…..According to three irrefutable Jewish sources, the Jewish Encyclopedia, Encyclopedia Judaica and the Talmud,
But here is what Jesus Himself says,
• “Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:” Matthew 25:41
• "these [on the left] shall go away into eternal punishment, Matthew 25:46"
Compare:
Lamentations 3:22 and 3:31-33, The steadfast love of the Lord NEVER ceases, his mercies NEVER come to an end. . . .
Lam.3:31 For the Lord will NOT cast off FOR EVER:
32 For if He causes grief, Then He will have compassion According to His abundant lovingkindness. 33 For He does not afflict willingly Or grieve the SONS OF MEN.…
Clearly the Greek/Hebrew words mistranslated "everlasting", "eternal" & "forever" in pro endless hell biased translations do not always mean what they seem to mean, e.g.:
Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever. (Exo.21:6)
https://www.christianforums.com/threads/augustines-ignorance-error-re-matthew-25-46.8041938/l
Have you been decieved by your Bible translation?
Is aionion necessarily coequal in duration with aionion (in Mt.25:46)?
• "the fire of hell where the fire is not quenched and the worm does not die, Mark 9:43-48"
• "cast into a fiery furnace where there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth,” Matthew 13:42, Matthew 13:50
Lame. Nothing there says anyone will suffer endless tortures. Jesus could have easily expressed such a thought, if that was His belief. Since He never does, He doesn't believe such a thing. See also:
Early church opposition to endless hell
• “But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.” Matthew 18:6
In Mt.18:6 is the lame warning of a punishment which is compared to mere drowning, which is nothing compared to being kept alive for the sole purpose of being tortured for all the "endless" ages of eternity that have "no end" & "never" cease. Jesus says it is "better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea". OTOH, if He had been a believer in endless punishment, He could have expressed that by saying it is better for them to have never lived, never been conceived, or that their parents had never known (had sex with) one another. Compare this anti-biblical Jewish view that the Lord Jesus Christ, Love Omnipotent, rejected:
"To every individual is apportioned two shares, one in hell and one in paradise. At death, however, the righteous man's portion in hell is exchanged, so that he has two in heaven, while the reverse is true in the case of sinners (Ḥag. 15a). Hence it would have been better for the latter not to have lived at all (Yeb. 63b)."
GEHENNA - JewishEncyclopedia.com
• “And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.” Matthew 7:23
"never" (Mt.7:23, etc)...this word appears to occur 16 times in the NT & it seems that it never means anything except "never". It is used of "love never fails" (1 Cor.13:8). It also occurs in Mt.7:23 where Jesus says "I never knew you; depart you from Me, those working lawlessness." Which is such an incredibly lame remark, if Love Omnipotent believed in endless torments. If He believed that such an unspeakably horrific final destiny awaits the wicked, including those He was referring to in Mt.7:23, why didn't He make it clear by telling them that they would "never" be saved and/or He would "never" know them? Would that not have been clear & unambiguous, unlike the words He spoke, & unlike the ambiguous aion & aionios, which often refer to finite duration in ancient Koine Greek? OTOH consider re the use of the word "never":
"Philo saith, “The punishment of the wicked person is, ζην αποθανοντα αει, to live for ever dying, and to be for ever in pains, and griefs, and calamities that never cease..."
Mark 9 Benson Commentary
Yet Scripture - never - uses such language. Moreover, it speaks of death being abolished, not being "for ever".
• “woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! it had been good for that man if he had not been born. ” Matthew 26:24
Better not to have been born. Not to have never existed.
Jesus said it would have been better if Judas had not been born. He did not say it would have been better if Judas had never been conceived or existed. The latter opposes universalism, the former does not necessarily do so. One who dies in the womb without being born has existed. To not be born & die before being born means that one existed.
It would be better to be (1) concieved (& therefore to exist) & not be born than (2) to be born & live a wicked life (e.g. Judas Iscariot), because the former is in better standing with God than the latter (compare, for example, Lk.12:47-48). Judas will suffer the wrath of God of which the child in utero, who was never born, is not deserving. Therefore, for Judas, it would have been better if he had never been born, but died in his mother's womb. But, though he will suffer the wrath of God, this does not rule out the possibility of his ultimate salvation. Therefore Mt.26:24 fails as a proof text against him being saved.
• “But I say unto you, that it shall be more tolerable in that day for Sodom, than for that city.” Luke 10:12
In Matt. 18:6, 26:24 and Luk 10:12, see above, Jesus teaches that there is a fate worse than death or nonexistence.
None of those verses refer to a "fate worse than...nonexistence". And a "fate worse than death" need not be endless tortures & is nowhere near being similar to endless tortures. Compare:
Heb.10:28 A man that hath set at nought Moses' law dieth without compassion on the word of two or three witnesses: 29 of how much sorer punishment, think ye, shall he be judged worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?
Stoning to death is not a very sore or long lasting punishment. People suffered far worse deaths via the torture methods of the eternal hell believing Medieval Inquisitionists and the German Nazis under Hitler.
Therefore, if the writer of Hebrews believed that wicked, rebellious, Christ rejectors would be punished with something so monstrous as being endlessly annihilated or tormented, he would not have chosen to compare their punishment to something so lame as being stoned to death. Clearly he did not believe Love Omnipotent is an unfeeling terminator machine or sadist who abandons forever the beings He created in His own image & likeness so easily.
.....Unlike the UR crowd I consider Jesus to be the standard not Paul or John or other NT writers. I interpret the writings of Paul et al. to agree with what Jesus said. On the other hand UR-ites reinterpret the words of Jesus so that they do not mean what they literally say in order to make them agree with the UR interpretation of Paul et al.
All Scripture is inspired of God. Paul is in harmony with what the 4 Gospels & Jesus say about the Lord being the Savior of the world, of all mankind. For Paul's inspired words of truth are from the risen Lord Jesus Christ Himself.
https://www.tentmaker.org/books/hope_beyond_hell.pdf
Unique Proof For Christian, Biblical Universalism