The fatal flaw of Universalism

[Charlie24]

Dear Charles: Forget your fingers. Until by the Spirit of the Lord you are expanded by the working of ephphatha, you will circle your wagon on the same little avenue of understanding.


There is one (1) passage of Canon for “everlasting punishment” (Matt.25)

Except that there isn’t. The Greek word “αιωνιος” does not mean “everlasting.” It means “lasting.”

And the Greek word “κολασις” does not mean “punishment.” It means “correction.”

We've been through all this!

I comes down to the proper and improper use of nouns and adjectives, doesn't it?

 

[Saint Steven]

Oh, now you're offended when called out and pushed into a corner.

I took you as being tougher than that.

I'm not offended.
But there is no need to resort to name-calling in this discussion.
God's children should play nice. - lol

 

[Charlie24]

Taking him at his plain word?
Are you referring to a flawed Bible translation? You are calling that "His plain Word"?

We have told you numerous times that we question the translation bias in our Bible.
It seems that Damnationists have turned the Bible into a sacred cow.
You are aware that the translations do not even agree with one another.
So what exactly is the plain "Word" from that perspective?

I have told you numerous times that your translation is incorrect and showed you how I know this!

 

[Charlie24]

I'm not offended.
But there is no need to resort to name-calling in this discussion.
God's children should play nice. - lol

OK, Steven, I will play nice as long as you allow me to play nice.

Telling me that I have set a standard for God and you haven't when you have clearly redefined His word, is commonly known as what?

This is controversial theology isn't it?

 

[Saint Steven]

I have told you numerous times that your translation is incorrect and showed you how I know this!

We seem to be at an impasse on the issue of translations.
I'll grant you your POV if you grant me mine.

Although, I'm not sure what you mean when you write "your translation". ???
Maybe that's a reference to Young's Literal Translation?

It seems we are both claiming translation bias in the other.

 

[Saint Steven]

OK, Steven, I will play nice as long as you allow me to play nice.

You need to take responsibility for your own actions.
Don't misbehave and then claim I didn't "allow" you to play nice.
That's ridiculous.

 

[Charlie24]

We seem to be at an impasse on the issue of translations.
I'll grant you your POV if you grant me mine.

Although, I'm not sure what you mean when you write "your translation". ???
Maybe that's a reference to Young's Literal Translation?

It seems we are both claiming translation bias in the other.

Yes, I agree. That's why earlier I suggested we part ways on the subject.

But as long as you post on this thread the differences we have, I will respond in like manner.

 

[Saint Steven]

Telling me that I have set a standard for God and you haven't when you have clearly redefined His word, is commonly known as what?

Where did I claim that YOU have set a standard for God? That's not what I said at all. I said repeatedly that God set a standard himself. Bearing false witness is commonly known as what? (just sayin')

 

[Saint Steven]

I'm having problems with my computer when posting, anyway.

The last time I looked at my Greek dictionary, punishment was,

retribution, penalty, chastisement.

Don't play this silly game with me,SM.

There it is. The first word in the definition is "correction".

Thayer's Greek Lexicon
STRONGS NT 2851: κόλασις

κόλασις, κολάσεως, ἡ (κολάζω), correction, punishment, penalty: Matthew 25:46; κόλασιν ἔχει,brings with it or has connected with it the thought of punishment, 1 John 4:18. (Ezekiel 14:3f, etc.; 2 Macc. 4:38; 4 Macc. 8:8; Wis. 11:14 Wis. 16:24, etc.; Plato, Aristotle, Diodorus 1, 77 (9); 4, 44 (3); Aelian v. h. 7, 15; others.) [SYNONYMS: κόλασις, τιμωρία: the noted definition of Aristotle, which distinguishes κόλασις from τιμωρία as that which (is disciplinary and) has reference to him who suffers, while the latter (is penal and) has reference to the satisfaction of him who inflicts, may be found in his rhet. 1, 10, 17; cf. Cope, Introduction to Aristotle, Rhet., p. 232. To much the same effect, Plato, Protag. 324 a. and following, also deff. 416. But, as in other cases, usage (especially the later) does not always recognize the distinction; see e. g. Philo de legat. ad Gaium § 1 at the end; fragment ex Eusebius prepos. evang. 8, 13 (Mang. 2:641); de vita Moys. 1:16 at the end; Plato de sera num. vind. §§ 9, 11, etc. Plutarch (ibid. § 25 under the end) uses κολάζομαι of those undergoing the penalties of the other world (cf. Justin Martyr, Apology 1, 8; Clement of Rome, 2 Cor. 6, 7 [ET]; Justin Martyr, Apology 1, 43; 2, 8; Test xii. Patr., test. Reub. 5; test. Levi 4, etc.; Martyr. Polycarp, 2, 3 [ET]; 11, 2 [ET]; Ignatius ad Rom. 5, 3 [ET]; Martyr Ignatius vat. 5 etc.). See Trench, Synonyms, § vii.; McClellan, New Testament, vol. i., margin references on Matt. as above; Bartlett, Life and Death Eternal. Note G.; C. F. Hudson, Debt and Grace, p. 188ff; Schmidt, chapter 167, 2f.]

 

[Charlie24]

Where did I claim that YOU have set a standard for God? That's not what I said at all. I said repeatedly that God set a standard himself. Bearing false witness is commonly known as what? (just sayin')

post#105
This is the fatal flaw of Damnationism. Because Damnationism has created a god that doesn't live up to the moral standards of God. What we might want to call idolatry. But I don't hold them responsible, we have all been fed the lies.

What is the difference in saying we have created a God that doesn't live up to the standard of God, and saying we have set a standard for God?

Either way you are saying we have set a standard for God!

 

[Charlie24]

There it is. The first word in the definition is "correction".

Thayer's Greek Lexicon
STRONGS NT 2851: κόλασις

κόλασις, κολάσεως, ἡ (κολάζω), correction, punishment, penalty: Matthew 25:46; κόλασιν ἔχει,brings with it or has connected with it the thought of punishment, 1 John 4:18. (Ezekiel 14:3f, etc.; 2 Macc. 4:38; 4 Macc. 8:8; Wis. 11:14 Wis. 16:24, etc.; Plato, Aristotle, Diodorus 1, 77 (9); 4, 44 (3); Aelian v. h. 7, 15; others.) [SYNONYMS: κόλασις, τιμωρία: the noted definition of Aristotle, which distinguishes κόλασις from τιμωρία as that which (is disciplinary and) has reference to him who suffers, while the latter (is penal and) has reference to the satisfaction of him who inflicts, may be found in his rhet. 1, 10, 17; cf. Cope, Introduction to Aristotle, Rhet., p. 232. To much the same effect, Plato, Protag. 324 a. and following, also deff. 416. But, as in other cases, usage (especially the later) does not always recognize the distinction; see e. g. Philo de legat. ad Gaium § 1 at the end; fragment ex Eusebius prepos. evang. 8, 13 (Mang. 2:641); de vita Moys. 1:16 at the end; Plato de sera num. vind. §§ 9, 11, etc. Plutarch (ibid. § 25 under the end) uses κολάζομαι of those undergoing the penalties of the other world (cf. Justin Martyr, Apology 1, 8; Clement of Rome, 2 Cor. 6, 7 [ET]; Justin Martyr, Apology 1, 43; 2, 8; Test xii. Patr., test. Reub. 5; test. Levi 4, etc.; Martyr. Polycarp, 2, 3 [ET]; 11, 2 [ET]; Ignatius ad Rom. 5, 3 [ET]; Martyr Ignatius vat. 5 etc.). See Trench, Synonyms, § vii.; McClellan, New Testament, vol. i., margin references on Matt. as above; Bartlett, Life and Death Eternal. Note G.; C. F. Hudson, Debt and Grace, p. 188ff; Schmidt, chapter 167, 2f.]

It matters nothing to me what these mortal men have said or will say.

I go to the Word of God for my definitions, and it says,

The penalty for sin is death! I don't need Aristotle to explain this to me!

 

[Saint Steven]

post#105
This is the fatal flaw of Damnationism. Because Damnationism has created a god that doesn't live up to the moral standards of God. What we might want to call idolatry. But I don't hold them responsible, we have all been fed the lies.

What is the difference in saying we have created a God that doesn't live up to the standard of God, and saying we have set a standard for God?

Either way you are saying we have set a standard for God!

No. That is not correct.

Is it a godly standard to forgive your enemies? Yes.
Is it a godly standard to seek restoration in relationship? Yes.
Damnationism claims that God will not forgive his enemies.
Damnationism claims that God will not restore all relationships.
That is not godly behavior. It does not meet God's own standards.

 

[Charlie24]

It matters nothing to me what these mortal men have said or will say.

I go to the Word of God for my definitions, and it says,

The penalty for sin is death! I don't need Aristotle to explain this to me!

With all due respect Steven, and trying my best to play nice.

The world of Universalism has so boggled your mind that you are often contradicting yourself. The same happened to Calvin.

He became so obsessed with predestination and kept adding to it until he couldn't but help contradict himself in error.

 

[Saint Steven]

It matters nothing to me what these mortal men have said or will say.

I go to the Word of God for my definitions, and it says,

The penalty for sin is death! I don't need Aristotle to explain this to me!

Aristotle is Greek. He probably knows the Greek language better than you do.
So it seems to me that he is highly qualified to advise you on the definition of Greek words.

There you go again, claiming a translation of the Bible is "the Word of God".
Since those translations created by mortal men do not agree, are you claiming that God does not agree with himself. I hope not.

@Shrewd Manager showed you that the NT Greek word for punishment is "correction". How does that apply to the verse in question? Does not "correction" imply an end to work toward? And an "end" to work toward implies a period of time that is completed when the goal of correction is reached.? And doesn't that imply that judgment is nether purely punitive nor eternal?

 

[Charlie24]

No. That is not correct.

Is it a godly standard to forgive your enemies? Yes.
Is it a godly standard to seek restoration in relationship? Yes.
Damnationism claims that God will not forgive his enemies.
Damnationism claims that God will not restore all relationships.
That is not godly behavior. It does not meet God's own standards.

Jesus plainly said there is a sin that will not be forgiven in this world nor the one to come.

There goes your greater hope in just one verse!

 

[Saint Steven]

With all due respect Steven, and trying my best to play nice.

The world of Universalism has so boggled your mind that you are often contradicting yourself. The same happened to Calvin.

He became so obsessed with predestination and kept adding to it until he couldn't but help contradict himself in error.

It appears that you are now talking to yourself. You replied to your own post. - lol

Charlie24 said: ↑
It matters nothing to me what these mortal men have said or will say.

I go to the Word of God for my definitions, and it says,

The penalty for sin is death! I don't need Aristotle to explain this to me!

 

[Charlie24]

Aristotle is Greek. He probably knows the Greek language better than you do.
So it seems to me that he is highly qualified to advise you on the definition of Greek words.

There you go again, claiming a translation of the Bible is "the Word of God".
Since those translations created by mortal men do not agree, are you claiming that God does not agree with himself. I hope not.

@Shrewd Manager showed you that the NT Greek word for punishment is "correction". How does that apply to the verse in question? Does not "correction" imply an end to work toward? And an "end" to work toward implies a period of time that is completed when the goal of correction is reached.? And doesn't that imply that judgment is nether purely punitive nor eternal?

You refer to Aristotle for your information and see where it gets you.

I will refer to the Word of God!

 

[Saint Steven]

Jesus plainly said there is a sin that will not be forgiven in this world nor the one to come.

There goes your greater hope in just one verse!

Looks like you are in the same boat as BNR.
Was it @Oldmantook that explained that the world to come is the Millennium?

You sidestepped my questions. Explain why this has no effect on your view of God.

Is it a godly standard to forgive your enemies? Yes.
Is it a godly standard to seek restoration in relationship? Yes.
Damnationism claims that God will not forgive his enemies.
Damnationism claims that God will not restore all relationships.
That is not godly behavior. It does not meet God's own standards.

 

[Charlie24]

It appears that you are now talking to yourself. You replied to your own post. - lol

Charlie24 said: ↑
It matters nothing to me what these mortal men have said or will say.

I go to the Word of God for my definitions, and it says,

The penalty for sin is death! I don't need Aristotle to explain this to me!

It was a continuation of the last post, train of though kind of thing.

I wouldn't expect you to understand that.

 

[Saint Steven]

You refer to Aristotle for your information and see where it gets you.

I will refer to the Word of God!

Yes. Aristotle is Greek. He probably knows the Greek language better than you do.
So it seems to me that he is highly qualified to advise you on the definition of Greek words.

There you go again, claiming a translation of the Bible is "the Word of God".
Since those translations created by mortal men do not agree, are you claiming that God does not agree with himself. I hope not.