ECT has Committed EVERY Logical Fallacy!

[Gregory Thompson]

That was actually pretty funny to read.

 

[Der Alte]

Lol, when having conversations with ECT people in general, I've noticed that overall a lot of their arguments fall into fallacies. Especially stuff like "Fallacy of Tradition" where they were taught ECT in their church so they think it's true.
Overall, the whole point about fallacies is that we should not discuss things with mere human points, but rather, for every point we make, we must back it up with scripture.
Rev. 15:4 "ALL nations shall come and worship You, for your judgments have been made manifested."

I don't know what kind of fallacy this is, but I know it is some kind of fallacy. Rev 15:4 is true but the UR misinterpretation of it is patently false. There ain't no nations in the grave, the lake of fire, or hell only individual dead bodies! And Rev 15:4 is "all" without distinction NOT "all" without exception.
.....In the '90s I was on a business flight to a military base in Va. the person in the seat next to me, not in uniform, was reading the Bible. To start a conversation I said, "That's a good book I like how it ends." He smiled and I said, "You are a military aviator." He looked surprised and asked, "Do I have a sign on my forehead." I said, "No, the glasses and the haircut." I had the same kind of glasses.
.....Having said that. I have read the end of the book.

Revelation 22:11
(11) He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.​

Ten more vss. "The End" no more death, no more salvation, only, "He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still:"
I have read quite a few less than satisfactory "explanations" why that vs. does "Not really say," what it very clearly does say.

 

[Der Alte]

I "looked it up" in Thayer's Greek Lexicon:

STRONGS G166:
αἰώνιος, -ον, and (in 2 Thessalonians 2:16; Hebrews 9:12; Numbers 25:13; Plato, Tim., p. 38 b. [see below]; Diodorus 1:1; [cf. WHs Appendix, p. 157; Winers Grammar, 69 (67); Buttmann, 26 (23)]) -ος, -α, -ον, (αἰών);

1. without beginning or end, that which always has been and always will be: θεός, Romans 16:26 (ὁ μόνος αἰώνιος, 2 Macc. 1:25); πνεῦμα, Hebrews 9:14.​

​

2. without beginning: χρόνοις αἰωνίοις, Romans 16:25; πρὸ χρόνων αἰωνίων, 2 Timothy 1:9; Titus 1:2; εὐαγγέλιον, a gospel whose subject-matter is eternal, i. e., the saving purpose of God adopted from eternity, Revelation 14:6.​

​

3. without end, never to cease, everlasting: 2 Corinthians 4:18 (opposed to πρόσκαιρος); αἰώνιον αὐτόν, joined to thee forever as a sharer of the same eternal life, Philemon 1:15; βάρος δόξης, 2 Corinthians 4:17; βασιλεία, 2 Peter 1:11; δόξα, 2 Timothy 2:10; 1 Peter 5:10; ζωή (see ζωή, 2 b.); κληρονομία, Hebrews 9:15; λύτρωσις, Hebrews 9:12; παράκλησις, 2 Thessalonians 2:16; σκηναί, abodes to be occupied forever, Luke 16:9 (the habitations of the blessed in heaven are referred to, cf. John 14:2 [also, dabo eis tabernacula aeterna, quae praeparaveram illis, 4 Esdras (Fritzsche, 5 Esdr.) 2:11]; similarly Hades is called αἰώνιος τόπος, Tobit 3:6, cf. Ecclesiastes 12:5); σωτηρία, Hebrews 5:9; [so Mark 16 WH, in the (rejected) 'Shorter Conclusion'].​

​

Opposite ideas are: κόλασις, Matthew 25:46; κρίμα, Hebrews 6:2; κρίσις, Mark 3:29 (Rec. [but L T WH Tr text ἁμαρτήματος; in Acta Thom. § 47, p. 227 Tdf., ἔσται σοι τοῦτο εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν καὶ λύτρον αἰωνίων παραπτωμάτων, it has been plausibly conjectured we should read λύτρον, αἰώνιον (cf. Hebrews 9:12)]); ὄλεθρος [Lachmann text ὀλέθριος], 2 Thessalonians 1:9 (4 Macc. 10:15); πῦρ, Matthew 25:41 (4 Macc. 12:12 αἰωνίῳ πυρὶ κ. βασάνοις, αἳ εἰς ὅλον τὸν αἰῶνα οὐκ ἀνήσουσί σε).​

​

[Of the examples of αἰώνιος from Philo (with whom it is less common than ἀΐδιος, which see, of which there are some fifty instances) the following are noteworthy: de mut. nora. § 2; de caritate § 17; κόλασις αἰ. fragment in Mang. 2:667 at the end (Richter 6:229 middle); cf. de praem, et poen. § 12. Other examples are de alleg, leg. iii., § 70; de poster. Caini § 35; quod deus immut. § 30; quis rer. div. her. § 58; de congressu quaer, erud. § 19; de secular sec 38; de somn. ii. § 43; de Josepho § 24; quod omn. prob. book § 4, § 18; de ebrietate § 32; de Abrah. § 10; ζωὴ αἰ.: de secular § 15; Θεός (ὁ) αἰ.: de plantat. § 2, § 18 (twice), § 20 (twice); de mundo § 2. from Josephus: Antiquities 7, 14, 5; 12, 7, 3; 15, 10, 5; b. j. 1, 33, 2; 6, 2, I; κλέος αἰ. Antiquities 4, 6, 5; b. j. 3, 8, 5, μνήμη αἱ.: Antiquities 1, 13, 4; 6, 14, 4; 10, 11, 7; 15, 11, 1; οἶκον μὲν αἰώνιον ἔχεις (of God), Antiquities 8, 4, 2; ἐφυλάχθη ὁ Ἰωάννης δεσμοῖς αἰωνίοις, b. j. 6, 9, 4.​

SYNONYMS: ἀΐδιος, αἰώνιος: ἀΐδ. covers the complete philosophic idea — without beginning and without end; also either without beginning or without end; as respects the past, it is applied to what has existed time out of mind. αἰώνιος (from Plato on) gives prominence to the immeasurableness of eternity (while such words as συνεχής continuous, unintermitted, διατελής perpetual, lasting to the end, are not so applicable to an abstract term, like αἰών); αἰώνιος accordingly is especially adapted to supersensuous things, see the N. T. Cf. Tim. Locr. 96 c. Θεὸν δὲ τὸν μὲν αἰώνιον νόος ὁρῆ μόνος etc.; Plato, Tim. 37 d. (and Stallbaum at the passage); 38 b. c.; legg. x., p. 904 a. ἀνώλεθρον δὲ ὄν γενόμενον, ἀλλ’ οὐκ αἰώνιον. Cf. also Plato's διαιώνιος (Tim. 38 b.; 39 e.). Schmidt, chapter 45.]​

​

... and Vine's Expository Dictionary:

​

STRONGS G166:​

Eternal:​

​

"describes duration, either undefined but not endless, as in Rom 16:25; 2Ti 1:9; Tts 1:2; or undefined because endless as in Rom 16:26, and the other sixty-six places in the NT.​

​

"The predominant meaning of aionios, that in which it is used everywhere in the NT, save the places noted above, may be seen in 2Cr 4:18, where it is set in contrast with proskairos, lit., 'for a season,' and in Phm 1:15, where only in the NT it is used without a noun. Moreover it is used of persons and things which are in their nature endless, as, e.g., of God, Rom 16:26; of His power, 1Ti 6:16, and of His glory, 1Pe 5:10; of the Holy Spirit, Hbr 9:14; of the redemption effected by Christ, Hbr 9:12, and of the consequent salvation of men, Hbr 5:9, as well as of His future rule, 2Pe 1:11, which is elsewhere declared to be without end, Luk 1:33; of the life received by those who believe in Christ, Jhn 3:16, concerning whom He said, 'they shall never perish,' Jhn 10:28, and of the resurrection body, 2Cr 5:1, elsewhere said to be 'immortal,' 1Cr 15:53, in which that life will be finally realized, Mat 25:46; Tts 1:2.​

​

"Aionios is also used of the sin that 'hath never forgiveness,' Mar 3:29, and of the judgment of God, from which there is no appeal, Hbr 6:2, and of the fire, which is one of its instruments, Mat 18:8; 25:41; Jud 1:7, and which is elsewhere said to be 'unquenchable,' Mar 9:43. "The use of aionios here shows that the punishment referred to in 2Th 1:9, is not temporary, but final, and, accordingly, the phraseology shows that its purpose is not remedial but retributive." * [* From Notes on Thessalonians by Hogg and Vine, pp. 232, 233.]​

Strong's is a concordance NOT a lexicon. It has been found to have about 15,000 errors or omissions.

The Problem of Using Strong’s Concordance Dictionary ~ Greek Words ~ Word Studies ~ and Greek Dictionaries

(Major Revision ~ 06/20/2016) Strong’s Concordance and Dictionary One thing that many believers do concerning the handling of Greek words is use Strong’s Concordance’s Dictionary …

faithbibleministriesblog.com

Strong's does not list historical sources supporting definitions as a lexicon does. Strong's only lists the definitions found in the KJV. For those interested in real Greek scholarship below is a link to my post quoting the complete definition of "aionios" from Bauer, Danker, Arndt, Gingrich which represents 120-160 years of combined Greek scholarship. Please note the blue highlights of the 80+ historical sources the scholars consulted to determine the correct meaning.

Daily Christian Universalist Verses

Good. Now show me where Josiah said that? It ain't in the Bible. You are the one that is not careful, choosing questionable sources because they support your assumptions/presuppositions. Did you even bother to read the sources I posted, with links, which included archaeological evidence? There...

www.christianforums.com

 

[Jeff Saunders]

I used to believe in ECT, then I became an Annihilationist (Conditional Immortality) and red a lot on the topic. Eventually though, I discovered the Christian Universalism was the truth and became a Christian Universalist. So everyone's at their own point in their own journey, so I hope that those who believe in ECT will realize the errors in their ways at least.

For me, my problem with Annihliationism is that there's still a forever consequence, where they're destroyed forever. I've got family members I've been trying to convert to Christianity, and the thought of them getting tortured forever or getting destroyed forever I still see as negative outcomes.

Rom. 12:17 We are not to "repay evil for evil."

Personally I would not have a problem with annihilation if this world were perfect and you had to work it hard to go against God .Then I could see a loving God snuffing out a person who rejected Him, but we don't live in a perfect world matter of fact this world is cursed and really messed up. Because God knows what a person is going to do before He creates them, and he still creates them and they live in a messed up world and dont follow him maybe because they never even knew he existed and then he annihilates them, that seems to go against what I would call love. As an example what about a young girl or boy that was born in the low cast in India and lives in a trash dump, they eat garbage, the air they breath stinks ,death and disease are ramet maybe they were born blind, all they know is Hinduism and they die and are snuffed out. why would a loving God create them in the first place ? I would think not creating them would be more loving.

 

[Jeff Saunders]

What fallacy is it when a UR proponent "reimagines" everything that Jesus and the Apostles "said/wrote" to mean the opposite of what the words say?

• torment doesn't mean torment.
• eternal doesn't mean eternal.
• gnashing doesn't mean gnashing.

I am UR and out of your list a agree that those who are thrown in the lake of fire do experence torment, gnashing or teeth but its not eternal it has an end. but I also dont belive the Greek word translated eternal is correctly translated.

 

[Der Alte]

Personally I would not have a problem with annihilation if this world were perfect and you had to work it hard to go against God .Then I could see a loving God snuffing out a person who rejected Him, but we don't live in a perfect world matter of fact this world is cursed and really messed up. Because God knows what a person is going to do before He creates them, and he still creates them and they live in a messed up world and dont follow him maybe because they never even knew he existed and then he annihilates them, that seems to go against what I would call love. As an example what about a young girl or boy that was born in the low cast in India and lives in a trash dump, they eat garbage, the air they breath stinks ,death and disease are ramet maybe they were born blind, all they know is Hinduism and they die and are snuffed out. why would a loving God create them in the first place ? I would think not creating them would be more loving.

Romans 4:15
(15) Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.
Romans 5:13
(13) (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
Romans 2:14
(14) For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:​

 

[Der Alte]

I am UR and out of your list a agree that those who are thrown in the lake of fire do experence torment, gnashing or teeth but its not eternal it has an end. but I also dont belive the Greek word translated eternal is correctly translated.

Native Greek speaking scholars in the Eastern Greek Orthodox church KNOW that the Greek word translated "eternal" does in fact mean exactly that, "eternal!"

EOB Matthew:25:46 When he will answer them, saying: ‘Amen, I tell you: as much as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’ 46 These [ones on the left vs. 41] will go away into eternal [αἰώνιος/aionios] punishment, [κόλασις/kolasis] but the righteous into eternal [αἰώνιος/aionios] life.”[EOB p. 96]​

…..Greek has been the language of the Eastern Greek Orthodox church since its inception, 2000 years ago +/-. Note, the native Greek speaking Eastern Orthodox Greek scholars, translators of the EOB, translated “aionios,” in Matt 25:46, as “eternal,” NOT “age.”
…..Who is better qualified than the team of native Greek speaking scholars, translators of the Eastern Greek Orthodox Bible [EOB], quoted above and below, to know the correct translation of the Greek in the N.T.?
Link to EOB online:

The New Testament ( The Eastern-Greek Orthodox Bible) : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

The New Testament (The Eastern-Greek Orthodox Bible)

archive.org

…..The Greek word “kolasis” occurs only twice in the N.T., 1st occurrence Matt 25:46, above, and 2nd occurrence 1 John 4:18., below.

EOB 1 John 4:18 There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear, because fear is connected with punishment.[κόλασις/kolasis] But the one who fears is not yet perfect in love.[EOB p. 518]​

In the EOB the Greek word “kolasis” is translated “punishment” in both Matt 25:46 and 1 John 4:18.
…..Some badly informed folks claim “kolasis” really means “prune” or “correction.”
Sorry, that is impossible, both “prune” and “correction” are verbs. “Kolasis” is a noun. One cannot translate a noun as a verb.
Also according to the EOB Greek scholars “kolasis” means “punishment.”
Note: in 1 John 4:18 there is no correction, the one with “kolasis” is not made perfect. Thus “kolasis” does not/cannot mean “correction.”
The word “correction” occurs one time in the NT 2 Timothy 3:16 ἐπανόρθωσις/epanorthosis. It looks nothing like kolasis.
…..It is acknowledged that modern Greek differs from koine Greek but I am confident that the native Greek speaking EOB scholars, supported by 2000 years +/- of uninterrupted Greek scholarship, are competent enough to know the correct translation of obsolete Greek words which may have changed in meaning or are no longer in use and to translate them correctly. Just as scholars today know the meaning of obsolete English words which occur in, e.g. the 1611 KJV and can define them correctly.

 

[Jeff Saunders]

There's no reimagining. Greek speaking Christians understood Greek and that aionios does not mean eternal. It was ill-informed Latin speakers, like Augustine, who didn't know Greek and got it wrong. In other words, they understood that in the next age some go to the age of life, others to the age of punishment, but eventually God will be all in all. They understood God's justice as merciful and remedial, not penal and retributive.

They understood the blessed hope concerned the restoration of all things-apokatastaseos panton (Acts 3:21).

I realize you assume proponents of universal restoration are changing meanings, but early interpreters have left us with a witness that was rejected by the Church of the Empire in favor of eternal torment. It's an unfortunate fact but one we need to face.

The biggest problem I find is that most of the lexicons and other books are mostly if not all from the very people who follow the Latin tradition . so we have a whole lot of people belive Augustine was correct and have written all kinds of books tp prove that they are correct. The problem is when you start out from a wrong starting point just because you have millions of people who agree with you doesn't make the conclusion correct. They are like the scripture that says " They compare themselves by themselves"

 

[Jeff Saunders]

How does the Greek speaking Eastern Orthodox Church translate it?
They never bothered with Latin and still teach "eternal life" from "ζωὴν αἰώνιον".

that was not true for the first 300 years of the church. Have you ever read the writings of the early church Fathers UR was the major belief .

 

[Jeff Saunders]

Romans 4:15​

(15) Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.​

Romans 5:13​

(13) (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.​

Romans 2:14​

(14) For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:​

Romans 11:32 For God has committed them all to disobedience , that He might have mercy on all. Same book same author it seems to say something different. Unless this all is one of those all's that don't mean all.

 

[Der Alte]

The biggest problem I find is that most of the lexicons and other books are mostly if not all from the very people who follow the Latin tradition . so we have a whole lot of people belive Augustine was correct and have written all kinds of books tp prove that they are correct. The problem is when you start out from a wrong starting point just because you have millions of people who agree with you doesn't make the conclusion correct. They are like the scripture that says " They compare themselves by themselves"

How long has universal reconciliation been around? Surely there must be some "properly" educated UR-ite scholars capable of writing a Greek and Hebrew Grammar and lexicon. Where are they, why haven't they written the "perfect" unbiased lexicon and grammar that is not influenced by that terrible Latin teaching or God forbid Augustine?

 

[Der Alte]

that was not true for the first 300 years of the church. Have you ever read the writings of the early church Fathers UR was the major belief .

That is patently false. And please do quote Schaff-Herzog so I can refute it.
ECF online.

Early Church Fathers

Early Church Fathers: information and documents concerning the early fathers of the church!

www.earlychristianwritings.com

 

[Jeff Saunders]

Respectfully, people who have spoken and written Greek continuously for 2000 plus years probably understand the meaning of the original Greek manuscripts. Theology aside, they can be trusted to translate Greek to English more accurately than an English speaker with an agenda.

Here is Matthew 25:46 from the EOB: "These [ones on the left] will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

Eternal actually means "eternal".

the problem with that is that language changes over time. example if I were to say," that two men went out and had a gay time at the party ," some one from 1920 would read that as they had a fun ,joyful time. now 2023 it has a whole new meaning now its a sexually deviant thing. so fast forward to the year 3500 ad and the current definition of gay is written in all the books as a homosexual thing and everyone from 3500 know that gay means a homosexual thing but it didn't start out that way. Thats why if you read the early church fathers they mostly saw Aionios as pertaining to an age , not eternal.

 

[Der Alte]

Romans 11:32 For God has committed them all to disobedience , that He might have mercy on all. Same book same author it seems to say something different. Unless this all is one of those all's that don't mean all.

Anyone can make the Bible say almost anything by quoting selective verses out-of-context as you have done. The following verses written by Paul, the author of Rom 11:32, above.
The Greek word translated "might have mercy," in Rom 11:32, is in the subjunctive mood, which is the mood of possibility/potentiality. It ain't a done deal.

1 Corinthians 6:9-10
9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: [no wrongdoer] neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
Galatians 5:19-21
19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
Ephesians 5:5 For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, [no wrongdoer] hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.
1 Corinthians 3:17 If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.​

Twenty two categories of unrighteous people who have no inheritance in the kingdom of God.1. adulterers, 2. covetous, 3. drunkenness, 4. effeminate, 5. emulations, 6. envious, 7. extortion 8. fornication, 9. hatred, 10. heresies, 11. homosexuals, 12. idolators, 13. lasciviousness, 14. murder, 15. reveling, 16. revilers 17. sedition, 18. strife, 19. thieves, 20. uncleanness 21. witchcraft. 22. Wrath
Vss cited: 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, Galatians 5:19-21, Ephesians 5:5, 1 Corinthians 3:17

 

[Der Alte]

the problem with that is that language changes over time. example if I were to say," that two men went out and had a gay time at the party ," some one from 1920 would read that as they had a fun ,joyful time. now 2023 it has a whole new meaning now its a sexually deviant thing. so fast forward to the year 3500 ad and the current definition of gay is written in all the books as a homosexual thing and everyone from 3500 know that gay means a homosexual thing but it didn't start out that way. Thats why if you read the early church fathers they mostly saw Aionios as pertaining to an age , not eternal.

Irrelevant smoke screen. Patently false "the early church fathers they mostly saw Aionios as pertaining to an age , not eternal." That is totally false information that UR so-called teachers, scholars, leaders have force fed their followers.

Early Church Fathers

Early Church Fathers: information and documents concerning the early fathers of the church!

www.earlychristianwritings.com

How about "Origen" the UR poster boy? Here is how Origen defines "aionios,"

(60) And he has explained the statement, “But he shall not thirst forever,” as follows with these very words: For the life he gives is eternal and never perishes, as, indeed, does the first life which comes from the well; the life he gives remains. For the grace and the gift of our Savior is not to be taken away, nor is it consumed, nor does it perish, when one partakes of it.​

Origen. (1993). Commentary on the Gospel according to John Books 13—32. (T. P. Halton, Ed., R. E. Heine, Trans.) (vol 89) washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press.​

Here Origen says in the book of John "aionios life" means "never perishes,[twice], remains, is not to be taken away, is not consumed."
Amended to add:
Don't you think scholars know that language changes over time? They are not dummies, if people with little to none language training know that, they do. Here is a link to a previous post of mine where I quote the complete definition of "aionios" from the Bauer, Danker, Arndt, Gingrich Greek lexicon. Which represents 120-160 years of combined Greek scholarship. Pay particular attention to the 80+ blue highlights of historical sources the scholars consulted to determine the correct translation. Real scholars don't sit around making up definitions for historical words.

Daily Christian Universalist Verses

Good. Now show me where Josiah said that? It ain't in the Bible. You are the one that is not careful, choosing questionable sources because they support your assumptions/presuppositions. Did you even bother to read the sources I posted, with links, which included archaeological evidence? There...

www.christianforums.com

 

[Jeff Saunders]

How long has universal reconciliation been around? Surely there must be some "properly" educated UR-ite scholars capable of writing a Greek and Hebrew Grammar and lexicon. Where are they, why haven't they written the "perfect" unbiased lexicon and grammar that is not influenced by that terrible Latin teaching or God forbid Augustine?

so something is only true because its in a lexicon? We are called to not be like the world and that is what the world says, show me the verse that says all things must be proven by a lexicon . lexicons are all written by men and if they start from a faulty assumption all the volumes in the world do not make them correct. Do you not think that when Jesus was around and dealing with the religious leaders of His time they were not quoting from all there writings that they took from scripture and traditions they had many years and many writings but they to started from a wrong assumption . That is why Jesus said John 5:39 you search the scriptures to find life but life is in me . He also said they did not know the Father. Is it possible that many have done the same thing today believing in the Augustine gospel.

 

[Jeff Saunders]

Irrelevant smoke screen. Patently false "the early church fathers they mostly saw Aionios as pertaining to an age , not eternal." That is totally false information that UR so-called teachers, scholars, leaders have force fed their followers.
How about "Origen" the UR poster boy? Here is how Origen defines "aionios,"

(60) And he has explained the statement, “But he shall not thirst forever,” as follows with these very words: For the life he gives is eternal and never perishes, as, indeed, does the first life which comes from the well; the life he gives remains. For the grace and the gift of our Savior is not to be taken away, nor is it consumed, nor does it perish, when one partakes of it.​

Origen. (1993). Commentary on the Gospel according to John Books 13—32. (T. P. Halton, Ed., R. E. Heine, Trans.) (vol 89) washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press.​

Here Origen says in the book of John "aionios life" means "never perishes,[twice], remains, is not to be taken away, is not consumed.

When death shall no longer exist,or the sting of death , nor any evil at all, then truly God will be all in all . Origen \ There are very many in our day, who though not denying the Holy Scripture , do not believe in endless torments -Augustine \Do not suppose that the soul is punished for endless eons (apeirou aionas ) in Tartarus . Very properly , the soul i not punished to gratify the revenge of the divinity, but for the sake of healing. But we say that the soul is punished for an aionion period (aionios) calling its life and its allotted period of punishment, its aeon. Olnmpiodorus (ad 550) these are a few quotes from the early fathers and there are more.

 

[Der Alte]

When death shall no longer exist,or the sting of death , nor any evil at all, then truly God will be all in all . Origen \ There are very many in our day, who though not denying the Holy Scripture , do not believe in endless torments -Augustine \Do not suppose that the soul is punished for endless eons (apeirou aionas ) in Tartarus . Very properly , the soul i not punished to gratify the revenge of the divinity, but for the sake of healing. But we say that the soul is punished for an aionion period (aionios) calling its life and its allotted period of punishment, its aeon. Olnmpiodorus (ad 550) these are a few quotes from the early fathers and there are more.

When one "quotes" a historical source the proper procedure is to identify the source title, paragraph, section etc. the way I did when I quoted Origen above. Not just post a bunch of disjointed words. I have never heard of "Olnmpiodorus." I saw a writing of Augustine earlier this evening where he did not support eternal punishment.

 

[Der Alte]

so something is only true because its in a lexicon? We are called to not be like the world and that is what the world says, show me the verse that says all things must be proven by a lexicon . lexicons are all written by men and if they start from a faulty assumption all the volumes in the world do not make them correct. Do you not think that when Jesus was around and dealing with the religious leaders of His time they were not quoting from all there writings that they took from scripture and traditions they had many years and many writings but they to started from a wrong assumption . That is why Jesus said John 5:39 you search the scriptures to find life but life is in me . He also said they did not know the Father. Is it possible that many have done the same thing today believing in the Augustine gospel.

More of that meaningless "Augustine" nonsense. Where else are students today supposed to learn the correct definition of ancient words if not a lexicon? Anonymous UR so-called "scholars" online? Let's get real. If you can't provide any kind of credible, verifiable evidence about Augustine, then be quiet about him. Maybe it is you who starts from wrong assumptions because I see very little credible, verifiable, historical evidence for anything, just empty accusations.

 

[atpollard]

that was not true for the first 300 years of the church. Have you ever read the writings of the early church Fathers UR was the major belief .

Would you please quote the specific ECF writing that claims Jesus and the Apostles misspoke and everyone will ultimately spend eternity in Heaven.