume it to be exclusively beggars on the street/almageris.
When people like anonimi or myself make mention of giving to the poor, we refer to anybody who doesn't have enough to live by or survive on at a particular point in time.

It could be a guy with a job, but is currently broke for a certain period.
It could be a member of one's church congregation that doesn't have enough money to settle his school fees.
It could be a guy whose ATM card got swallowed up by the ATM machine on a saturday morning when banks do not open to service his cash needs.
It could be your pastor who might be broke at the moment and needs money to handle a situation at hand.
It could be somebody who never has at any point in time due to some unfortunate situation in his/her life.
It could be somebody who needs a ride due to insufficient transport fare.
It could also be the allmangeris that you mentioned(although most of them ought to be doing something else).

It's not all about money though:

It could also be somebody who needs help with an assignment.
It could somebody who just needs a bit of your time on a problem he/she is facing.
It could be someone who needs advice on what to do.

I personally do not use the term "giving to the poor"; rather I prefer to use "giving to those in need"; . . . .that cuts across any category of
persons in this life.

And besides, you should know that it does happen on this forum that the word "church" is used interchangeably by different people to mean either the body of Christ or the building where people are with the aim of worshipping God. So, I do not think your assumption about anonimi is justified.

Image123:
God is not found in church ko. How this guys just mistalk is ridiculous. What's more ludicrous is when they're welcomed with an embrace by 'those who ought to know better', simply because they don't support tithe.
Life is more than tithe, gangs and cliques against pro.tithers will not change God's Word/standard. Though hand join in hand, . . .
FYI, the church is the body of Christ, it's absurd to say that God is not found in it(both local and universal). He's supposed to be omnipresent btw.
Also, the matthew scripture quoted refers to BRETHREN(the body of Christ), not some bunch of almangris(no hard feelings meant to them).

image123,

You're not being honest with the bold part above.
The brethren Christ refered to covers both those of the household of God and also those that do not belong.
The point that was trying to be passed across by anonimi is that giving to God is reflected or carried out when we give to those
who are in need; whether in the church or outside it.Or will you call a member of the family of Christ(church) a stranger as depicted by the passage?
Isn't it an outsider or unknown person that the term stranger should be applied?

Our helping or being good to people is not limited only to those in the church; it includes everybody. The only difference is that those of the church
get priority; meaning, them first before the others.

That's the point pushed by these verses below:

Gal 6:9-10
(9)  And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not.
(10)  As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith.

And we know that giving to meet needs is doing good, right?

Ephesians 2:8-9
(8 )  For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
(9)  Not of works, lest any man should boast.

This faith in Christ which a lot of us Christians claim to have; it is a gift given to us by God.
It wasn't by our doing that we got or acquired this faith, it wasn't because we were smart to grasp
the import of God's word, or that we were on a higher pedestal than some others that we came to believe in Christ.
It isn't because of some so called choice which we made on our own to turn from the ways of the world.

We have faith in Christ because God was so kind to bestow us with this gift of faith. Without God bestowing this gift
on us, we would not be in the faith; we would not believe in Christ, we wouldn't be Christians.

It is God's gift that made us Christians, not any effort or choice or intellect of ours (see verse 9 above).
So, it is easy to conclude that without God bestowing the gift of faith on a person, he/she can't be saved; no matter the barrage/torrent
of preachings of the word of God.

I say all this because over time through my experience on this religion section/forum, I have noticed the edge some Christians
seem to unknowingly or knowingly display over those that aren't Christians (eg. Muslims,Atheists,etc).
It's almost like saying "You guys are useless and silly for not choosing/believing in Christ. I was smart enough to be convicted
by the word of God and am saved because I chose to be."

This is bad. A lot of christians display this attitude on this forum and if they're honest with themselves, they'll know if they are guilty of this
one way or another.
They have gotten to the point in which they feel they have an edge over others and are unknowingly proud about this and are unknowingly
boasting that it is because of their so called "choices" (works) they are saved.

I say this again: We are saved, not because of anything we did, not because we were smart, not because we were better than those who are atheists/Muslims/buddhists, etc. We are saved because God had mercy on us and bestowed upon us the gift of faith without which we wouldn't have
been saved.

Let this fact reflect in your lives as you deal/interract with others on a daily basis; especially those of a different faith.
Remember, the only thing you can do for them is to make known to them the truth of God's word and leave the rest to God and pray he
grants them the gift of faith.

oweniwe:
Some guys have been warning on how satan is using the united nations to "finish" the world. Do you think the UN belongs to lucifer?

Who the heck is Lucifer?
I know he ain't Satan.

Go through this link below. It might help your dilenma:

Female Pastors?

[quote author=Mad_Max link=topic=462380.msg6296175#msg6296175 date=1277715373]Wow. What were you before? Most of us were raised as something till we knew better. Catholic? Protestant? Pentecostal? What changed your mind and led you to where you are now? Sorry if I'm being intrusive.[/quote]Can't really go into much detail here cos I have to dash out very soon.
But here is the summary:

- I was born into a muslim home. Was a muslim till my secondary school days.(never enjoyed it at all;except for the ram eatings )
I also secretly wished to be a christian based on what i saw from the lives of christians which were my very close friends.

- My elder brother first converted to christianity. Soon enough, I and the rest of my family followed suit.
We joined a pentecostal church in port harcourt and were there for some years.

- After my higher institution days and along the line of my working days, I started doing quite a lot of reading on christianity on the internet.
there i discovered articles from different blogs which encouraged me to start thinking for my self and doing proper bible study.

- Discovering the wrongs in the penetecostal movement, i pulled out and have been non denominational ever since and continue to build my knowledge on God and christianity.

[quote author=Mad_Max link=topic=462380.msg6296077#msg6296077 date=1277713575]That's very unusual. How come? Don't people give you grief about it, urging you to their church or temple, trying to save your soul?[/quote]I've gone beyond caring about what some people say about my way of things as regards God.
In the past I felt some grief when people asked questions or wondered about my beliefs but that's all gone now.

I meet with some christians of like mind every opportunity I get on some sundays to fellowship.

[quote author=Mad_Max link=topic=462380.msg6295850#msg6295850 date=1277709580]

Thanks, ttalks. I'm guessing you're a JW. [/quote]No, I'm not a JW.
I'm just a plain ol' bible believing christian with no denominational affiliations.

[quote author=Mad_Max link=topic=462380.msg6293047#msg6293047 date=1277659794]You say we are [b]bits of God that return to God after death, [/b]and that biological death is it. That's intriguing. Could you elaborate? I've no interest in an argument or anything like that. I'd just like to understand that view.[/quote]The bolded part above does have some support from the bible:

Ecc 12:7
(7) Then shall the dust [out of which God made man's body] return to the earth as it was, and the spirit shall return to God Who gave it.


But that isn't the end of things; rather a phase that must be passed before the other phases commence(eg. judgement, etc).

But I guess Jenwitemi needs to answer you to highlight what he means.

Joagbaje:
The understanding from wordboook dictionary was different. it means something obvious or so. I dont have it by me I would have quoted it verbatim.

joagbaje, did you do physics during your school days?
If you did, you would have heard about apparent depth/height as opposed to real/true depth or height.

The view a person could have of the depth of a swimming pool(filled with water) at a certain angle is obvious to the person as shallow
which gives him/her the apparent depth of the pool, but taking a dive would alert this person on the fact that the real depth is much deeper than earlier observed.


So , something being apparent is definitely obvious on face value, but further examination would reveal it to be not necessarily so.

Check here for apparent depth/real depth

Appart from all these above, it is very very easy for anybody to know that the passage from the bible in question never suggested that
Paul was dead but expressed what the people thought of his condition.

I've abandoned this thread for a long time now.
This is because I'm very busy with work and also busy with the development
of a tough web application and also busy with preparations for an exam.

So, alas, . . . . .I can't continue just yet.

But I'll leave this scripture for meditation(real deep meditation ) :

Rom 8:19-21
(19) For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.
(20) For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,
(21) Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.

nuclearboy:
^^ My only query is - does he truly believe these things or is it the fear of losing his job/salary/whatever that makes him defend such horrendous ideas?

I guess it's a combo/combination of the two.

At one point, it seems like the former; where he vehemently defends the glaringly wrong.
At another point, it seems like the latter where he mellows down a bit but still never admits being wrong.

Chris Oyaks words are definitely a logic virus.
Only those without the most powerful firewalls(such as Baba Jo) are susceptible to be corrupted
by their destructive tendencies.

Joagbaje:
The stoning of Paul was not like a man chasing a goat away from the compund with stone. It was execution. Sharia . It was a death sentence and not a wounding sentence. just as stephen was executed. The keep stoning until the individual dies . They have to be sure he was dead before throwing away the body. Thesame way James the brother of Jesus was killed by stoning and when he refused to die , someone smashed his head with a big stone befiore disposing the body. When you carry out execution ,you must ensure the person dies, if not its not execution.

Living bible gives more insight .

ACT 14:19 (TLB)
Yet only a few days later, some jews arrived from Antioch and Iconium and turned the crowds into a murderous mod that stoned Paul and draggged him out of the city, apparently dead 20. But as believers stood around him, he got up and went back into the city

Two things Jesus assured those who will believe in the resurrection life.

1. They will not die.
2. If they die, they will rise up again. if they believe.

These two were evident in Paul's.ministry. When he was bitten by serpent , people expected him to die. but the resurrection life kept him alive from death. And when he finally exprerience death through stoning execution, He was brought back alive by the prayer of the brethren. It is very evident that the rising up of Paul was based on the prayers of the saints that gather arround him.

Acts 14:20
Howbeit, as the disciples stood round about him, he rose up, and came into the city: and the next day he departed with Barnabas to Derbe.

We have to come to a place where we can take the word for what it says.

John 11:25-26
Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: [26] And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?

I BELIEVE THOU THIS![size=13pt][/size]

Oga sir, go and brush up your english language.

Do you know the meaning of apparently?

Apparent:

Appearing as such but not necessarily so

. . . from WordWeb dictionary

Conclusion: Paul appeared to be dead, but was not dead.

viaro:
Well, I tried to look into the subject and also consulted the link you recommended. On reading the first paragraph, the question that came to mind was: Is God Eternal? I patiently tried to read through to see the author's answer to that question, and this is what I initially found:

I haven't read to the end of that article, but I would here at this time ask you directly, ttalks: Is God Eternal? And in what sense? Your would help contextualize our discussion, rather than appealing to what others think.

I post links to others who think along the same lines I'm thinking to buttress my points.

as regards your question; "Is God eternal?" ,
my answer would be this:

God is the eonian God; meaning he is the God of the ages, tha age-abiding God.
He makes/creates the ages and abides through them.
Eternal is not a proper concept so I can't really place him as eternal(since the word is definitely foreign to original scripture).

He is not dependent on the ages to be; he exists outside and within the ages.He exists beyond all/any concept of time(which unfortunately, "eternal" falls within i.e.  time).

Now, I know I have somehow been sidetracked from my postings on what this "Lake of Fire" is supposed to be.
I will get back to that but can't say when at the moment cos i'm going to be offline for a while.

I'll also give some examples to show that this "eternal" or "everlasting" which we're all used to do have some culmination/end at some point.

aletheia:
But you have no quibbles with. . ."eternal life" as in John 3:16. Aren't you cherry-picking?

The eternal life which we've all been used to is still subject to this interpretation issue I pointed out.
Rather than eternal life, it should be "eonian life" which connotes "age-abiding/age-long" life.

The chosen who believe in Christ have this life.
After death, comes their resurrection when Christ returns. They are given immortality which refers to "deathlessness"
which is not a concept of time but rather a state of being.

1Co 15:52-54
(52) In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
(53) For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.
(54) So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.

Those in Christ will surpass the ages as they come and go.

viaro:
I understand what you mean - Mark 4:33-34.

However, the import of what He was saying to both the multitudes and His disciples with regards to salvation and judgement are clear enough to show that the idea of a 'universal salvation' is untenable - see Mark 3:29 ('eternal damnation', KJV) and John 5:29 ('they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation', KJV).

You ought to be aware that the concept of "eternal" damnation is false and alien to scripture.
Translations showing eternal are very very wrong.
There has been a lot of disagreements on the fact that aiōnios means eternal.
It does not mean eternal; rather it connotes "age-long/age-abiding", and we know that ages do have beginnings and do have ends.

Eternal is very foreign to original scripture(but very conversant with most available scripture translations of today).

Please go through this - - - > Whence cometh eternity? to understand what I'm saying here.

I do not expect everybody to suddenely agree with the point I'm making here; i just want you to realize that this is a position that is standing
and is worth looking into.

viaro:
Well, I seriously disagree. On the contrary, Christ spoke and taught in various ways - sometimes symbolically where He employed figues of speech (metaphors, similes, ironies, hyperboles, etc); other times He spoke and meant what He said in very literal terms.

For example, as regarding His commandment that those who believe the Gospel should be baptized (Matthew 28:19 and Mark 16:16), we know that such a command cannot be 'spiritualized' to become symbolic - baptism there is literally implied, in just the way that He Himself was baptized by John the Baptist (Matt. 3:13-16).

There are so many examples where Jesus intended His hearers to understand the literalness in what He said; but even where He used figures of speech, we cannot miss the fact that salvation is given to those who repent, while divine judgement is reserved for those who are unrepentant and persist in their ungodliness (Luke 13:2-5).

Christ spoke metaphorically mainly when he spoke to the public. He mainly spoke in literal terms when he addressed the 12 and the 12 only.

ttalks: How do we then interprete or determine or discern spiritual things?

2Pe 1:20(KJV)
(20) Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

2Pe 1:20(CLNT)
(20) knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture at all is becoming its own explanation.

The book of revelations was Christ's revelation. It can also be termed a set of prohecies; events that have happened and those
yet to happen.

Now the verse given above shows that prophecy of the scripture cannot be its own explanation or interpretation(KJV makes it look like personal;as in, a person's own interpretation. Should it be public then?).

G2398
ἴδιος
idios
id'-ee-os
Of uncertain affinity; pertaining to self, that is, one's own; by implication private or separate: - X his acquaintance, when they were alone, apart, aside, due, his (own, proper, several), home, (her, our, thine, your) own (business), private (-ly), proper, severally, their (own).

Since this is in relation to prophecy which is inanimate, it should read "of its own interpretation/explanation".

This is saying we can't interprete portions of prophecies on their own.

So, Revelations 20:14-15;which is a portion of prophecy and is spiritual since it was spoken by Christ cannot be interpreted on its own.

So how then is it/are they interpreted?

1Co 2:12-13
(12) Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
(13) Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.


We should interprete spiritual things by comparing them with spiritual things.

Now, since Christ's words are spirit/spiritual, it is only sensible for us to know that everything he says is
spiritual and cannot be interpreted to be literal.

Example:

Rev 20:14-15
(14) And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
(15) And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.


This is from revelations. These are Christ words since it was the revelation he gave to John.
Christ's words here are definitely spiritual too.
So they must have some deeper meaning to them shouldn't they; they shouldn't be taken for face value.

Now, the next thing is:

How do we then interprete or determine or discern spiritual things?

Zikkyy:
Preach what Viaro What would be the basis of setting ten percent as the amount to give Let’s preach unconditional giving instead, and let the person paying decides in his heart the percentage to give ranging from 0 to 100%. Preaching tithing would amount to rule setting.

Perhaps, viaro can give us his own version/understanding of tithes that needs to be preached. Let's see what it is about.

viaro:
@ttalks,

Thank you for squeezing time from your busy schedule to reply mine.

That verse carries varied pointers; basically, it should convey the understanding that the words which Christ speaks have the potency to give life.

Ok viaro.

The verse I gave above, it is clear that the part saying "they are spirit" in relation to Christ's words is a metaphor.
In fact, the whole verse itself is a metaphor when one relates words to "spirit" and "life".

So, if this is agreed, it is like Christ said:
"They are like spirit and life in certain ways."

Because we know that words are heard and probably seen when written but they definitely are not inaudible or invisible which are characteristics of a spirit.
So, Christ's usage of spirit and life in relation to words are metaphorical.

But the understanding one can glean from that verse is that Christ's words are spirit or rather , spiritual.

viaro: No sir - Revelation that mentions the Lake of fire and second death does not show us anything about your conclusion - unless you have pointers in specific verses that say so. The second death is NOWHERE said to be a purging of wrong elements of sin - care to show us where it is otherwise taught so in Revelation?

I'm back finally to respond to this.

N/B: I'm at work at the moment, so my responses to posts directed at me might not be so quick.

To answer this, . . . I'll have to break down my answer into quite a number of posts.

First of all, I'd like to ask a question:

What do you/or any body else understand by this statement by Christ below?

John 6:63
(63) It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

davidylan:
Dont know how "deeply" you "studied" the bible but you seem to have missed this - Heb 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:

I didn't miss it.
However, have you checked that ^^ against:

Rev 20:6
(6) Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

viaro:
Thank you, ttalks. I like your outline - succinct and straight to the point.

Glad to read this. But then, first thing is this: if they end up in the lake of fire, that is acknowledging that such a reality exists, no? Second, if that reality does not exist, why then acknowledge that anyone is going to end up there?

See why we have these concerns? However, what do you make out to be the Lake of Fire?

I didn't say the reality does not exist.rather I meant that the perception about it is wrong;hence the title:"Hell is a Christian Hoax".
Maybe it should have read: "The Christian perception of hell is wrong".

Nice - but sad inference. Verse 10 (the very next verse after Isaiah 26:9) says of the wicked (emphasis added):

Let favour be shewed to the wicked, yet will he NOT LEARN righteousness:
in the land of uprightness WILL he DEAL UNJUSTLY,
and WILL NOT behold the majesty of the LORD.

At what point is the wicked going to be saved if he WILL NOT learn righteousness, sir?

Verse 9 talks about judgement bringing righteousness.
verse 10 talks about favour; . . two diferent things.

No sir - Revelation that mentions the Lake of fire and second death does not show us anything about your conclusion - unless you have pointers in specific verses that say so. The second death is NOWHERE said to be a purging of wrong elements of sin - care to show us where it is otherwise taught so in Revelation?

I will have to get back to you on this.I have been swamped with
a whole load of work at the moment and will not be able to continue today.
I will have to continue tomorrow(my personal internet is down at the moment; I'm currently using
the one at work).

But let the discussion go on even without my inputs; I'll join tomorrow.

As regards the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, the point I'm trying to pull out with that is the fact that this "hell" which is being debated;
whether it's a geographical location or a state which some people would go through, nobody is there or going through it right now; not even the
rich man.

Luk 16:19-24
(19) There was a certain rich man who [habitually] clothed himself in purple and fine linen and reveled and feasted and made merry in splendor every day.
(20) And at his gate there was [carelessly] dropped down and left a certain utterly destitute man named Lazarus, [reduced to begging alms and] covered with [ulcerated] sores.
(21) He [eagerly] desired to be satisfied with what fell from the rich man's table; moreover, the dogs even came and licked his sores.
(22) And it occurred that the man [reduced to] begging died and was carried by the angels to Abraham's bosom. The rich man also died and was buried.
(23) And in Hades (the realm of the dead), being in torment, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham far away, and Lazarus in his bosom.
(24) And he cried out and said, Father Abraham, have pity and mercy on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am in anguish in this flame.

This definitely is a parable as the bible let's us know. It was pointing to some message rather than a lie that people are in "hell" right now or are going through
"hell"

G3850
παραβολή
parabolē
par-ab-ol-ay'
From G3846; a similitude (“parable”), that is, (symbolically) fictitious narrative (of common life conveying a moral), apoth gm or adage: - comparison, figure, parable, proverb.

A parable is a work of fiction with the aim of conveying a moral. The parable was not in anyway suggesting that the rich man was in "hell fire" or going through "hell".

Besides, the passage above told us that it was in Hades(the place or state of departed souls[righteous/unrighteous]) that the rich man was in.

viaro:
@ttalks,

The article is faulty. It takes too many things for granted and excuses very important issues under the guise of what the author assumes falls under 'symbolic' language. That is an escape hatch that is not even half-clever, especially because Ray Smith is known to be too busy condemning others rather than delving into the Word for whetever he wants to say on any subject.

Okay, let's assume for his (and your) sake that hell is a hoax. The implication is that the whole world would be saved - which was what you wanted to lead us to believe. Good for you, but is that indeed what Scripture teaches? If you feel so, then please think carefully on these:

1.  what happens to the devil and his angels?

2.  what is the ultimate end of all the ungodly, unregenerate and unrepentant?

3.  what then is the need for anyone at all to repent, since everyone would ultimately be saved after persisting in sin?

I would not like to assuage the thread, so let's take these few questions initially - more as we progress.

Question 1. The simple fact that they end up in the Lake of Fire.
But the question that ought to be asked is : what is this Lake of fire?

Question 2. They will learn righteousness and be saved.

Isaiah 26:9
(9)  With my soul have I desired thee in the night; yea, with my spirit within me will I seek thee early: for when thy judgments are in the earth, the inhabitants of the world will learn righteousness.

Question 3. To escape the second death/Lake of fire experience at the time of judgement; to escape the painful experience of being purged and refined to
get rid of anything sin or unrighteousness. That's what this whole hell/second death/lake of fire thing is; a period or age of going through God's refining to be purged of all wrong and element of sin. It is not the fabrication of endless torture and torment forever.

davidylan:
what then is the benefit of the atonement on the cross?

Very simple answer. To save man from his sin.
Christ did not come to die to prevent us from going to hell.
He simply came to take away sin/save us from our sins.

If you really spent time going through the article i refered you all to, this question would
not have surfaced.

The common belief is that salvation takes place only in this age(the church age); that anybody that dies a sinner would not get another chance
at salvation.
Well, studying the bible deeply reveals that only a few will be saved in this age by believing in Christ while the rest will be saved after this age.
The general belief which we all have that it is only those who believe in Christ that will be saved is true as regards this age and time
but the remaining will experience their own salvation sometime after the resurrection.

People believe that this time(this age) is the only time/or period of salvation. this is probably based on:

2Co 6:2
(2)  (For he saith, I have heard thee in a time accepted, and in the day of salvation have I succoured thee: behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation.)

This verse renders day of salvation as "the day of salvation" kind of like making one exclusive period/age in time where salvation was to be possible.
But this verse was quoted from:

Isaiah 49:8
(8 )  Thus saith the LORD, In an acceptable time have I heard thee, and i[b]n a day of salvation[/b] have I helped thee: and I will preserve thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, to establish the earth, to cause to inherit the desolate heritages;

So as we can see that it actually was a day of salvation(meaning one among two,three or more) and not "the day".

Just go through the article.it answers most of the questions that might come up.

OLAADEGBU:
It is true that God wants to save the whole world infact He does not want the death of a sinner but that they all repent.  He sent His only begotten Son that whosoever believes in Him would not perish but would have eternal life.

The guy that manufactured soap/detergent has it in mind that people would be clean but is everybody clean?  It is only if you use the soap/detergent will you be clean.  The same goes for salvation, it is only those who apply the precious blood of Jesus by faith would be saved from their sin.  God has played His part the ball is now in our court.  Repent and believe the gospel.

There is a very big difference between God and the guy that manufactured soap.
God has the power to make his desire/wish to come to pass irrespective of what man feels or does or chooses; the soap guy has no power to make people be clean, he can only hope.

The verses I gave above showing that God's wish/will/desire will definitely come to be definitely do not portray any subjection to anything
not to talk of man's puny will or choices.