Christian Universalism. What's not to like?

[Major1]

How is my post talking down to you? I merely quoted some pertinent facts about Strong's.

It is called .... thin skin.

Some people have that when they know they are on shaky ground.

 

[Der Alte]

Bro, overall you talk down to the "hell no crowd" all the time, as if you think they're complete idiots.

Prove it. Quote me 3-4 examples how I routinely do that without provocation.

 

[Andrewn]

In the Old Testament, the word which indicated Hell, and that is sheol. It appears originally to have been the Hebrews’ version of the Sumerian and Babylonian Irkalla, or Netherworld, also referred to more poetically as “the House of Dust and Darkness.” For all the dead — good, bad, in-between — this was an unpleasant place, one where souls were left to dine only on dust and live in an unrelenting haze of ash.

Similarly, in Norse mythology, Hel is a grey land under the earth in the fog-world of Nephilim where the majority of souls would go. No fire, brimstone, or undying worms.

 

[Der Alte]

Time to re-post this. It may or may not be relevant what a word, such as "hell" might have meant in different country, language, culture etc. more than a few 100 years ago. Even in English common words have changed meaning over the years. For example, when we hear/read the word "truck" we think of a large boxy vehicle used for transporting large, heavy loads. "Truck" originally meant vegetables, then it came to mean a vehicle used for carrying vegetables. Sometimes it meant "to have dealings with" as in "I don't have any truck with them."
…..If is often argued in forums like this that "Gehenna" referred to a constantly burning trash dump in the valley of Ge Hinnom outside Jerusalem. There is no credible evidence from any historical source for that. There was a valley near Jerusalem which was used for a trash dump but it was the Kidron valley not Ge Hinnom.
https://www.researchgate.net/public...udy_of_the_City-Dump_of_Early_Roman_Jerusalem
Concerning only the existence of a Jewish belief in hell not the validity of the historical faith, beliefs and practices of the ancient Jews. Below are quotes from three credible Jewish sources; the Jewish Encyclopedia, Encyclopedia Judaica and the Talmud. Which to date have not been refuted.
…..According to these three sources, among the יהודים/Yehudim/ιουδαιων/Youdaion/Jews in Israel, before and during the time of Jesus, there was a significant belief in a place of everlasting torment of the wicked and they called it both sheol and gehinnom, which are translated Hades and Gehenna, respectively, in both the 225 BC LXX and the NT.
…..There were different factions within Judaism; Sadducees, Pharisees, Essenes etc. and different beliefs about resurrection, hell etc. These differing beliefs do not refute anything in the following post.

[1]1917 Jewish Encyclopedia, Gehenna
The place where children were sacrificed to the god Moloch … in the "valley of the son of Hinnom," to the south of Jerusalem (Josh. xv. 8, passim; II Kings xxiii. 10; Jer. ii. 23; vii. 31-32; xix. 6, 13-14). … the valley was deemed to be accursed, and "Gehenna" therefore soon became a figurative equivalent for "hell." Hell, like paradise, was created by God (Sotah 22a);[“Soon” in this verse would be about 700 BC +/-, DA]​

[Note: this is according to the ancient Jews, long before the Christian era, NOT any assumed/alleged bias of “modern” Christian translators. DA]

”(I)n general …sinners go to hell immediately after their death. The famous teacher Johanan b. Zakkai wept before his death because he did not know whether he would go to paradise or to hell (Ber. 28b). The pious go to paradise, and sinners to hell(B.M. 83b).
But as regards the heretics, etc., and Jeroboam, Nebat's son, hell shall pass away, but they shall not pass away" (R. H. 17a; comp. Shab. 33b). All that descend into Gehenna shall come up again, with the exception of three classes of men: those who have committed adultery, or shamed their neighbors, or vilified them (B. M. 58b).[/i]
… heretics and the Roman oppressors go to Gehenna, and the same fate awaits the Persians, the oppressors of the Babylonian Jews (Ber. 8b). When Nebuchadnezzar descended into hell, [שאול/Sheol] all its inhabitants were afraid that he was coming to rule over them (Shab. 149a; comp. Isa. xiv. 9-10). The Book of Enoch [x. 6, xci. 9, etal] also says that it is chiefly the heathen who are to be cast into the fiery pool on the Day of Judgment (x. 6, xci. 9, et al). "The Lord, the Almighty, will punish them on the Day of Judgment by putting fire and worms into their flesh, so that they cry out with pain unto all eternity" (Judith xvi. 17). The sinners in Gehenna will be filled with pain when God puts back the souls into the dead bodies on the Day of Judgment, according toIsa. xxxiii. 11 (Sanh. 108b).
Link: Jewish Encyclopedia Online
Note, scripture references are highlighted in blue.
= = =
[2]1972 Encyclopedia Judaica:
Gehinnom (Heb. גֵּי בֶן־הִנֹּם, גֵּי בְנֵי הִנֹּם, גֵּיא בֶן־הִנֹּם, גֵּיא הִנֹּם; Gr. Γέεννα; "Valley of Ben-Hinnom, Valley of [the Son (s) of] Hinnom," Gehenna), a valley south of Jerusalem on one of the borders between the territories of Judah and Benjamin, between the Valley of *Rephaim and *En-Rogel (Josh. 15:8; 18:16). It is identified with Wadi er-Rababi.
…..During the time of the Monarchy, Gehinnom, at a place called Topheth, was the site of a cult which involved the burning of children (II Kings 23:10; Jer. 7:31; 32:35 et al.; ). Jeremiah repeatedly condemned this cult and predicted that on its account Topheth and the Valley of the Son of Hinnom would be called the Valley of the "Slaughter" (Jer. 19:5–6).
In Judaism the name Gehinnom is generally used as an appellation of the place of torment reserved for the wicked after death. The New Testament used the Greek form Gehenna in the same sense.
Gehinnom
http://www.jevzajcg.me/enciklopedia/Encyclopaedia Judaica, v. 07 (Fey-Gor).pdf
= = =
[3]pre-Christianity Talmud -Tractate Rosh Hashanah Chapter 1.
The school of Hillel says: . . . but as for Minim, [i.e. followers of Jesus] informers and disbelievers, who deny the Torah, or Resurrection, or separate themselves from the congregation, or who inspire their fellowmen with dread of them, or who sin and cause others to sin, as did Jeroboam the son of Nebat and his followers, they all descend to Gehenna, and are judged there from generation to generation, as it is said [Isa. lxvi. 24]:
"And they shall go forth and look upon the carcases of the men who have transgressed against Me; for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched." Even when Gehenna will be destroyed, they will not be consumed, as it is written[Psalms, xlix. 15]: "And their forms wasteth away in the nether world," which the sages comment upon to mean that their forms shall endure even when the grave is no more.
Concerning them Hannah says [I Sam. ii. 10]: "The adversaries of the Lord shall be broken to pieces."
Link: Tract Rosh Hashana: Chapter I.​

 

[Major1]

Similarly, in Norse mythology, Hel is a grey land under the earth in the fog-world of Nephilim where the majority of souls would go. No fire, brimstone, or undying worms.

Which makes the Bible more authentic.

 

[Major1]

I don't have a problem with that, do you?
How would you benefit if Satan was not restored?
Remember, revenge is a sin. (Romans 12:19)

Matt. 8:29..........
"And suddenly they [demons] cried out, saying, "What have we to do with You, Jesus, You Son of God? Have You come here to torment us before the time?"

That verse reveals that the demons already know what their future destiny will be, that is, torment not annihilation.

Consequently, this verse and Rev. 20:10 together give us in-depth insights into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels:Then He will also say to those on the left hand, "Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels" (Mt. 25:41, NKJV).

That means that Satan and his demons can not and will not be saved.

 

[Ceallaigh]

He said he used Strong's to make his decisions about the Biblical words. The statement I quoted said that Strong's was not intended for nor should it be used for "translation" purposes. That is not the purpose of a concordance.
Strong's will show every verse where significant words occur and how they are translated in the KJV. I am referring to the original Strong's which is the edition which is out of copy right and available online. There is a revised addition, "The Strongest Strong's" but it is in copyright and must be purchased if one wants to use it.
FYI correct translation does not consist of merely looking at a list of how a word is translated in the KJV then eeny, meeny, mine mo randomly picking one out of that list.

So what source and method do you use?

 

[Ceallaigh]

You may not have a Personal belief in it but the theology you promote, and you are promoting not explaining......in fact does teach that very thing and your partner Steve even agrees with it!

You say you are "explaining" Universalism. In Alabama my grandpa always told me that is it quakes like a duck, and swims like a duck and walks like a duck...........Then IT IS A DUCK!

Why is Steve my partner? Why not Hmm or Lazarus Short? I mean if I'm going to be forced into a partnership with someone, I have a right to know why.

Here's the deal, if you say something that's accurate about UR, then I won't have to correct you on it. I'll say something like "that's a good point".

 

[Ceallaigh]

It is called .... thin skin.

Some people have that when they know they are on shaky ground.

And that's known as, the pot calling the kettle black, and people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

 

[Ceallaigh]

Old Testament. The Hebrew word seol [l/a.v], "Sheol, " refers to the grave or the abode of the dead ( Psalms 88:3 Psalms 88:5 ). Through much of the Old Testament period, it was believed that all went one place, whether human or animal ( Psalms 49:12 Psalms 49:14 Psalms 49:20 ), whether righteous or wicked ( Eccl 9:2-3 ). No one could avoid Sheol ( Psalm 49:9 ; 89:48 ), which was thought to be down in the lowest parts of the earth ( Deut 32:22 ; 1 Sam 28:11-15 ; Job 26:5 ; Psalm 86:13 ; Isa 7:11 ; Ezekiel 31:14-16 Ezekiel 31:18 ).

Unlike this world, Sheol is devoid of love, hate, envy, work, thought, knowledge, and wisdom ( Ecclesiastes 9:6 Ecclesiastes 9:10 ). Descriptions are bleak: There is no light ( Job 10:21-22 ; 17:13 ; Psalms 88:6 Psalms 88:12 ; 143:3 ), no remembrance ( Psalm 6:5 ; 88:12 ; Eccl 9:5 ), no praise of God ( Psalm 6:5 ; 30:9 ; 88:10-12 ; 115:17 ; Isa 38:18 ) — in fact, no sound at all ( Psalm 94:17 ; 115:17 ). Its inhabitants are weak, trembling shades ( Job 26:5 ; Psalm 88:10-12 ; Isa 14:9-10 ) who can never hope to escape from its gates ( Job 10:21 ; 17:13-16 ; Isa 38:10 ). Sheol is like a ravenous beast that swallows the living without being sated ( Prov 1:12 ; 27:20 ; Isa 5:14 ).
(What is Sheol and Where is it? Bible Meaning and Definition) (biblestudytools.com)

How much do you know about William B. Nelson, Jr.?

 

[Ceallaigh]

Time to re-post this. It may or may not be relevant what a word, such as "hell" might have meant in different country, language, culture etc. more than a few 100 years ago. Even in English common words have changed meaning over the years. For example, when we hear/read the word "truck" we think of a large boxy vehicle used for transporting large, heavy loads. "Truck" originally meant vegetables, then it came to mean a vehicle used for carrying vegetables. Sometimes it meant "to have dealings with" as in "I don't have any truck with them."
…..If is often argued in forums like this that "Gehenna" referred to a constantly burning trash dump in the valley of Ge Hinnom outside Jerusalem. There is no credible evidence from any historical source for that. There was a valley near Jerusalem which was used for a trash dump but it was the Kidron valley not Ge Hinnom.
https://www.researchgate.net/public...udy_of_the_City-Dump_of_Early_Roman_Jerusalem
Concerning only the existence of a Jewish belief in hell not the validity of the historical faith, beliefs and practices of the ancient Jews. Below are quotes from three credible Jewish sources; the Jewish Encyclopedia, Encyclopedia Judaica and the Talmud. Which to date have not been refuted.
…..According to these three sources, among the יהודים/Yehudim/ιουδαιων/Youdaion/Jews in Israel, before and during the time of Jesus, there was a significant belief in a place of everlasting torment of the wicked and they called it both sheol and gehinnom, which are translated Hades and Gehenna, respectively, in both the 225 BC LXX and the NT.
…..There were different factions within Judaism; Sadducees, Pharisees, Essenes etc. and different beliefs about resurrection, hell etc. These differing beliefs do not refute anything in the following post.

[1]1917 Jewish Encyclopedia, Gehenna
The place where children were sacrificed to the god Moloch … in the "valley of the son of Hinnom," to the south of Jerusalem (Josh. xv. 8, passim; II Kings xxiii. 10; Jer. ii. 23; vii. 31-32; xix. 6, 13-14). … the valley was deemed to be accursed, and "Gehenna" therefore soon became a figurative equivalent for "hell." Hell, like paradise, was created by God (Sotah 22a);[Note, “soon” in this passage would be about 700 BC +/-, DA]
[Note: this is according to the ancient Jews, long before the Christian era, NOT any assumed/alleged bias of “modern” Christian translators. And at least 14 centuries before Dante'. DA]
”(I)n general …sinners go to hell immediately after their death. The famous teacher Johanan b. Zakkai wept before his death because he did not know whether he would go to paradise or to hell (Ber. 28b). The pious go to paradise, and sinners to hell(B.M. 83b).
But as regards the heretics, etc., and Jeroboam, Nebat's son, hell shall pass away, but they shall not pass away" (R. H. 17a; comp. Shab. 33b). All that descend into Gehenna shall come up again, with the exception of three classes of men: those who have committed adultery, or shamed their neighbors, or vilified them (B. M. 58b).[/i]
… heretics and the Roman oppressors go to Gehenna, and the same fate awaits the Persians, the oppressors of the Babylonian Jews (Ber. 8b). When Nebuchadnezzar descended into hell, [שאול/Sheol] all its inhabitants were afraid that he was coming to rule over them (Shab. 149a; comp. Isa. xiv. 9-10). The Book of Enoch [x. 6, xci. 9, etal] also says that it is chiefly the heathen who are to be cast into the fiery pool on the Day of Judgment (x. 6, xci. 9, et al). "The Lord, the Almighty, will punish them on the Day of Judgment by putting fire and worms into their flesh, so that they cry out with pain unto all eternity" (Judith xvi. 17). The sinners in Gehenna will be filled with pain when God puts back the souls into the dead bodies on the Day of Judgment, according toIsa. xxxiii. 11 (Sanh. 108b).
Link: Jewish Encyclopedia Online
Note, scripture references are highlighted in blue.

All of the references here (except for the ones in blue) are not readily identifiable. So an extrabiblical hodgepodge of snippets from so far unknown sources wrapped around Isaiah 14:9-10, Isaiah 33:11 and the apocryphal Enoch and Judith.

If this hasn't been refuted, probably the main reason for that is because it's mostly jumbled snippets from several indefinable sources in a format that's difficult to read.

[2]1972 Encyclopedia Judaica:
Gehinnom (Heb. גֵּי בֶן־הִנֹּם, גֵּי בְנֵי הִנֹּם, גֵּיא בֶן־הִנֹּם, גֵּיא הִנֹּם; Gr. Γέεννα; "Valley of Ben-Hinnom, Valley of [the Son (s) of] Hinnom," Gehenna), a valley south of Jerusalem on one of the borders between the territories of Judah and Benjamin, between the Valley of *Rephaim and *En-Rogel (Josh. 15:8; 18:16). It is identified with Wadi er-Rababi.
…..During the time of the Monarchy, Gehinnom, at a place called Topheth, was the site of a cult which involved the burning of children (II Kings 23:10; Jer. 7:31; 32:35 et al.; ). Jeremiah repeatedly condemned this cult and predicted that on its account Topheth and the Valley of the Son of Hinnom would be called the Valley of the "Slaughter" (Jer. 19:5–6).

That's all well known by those familiar with the subject.

In Judaism the name Gehinnom is generally used as an appellation of the place of torment reserved for the wicked after death. The New Testament used the Greek form Gehenna in the same sense.
Gehinnom
http://www.jevzajcg.me/enciklopedia/Encyclopaedia Judaica, v. 07 (Fey-Gor).pdf

Okay, who came up with that part and when?

[3]pre-Christianity Talmud -Tractate Rosh Hashanah Chapter 1.

The school of Hillel says: . . . but as for Minim, [i.e. followers of Jesus] informers and disbelievers, who deny the Torah, or Resurrection, or separate themselves from the congregation, or who inspire their fellowmen with dread of them, or who sin and cause others to sin, as did Jeroboam the son of Nebat and his followers, they all descend to Gehenna, and are judged there from generation to generation, as it is said [Isa. lxvi. 24]:
"And they shall go forth and look upon the carcases of the men who have transgressed against Me; for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched." Even when Gehenna will be destroyed, they will not be consumed, as it is written[Psalms, xlix. 15]: "And their forms wasteth away in the nether world," which the sages comment upon to mean that their forms shall endure even when the grave is no more.
Concerning them Hannah says [I Sam. ii. 10]: "The adversaries of the Lord shall be broken to pieces."
Link: Tract Rosh Hashana: Chapter I.

Since this refers to the followers of Jesus, it was obviously written either during the three years of Jesus' ministry or more likely after. So it wouldn't have been anything Jesus was referencing when he talked about Gehenna or anything the Jews would be all that familiar with when Jesus was teaching since it would have been so new.

So in conclusion:

Source 1 is pretty much indefinable.

Source 2 is the well known Biblical history of the valley of Hinnom with an attached conclusion from an undefined undated source.

Source 3 seems most likely a distorted view by Jews who rejected Jesus, written after his ministry.

 

[Der Alte]

* * *

<QUOTE=Major1>Matt. 8:29..........
"And suddenly they [demons] cried out, saying, "What have we to do with You, Jesus, You Son of God? Have You come here to torment us before the time?"
That verse reveals that the demons already know what their future destiny will be, that is, torment not annihilation.
Consequently, this verse and Rev. 20:10 together give us in-depth insights into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels:Then He will also say to those on the left hand, "Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels" (Mt. 25:41, NKJV).
That means that Satan and his demons can not and will not be saved.</QUOTE>​

The Hell no! crowd routinely argues that "'aionios' never means eternal." They also argue that "kolasis" translated "punishment" in Matt 25:46 means "correction."
In these 3 verses Jesus clearly defines/describes "aionios" as "eternal/everlasting."

John 3:15
15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
John 3:16
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.​

In Jn 3:15-16 Jesus juxtaposes "aionios life" with "should not perish," twice. Unless Jesus was lying "aionios life" means "shall not perish." NOT a finite age life.

John 5:24
24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.​

In this verse Jesus juxtaposes "aionios life" with "shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life." If "aionios" means a finite "age" then Jesus lied and those who believe in Him will come into condemnation and death.
"Kolasis" occurs twice in the NT Matt 25:46 "kolasis/punishment." The only other occurrence is 1 Jn 4:18

1 John 4:18
18 There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment.[kolasis] He that feareth is not made perfect in love.​

The one who has fear, has "kolasis"/"torment" they are not made perfect i.e. NO correction.

 

[Fervent]

I have found that to also be the issue with the ET bent though. In regard to several main proof texts used to support ET, I don't see where the text or the overall passage which the text is taken from, is necessarily about the afterlife and especially about eternal torment.

Again I have found what you're saying about those who defend UR also being the case with those who defend ET. What I see the situation being is that most/all Christians get taught the ET scenario from the get go. They're told ahead of time how the Bible should be interpreted regarding ET. From what I've seen UR doesn't start out as a preconceived idea that Christians then try building case for through scripture, but rather they start seeing problems with the ET scenario they were taught and in many cases believed.

Personally I started going to church / sunday school when I was 6 years old back around 1968. And I didn't become aware of the doctrine of universal reconciliation until around 40 years later in 2008. And that was only because I heard the term "universal salvation" motioned in a secular movie. Which caused me to look it up, which then took me to the universalist website tentmaker.org. What I learned about UR there was enough to at least make make me say "hmm". And that's probably because I wasn't taught that it was a lie I must reject ahead of time.

If that's the case I'm not sure how you're parsing context. One of the most common passages in favor of either annihilation or torment(and the strongest case is torment) is Matthew 25. That passage is very clearly teaching about the final judgment, and makes clear separation between those who go to one side for salvation and those who go to eternal punishment of some sort. Or Malachi which divides the righteous(precious metals) and the wicked(chaff) when speaking of the final judgment. In fact over and over again wherever final states are being taught it is consistently divided between different fates for the righteous and the wicked.

It's not a matter of interpreting it according to one or another, but looking at what the context is. I have yet to see a single passage that is didactic in intent, centering on final fates, where universal redemption is central to the point. I have seen several of those where it comes down to choosing between annihilation and eternal torment, with some naturally leaning to one or the other. The only support for UR seems to be to begin with a favorable view towards it and then put blinders on and nit-pick words that there is little reason to question like "aionios."

 

[Fervent]

Tell us then, does God have a plan, and if so, what is it?

One of the most common expressions in the Bible regarding God's plan is to take to Himself a remnant.

 

[Ceallaigh]

The Hell no! crowd routinely argues that "'aionios' never means eternal." They also argue that "kolasis" translated "punishment" in Matt 25:46 means "correction."
In these 3 verses Jesus clearly defines/describes "aionios" as "eternal/everlasting."

John 3:15
15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
John 3:16
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.​

In Jn 3:15-16 Jesus juxtaposes "aionios life" with "should not perish," twice. Unless Jesus was lying "aionios life" means "shall not perish." NOT a finite age life.

John 5:24
24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.​

In this verse Jesus juxtaposes "aionios life" with "shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life." If "aionios" means a finite "age" then Jesus lied and those who believe in Him will come into condemnation and death.
"Kolasis" occurs twice in the NT Matt 25:46 "kolasis/punishment." The only other occurrence is 1 Jn 4:18

1 John 4:18
18 There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment.[kolasis] He that feareth is not made perfect in love.​

The one who has fear, has "kolasis"/"torment" they are not made perfect i.e. NO correction.

The way I understand it from the Hell no! crowd's perspective, it depends on how "aionios" is being applied. For example God is "aionios" eternal because God is full circle having no beginning or end. Whereas man has a beginning, a starting point. So unlike God, man is not infinite. One could say man becomes infinite, but how can infinity have a starting point? Or put another way, if God had a starting point where He came into existence, would He still be infinite/eternal?

As for "kolasis"/"torment" being used in the parable of the sheep and goats found in Matthew 25:46, and also found in 1 John 4:18; how literal is it? As for Matthew 25:46, parables use figurative language. As for 1 John 4:18, what sort of torment was John talking about? Did he mean literal torment or was he using the word figuratively?

 

[Hmm]

One of the most common expressions in the Bible regarding God's plan is to take to Himself a remnant.

How ambitious.

 

[Ceallaigh]

If that's the case I'm not sure how you're parsing context. One of the most common passages in favor of either annihilation or torment(and the strongest case is torment) is Matthew 25. That passage is very clearly teaching about the final judgment, and makes clear separation between those who go to one side for salvation and those who go to eternal punishment of some sort. Or Malachi which divides the righteous(precious metals) and the wicked(chaff) when speaking of the final judgment. In fact over and over again wherever final states are being taught it is consistently divided between different fates for the righteous and the wicked.

Matthew 25 consists of three parables. I figure you're talking about the third parable found in Matthew 25:31-46. With emphasis on verses 41 and 46. It seems to me that whenever this is used as the primary go-to proof text, the fact that it's a parable and what it's about gets left out. In this parable Jesus is saying that those who performed a single act of charity, received eternal life in heaven. If one is to take Matthew 25:31-46 as being completely literal, then that means Jesus said all anyone has to do to receive eternal life in haven, is to give someone a cup of water. Of course virtually no one is going to say that's exactly what Jesus meant. So it's like Jesus didn't mean what he said in Matthew 25:31-46, except for verse 41 and 46. How much sense does that make? And again in Malachi, how literal was he being? As for the fate of the wicked, like ET, UR also teaches that the wicked will be judged and punished. The difference is in what form that punishment will take.

It's not a matter of interpreting it according to one or another, but looking at what the context is. I have yet to see a single passage that is didactic in intent, centering on final fates, where universal redemption is central to the point. I have seen several of those where it comes down to choosing between annihilation and eternal torment, with some naturally leaning to one or the other. The only support for UR seems to be to begin with a favorable view towards it and then put blinders on and nit-pick words that there is little reason to question like "aionios."

From what I've seen so far, proponents of annihilation and UR both maintain that the doctrine of eternal torment is immoral and makes God out to be a monster. So the beginning point for both is coming to the conclusion that the ET doctrine is plain wrong, and therefore the Bible must be talking about some other outcome. ET proponents can say that both put blinders on by ignoring certain verses and/or changing the meaning of certain verses and/or words, because they can't stomach the truth.

 

[Hmm]

Why is Steve my partner? Why not Hmm or Lazarus Short?

And how long has this been going on MMXX. When were you going to tell me?

 

[Fervent]

The way I understand it from the Hell no! crowd's perspective, it depends on how "aionios" is being applied. For example God is "aionios" eternal because God is full circle having no beginning or end. Whereas man has a beginning, a starting point. So unlike God, man is not infinite. One could say man becomes infinite, but how can infinity have a starting point? Or put another way, if God had a starting point where He came into existence, would He still be infinite/eternal?

As for "kolasis"/"torment" being used in the parable of the sheep and goats found in Matthew 25:46, and in 1 John 4:18, how literal is it? As for Matthew 25:46, parables use figurative language. As for 1 John 4:18, what sort of torment was John talking about? Did he mean literal torment or was he using the word figuratively?

The biggest issue with this sort of questioning is it is always from motivated inquirers. There's a pet theology they're questioning the language to support, not a dispassionate lexical inquiry. The case for aionios referring to "eternal," especially within that passage where it is parallelled with another eternal event that URs do agree is truly eternal is pretty strong and on a purely linguistic basis it is doubtful anyone would entertain alternative reads.

"kolasis" is a more interesting case, but there's a misconception involved because the primary quality is that the principal aim is corrective rather than punitive though that does not entail restoration. The word choice is likely more to reflect God's character rather than indicating anything about the action itself since "timoria" implies a bit of sadism and the end of the torment is not God's satisfaction.

 

[Ceallaigh]

And how long has this been going on MMXX. When were you going to tell me?

You're going to have to ask Major1, he's the one making the arrangements.