Universalism...why not?

Which is it?

  • God doesn't want all men to be saved.

    Votes: 4 8.2%
  • God can't do what he wants to do.

    Votes: 2 4.1%
  • Neither, God will continue to work on unrepentant souls because his love & patience are unending.

    Votes: 40 81.6%
  • Don't know...never thought about this before.

    Votes: 3 6.1%

  • Total voters
    49

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,576
6,063
EST
✟992,249.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Hillsage said:
[post #1108]This adjective “aionios” is never found until the writings of Plato (427 BC - 347 BC) who only used the word five times, and while he did use this word in the context of eternity, he never used it by itself to mean such. Why? Because the word, in and of itself does not mean “eternity.” Whenever he wanted to convey the idea of eternity, he always combined a stronger forced word with it (such as “aidios”), but not once did he ever use “aionios” by itself to mean “endless.” However, both Plato and Aristotle did use the word “aionios” by itself to mean temporary.
Right about here is where some credible, verifiable, historical evidence should be posted but all I am seeing is unsupported personal opinion.
Aionios pertains to a quality of life, in time as opposed to a quantity of time, in life. 2000 years ago Plato and Aristotle knew this, today eternal torturers don't.
More unsupported personal opinion. Here is a quote from Plato "Aion is what is properly eternal" Timoeus, ed. Steph. 3, 37, or ed. Baiter, Orell. et Winck. 712
 
Upvote 0

Hillsage

One 4 Him & Him 4 all
Supporter
Jun 12, 2009
5,244
1,767
The land of OZ
✟322,350.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
...personally, I can't foresee how the ultimate demise in the long term of Nero, Hitler, Mao, Stalin, or Pol Pot (or anyone like them) will diminish me in the presence of Christ for eternity. I'm not saying this as a criticism, but as a point of philosophical and theological contemplation.

Peace,
2PhiloVoid
"as a point of philosophical and theological contemplation" your post sounds like you don't have the love for all, that God does. Do you think Jesus died on the cross for 'worthy you/me', but not unworthy them? God's plan and God's love simply sounds beyond the grasp of your heart compared to our hearts. I feel sorry for those 'corrupted ones' whose minds have been taken captive, and it's still up to God to grant them repentance, just like He did you and me;

2TI 2:25 correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant that they will repent and come to know the truth, 26 and they may escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will.

Knowing how much I needed God to pursue me in order that I might be 'found' allows me to have His heart for those whom the nominal church despises as worthy of eternal torture. All the while 'they', the still sinning church, have merciful absolution. :doh:
 
  • Like
Reactions: mkgal1
Upvote 0

Hillsage

One 4 Him & Him 4 all
Supporter
Jun 12, 2009
5,244
1,767
The land of OZ
✟322,350.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Right about here is where some credible, verifiable, historical evidence should be posted but all I am seeing is unsupported personal opinion.

More unsupported personal opinion. Here is a quote from Plato "Aion is what is properly eternal" Timoeus, ed. Steph. 3, 37, or ed. Baiter, Orell. et Winck. 712
As I've said many times before, my studies concerning this whole doctrine took me 10 years. I found stuff I've never seen here. And I don't remember 'the source' because I was simply seeking God for the truth for myself...in those more difficult days of 'before computers'. But God honored true seekers/knockers then, just as He does now.

One thing you proved to me long ago, with you there is 'no source' that is credible...other than yours. I've refuted cut/paste responses of yours long ago. I actually assumed that's why I've enjoyed never having you 'not once' pester me personally for that last # of years. :clap: And now this post, out of the blue. :( I thought I was blessed and on your 'ignore list'. Now I'm sorry to find that is not the case. Oh well, I've no interest in any more posts from/with you, that's for sure. You are a solid Christian IMO. But cement is also solid, and just as mixed up, before getting that way. You see yourself as some crusading avenger for 'the truth' here...., but just as solidly, so do we. And I also 'think' we have proven 'the better mix'. :wave:
 
  • Like
Reactions: ClementofA
Upvote 0

mkgal1

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33
Supporter
Jun 22, 2007
27,339
7,349
California
✟551,233.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
An interesting argument I just ran into by David Bentley Hart (or his pet dog, I suppose) from a Universalist perspective:



I think there is a very strong point here. It reminds me of some of the stuff I've seen by John Donne. "No man is an island, entire of itself... any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind; and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee."

I'm not really a Universalist. I'm mostly just still exploring Christianity's claims in general, but... this is kind of a big deal. I'm not really sure how to get around the apparent fact that if Universalism fails, the concept of salvation becomes incoherent and Christianity as a whole comes tumbling down with it.
Thanks for sharing that. There's a certain imagery that comes to mind when I think of Christ redeeming all to Him....and what's described here (to me) fits well with that. I think that's another part of the reason God said to Adam, "It's not good for the man to be alone". Love needs to be given AND received in order to be complete.

I believe God is more about community (as reflected in the Trinity). We are to be joining with Him--I believe--in His action of reconciling all to Him (through love--not judgment and warnings/threats of hell).
 
Upvote 0

mkgal1

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33
Supporter
Jun 22, 2007
27,339
7,349
California
✟551,233.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
It is a call for man to trust to God. The whole work is regarding recovery from an illness and is predicated on the two greatest commandments, to love God and to Love thy neighbour. The idea being that they are associated ideals, hence everything that happens to anyone touches me also.

No man hath affliction enough that is not matured and ripened by it, and made fit for God by that affliction. If a man carry treasure in bullion, or in a wedge of gold, and have none coined into current money, his treasure will not defray him as he travels. Tribulation is treasure in the nature of it, but it is not current money in the use of it, except we get nearer and nearer our home, heaven, by it.

I myself don't see universalism here applied or intimated.
I do. The part about "everything that happens to anyone touches me also" (community....God's love binding us all back together).....and affliction maturing us......even purifying us (that's how I read "made fit for God by that affliction")....all appears to me to be describing universal reconciliation.....an eventual restoration of all.
To the thread in general (blind post):
I am not a universalist. To me, universalism fails in that it renders all our moral struggles moot and the whole idea of Sin and Justice irrelevant.
That's what I used to think, too. That's not the sort of universal reconciliation I believe in, though. This is what I'm inclined to believe (what Gregory of Nyssa described):

>>>In the Great Catechism, Gregory suggests that while every human will be resurrected, salvation will only be accorded to the baptised, although he also states that others driven by their passions can be saved after being purified by fire.[56] While he believes that there will be no more evil in the hereafter, it is arguable that this does not preclude a belief that God might justly damn sinners for eternity.[57] Thus, the main difference between Gregory's conception of ἀποκατάστασις and that of Origen would be that Gregory believes that mankind will be collectively returned to sinlessness, whereas Origen believes that personal salvation will be universal.[57] This interpretation of Gregory has been criticized recently, however.[58]Indeed, this interpretation is explicitly contradicted in the "Great Catechism" itself, for at the end of chapter XXXV Gregory declares that those who have not been purified by water through baptism will be purified by fire in the end, so that "their nature may be restored pure again to God".[59] Furthermore, in the next chapter (ch. XXXVI), Gregory says that those who are purified from evil will be admitted into the "heavenly company".[60]

Attempting to reconcile these disparate positions, Eastern Orthodox theologian Dr. Mario Baghos notes that "when taken at face value the saint seems to be contradicting himself in these passages; on the one hand he asserted the salvation of all and the complete eradication of evil, and, on the other, that the fire needed to purge evil is ‘sleepless’, i.e. everlasting. The only solution to this inconsistency is to view any allusion to universal salvation in St Gregory as an expression of God’s intention for humanity, which is in fact attested to when his holy sister states that God has “one goal […] some straightway even in this life purified from evil, others healed hereafter through fire for the appropriate length of time.” That we can choose either to accept or ignore this purification is confirmed by the saint’s many exhortations that we freely undertake the virtuous path."[61] Dr. Ilaria Ramelli has made the observation that for Gregory free will was compatible with universal salvation, since every person would eventually accept the good having gone through purification.[58] Gregory of Nyssa - Wikipedia
images



As far as I know they are all perfectly orthodox and therefore unlikely to be universalists in a Church that has historically considered it heresy.
Universal reconciliation has not been considered heretical or else many of the saints wouldn't be considered saints any longer.....would they?

As far as I know....Origen's version (with the idea of pre-existent souls) is the only form of universalism that's been deemed heretical in the Orthodox church.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Hillsage
Upvote 0

mkgal1

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33
Supporter
Jun 22, 2007
27,339
7,349
California
✟551,233.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
From Harvard:

>>>Gregory of Nyssa: ἀνάστασίς ἐστιν ἡ εἰς τὸ ἀρχαῖον τῆς φύσεως ἡμῶν ἀποκατάστασις
On the Soul and the Resurrection 156C

The resurrection is the restoration of humanity to its original condition, before the fall. The same expression, in its verbal form, is used again by Eusebius in Commentary on Isaiah 1.83.120: αὖθις ἀποκατασταθήσῃ εἰς τὸ ἀρχαῖον (“you will be restored again to your original condition”). Resurrection is described as a restoration to life, brought about by Christ, in Oratio ad sanctorum coetum 11.12: ἀντὶ δὲ θανάτου πάλιν εἰς τὸ ζῆν ἀποκατάστασις (“instead of death, being restored to life again”).


Also, Eusebius, precisely like Origen (see especially in Homilies on Jeremiah 14.18 and Commentary on Matthew 17.19), read Peter’s words in Acts 3:21—which he repeatedly cites—as a reference to the eventual universal restoration. In Against Marcellus, he explains Peter’s expression, “the times of universal restoration,” as the world to come, in which all beings will receive their perfect restoration:

What else does the expression ‘until the times of apokatastasis’ [ἄχρι χρόνων ἀποκαταστάσεως] indicate to us, if not the aeon to come, in which all beings must receive their perfect restoration [δεῖ πάντα τῆς τελείας τυχεῖν ἀποκαταστάσεως]? [. . .] On the occasion of the restoration of absolutely all beings [τῆς ἀποκαταστάσεως ἁπάντων], as Paul says, the creation itself will pass on from slavery to freedom. For he says: ‘Creation itself will be liberated from the slavery of corruption to the freedom of the glory of the children of God,’ (etc).
Against Marcellus 2.4.11​

The universality of the eventual apokatastasis is corroborated by Paul’s words regarding the creation that will be liberated from enslavement to corruption. In Eccl. Theol. 3.9.1, Eusebius again cites Acts 3:21, once more connecting it to Paul’s statement concerning the final liberation of all creation from corruption, in practically the same terms. [6]
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hillsage
Upvote 0

mkgal1

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33
Supporter
Jun 22, 2007
27,339
7,349
California
✟551,233.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Quid est Veritas? said:
To me, universalism fails in that it renders all our moral struggles moot and the whole idea of Sin and Justice irrelevant.
That's actually how I feel about the "say a prayer and you're in" theology---I don't see any emphasis on actual restoration of creation back to a state without corruption in that (I don't know if you're of that belief....I just mean in a general sense).

As I think Hillsage mentioned earlier....in my view, what I see around me are people that attend church regularly yet continue to blatantly sin (but....they have that "security" that their future after this life is "protected"). I just wonder about the damage they're leaving in their wake.....you know? It reminds me of this passage:

"Then do you come and stand before Me in this house called by My name and say, 'We are delivered, so we can continue doing all these detestable acts?"~Jeremiah 7:10
 
Upvote 0

mkgal1

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33
Supporter
Jun 22, 2007
27,339
7,349
California
✟551,233.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Also.....in reading the commentary of Matthew 17:19-20 from Origen, I see that "unbelief" comes up even after the disciples had been following Jesus for....what...wasn't this around the third year this happened? To me.....it's all an ongoing process to rid us of fear, unbelief, and corruption:

Church Fathers said:
Following this you may see, He did not there many mighty works because of their unbelief. Matthew 13:58 We are taught by these things that powers were found in those who believed, since to every one that has shall be given and he shall have abundance, Matthew 13:12 but among unbelievers not only did the powers not work, but as Mark wrote, They could not work. Matthew 17:19-20 For attend to the words, He could not there do any mighty works, for it is not said, He would not, but He could not; as if there came to the power when working co-operation from the faith of him on whom the power was working, but this co-operation was hindered in its exercise by unbelief. See, then, that to those who said, Why could we not cast it out? He said, Because of your little faith. Matthew 14:31 And to Peter, when he began to sink, it was said, O you of little faith, wherefore did you doubt? Luke 8:45-46 But, moreover, she who had the issue of blood, who did not ask for the cure, but only reasoned that if she were to touch the hem of His garment she would be healed, was healed on the spot. And the Saviour, acknowledging the method of healing, says, Who touched Me? For I perceived that power went forth from Me. Matthew 17:20 And perhaps, as in the case of material things there exists in some things a natural attraction towards some other thing, as in the magnet for iron, and in what is called naphtha for fire, so there is an attraction in such faith towards the divine power, according to what is said, If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed, you shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place, and it shall remove.Matthew 13:58 And Matthew and Mark, wishing to set forth the excellency of the divine power, that it has power even in unbelief, but not so great power as it has in the faith of those who are being benefited, seem to me to have said with accuracy, not that He did not any mighty works because of their unbelief, but that He did not many there. Mark 6:5 And Mark also does not say, that He could not do any mighty work there, and stop at that point, but added, Save that He laid His hands upon a few sick folk and healed them, Mark 6:5 the power in Him thus overcoming the unbelief.~
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,576
6,063
EST
✟992,249.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
From Harvard:
Harvard is a secular university. Just saying "from Harvard" does not give any credence to anything.
>>>Gregory of Nyssa: ἀνάστασίς ἐστιν ἡ εἰς τὸ ἀρχαῖον τῆς φύσεως ἡμῶν ἀποκατάστασις
Actually reads:"Whether or not it is in the nature of the state of the place of remodeling" Nothing in this quote which supports universalism.
On the Soul and the Resurrection
156C
he resurrection is the restoration of humanity to its original condition, before the fall. The same expression, in its verbal form, is used again by Eusebius in Commentary on Isaiah 1.83.120: αὖθις ἀποκατασταθήσῃ εἰς τὸ ἀρχαῖον (“you will be restored again to your original condition”). Resurrection is described as a restoration to life, brought about by Christ, in Oratio ad sanctorum coetum 11.12: ἀντὶ δὲ θανάτου πάλιν εἰς τὸ ζῆν ἀποκατάστασις (“instead of death, being restored to life again”).
Also, Eusebius, precisely like Origen (see especially in
Homilies on Jeremiah 14.18 and Commentary on Matthew 17.19), read Peter’s words in Acts 3:21—which he repeatedly cites—as a reference to the eventual universal restoration. In Against Marcellus, he explains Peter’s expression, “the times of universal restoration,” as the world to come, in which all beings will receive their perfect restoration:
What else does the expression ‘until the times of apokatastasis’ [ἄχρι χρόνων ἀποκαταστάσεως] indicate to us, if not the aeon to come, in which all beings must receive their perfect restoration [δεῖ πάντα τῆς τελείας τυχεῖν ἀποκαταστάσεως]? [. . .] On the occasion of the restoration of absolutely all beings [τῆς ἀποκαταστάσεως ἁπάντων], as Paul says, the creation itself will pass on from slavery to freedom. For he says: ‘Creation itself will be liberated from the slavery of corruption to the freedom of the glory of the children of God,’ (etc).
Against Marcellus 2.4.11
The universality of the eventual apokatastasis is corroborated by Paul’s words regarding the creation that will be liberated from enslavement to corruption. In Eccl. Theol. 3.9.1, Eusebius again cites Acts 3:21, once more connecting it to Paul’s statement concerning the final liberation of all creation from corruption, in practically the same terms. [6]
This post was quoted verbatim from 15. Origen, Eusebius, the Doctrine of Apokatastasis, and Its Relation to Christology, Ilaria Ramelli
If I want to have a discussion with Ilaria Ramelli, Ph.D. (Classical Philology and Culture of the Ancient World), I will go to her website.
 
Upvote 0

ClementofA

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jul 10, 2016
5,459
2,197
Vancouver
✟310,073.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
I am sorry, but that is shameless quote-mining and taking out of context in that website.

It even quotes Augustine and Ambrose of Milan, both most assuredly not universalists, as if they concur by the simple fact of ommiting his rebuttal in Augustine's case or misrepresenting Ambrose who was speaking of something else entirely. Augustine was explaining incorrect views and then going on to show why it is so, but the latter is barefacedly left out and Ambrose is speaking on Paul's dead-in-Christ and the Resurrection at the Parousia, not universalism.

Others like Jerome, Clement and Basil seem to be explaining others' views as in "some say"; not their own. As far as I know they are all perfectly orthodox and therefore unlikely to be universalists in a Church that has historically considered it heresy.

Some people should learn not to misrepresent universalist beliefs.

I wonder what scholarly materials you have read on the subject of universalism in the Early Church Fathers:

"Augustine himself, after rejecting apokatastasis, and Basil attest that still late in the fourth and fifth centuries this doctrine was upheld by the vast majority of Christians (immo quam plurimi)."

"Of course there were antiuniversalists also in the ancient church, but scholars must be careful not to list among them — as is the case with the list of “the 68” antiuniversalists repeatedly cited by McC on the basis of Brian Daley’s The Hope of the Early Church — an author just because he uses πῦρ αἰώνιον, κόλασις αἰώνιος, θάνατος αἰώνιος, or the like, since these biblical expressions do not necessarily refer to eternal damnation. Indeed all universalists, from Origen to Gregory Nyssen to Evagrius, used these phrases without problems, for universalists understood these expressions as “otherworldly,” or “long-lasting,” fire, educative punishment, and death. Thus, the mere presence of such phrases is not enough to conclude that a patristic thinker “affirmed the idea of everlasting punishment” (p. 822). Didache mentions the ways of life and death, but not eternal death or torment; Ignatius, as others among “the 68,” never mentions eternal punishment. Ephrem does not speak of eternal damnation, but has many hints of healing and restoration. For Theodore of Mopsuestia, another of “the 68,” if one takes into account also the Syriac and Latin evidence, given that the Greek is mostly lost, it becomes impossible to list him among the antiuniversalists. He explicitly ruled out unending retributive punishment, sine fine et sine correctione.

"I have shown, indeed, that a few of “the 68” were not antiuniversalist, and that the uncertain were in fact universalists, for example, Clement of Alexandria, Apocalypse of Peter, Sibylline Oracles (in one passage), Eusebius, Nazianzen, perhaps even Basil and Athanasius, Ambrose, Jerome before his change of mind, and Augustine in his anti-Manichaean years. Maximus too, another of “the 68,” speaks only of punishment aionios, not aidios and talks about restoration with circumspection after Justinian, also using a persona to express it. Torstein Tollefsen, Panayiotis Tzamalikos, and Maria Luisa Gatti, for instance, agree that he affirmed apokatastasis.

"It is not the case that “the support for universalism is paltry compared with opposition to it” (p. 823). Not only were “the 68” in fact fewer than 68, and not only did many “uncertain” in fact support apokatastasis, but the theologians who remain in the list of antiuniversalists tend to be much less important. Look at the theological weight of Origen, the Cappadocians, Athanasius, or Maximus, for instance, on all of whom much of Christian doctrine and dogmas depends. Or think of the cultural significance of Eusebius, the spiritual impact of Evagrius or Isaac of Nineveh, or the philosophico-theological importance of Eriugena, the only author of a comprehensive treatise of systematic theology and theoretical philosophy between Origen’s Peri Archon and Aquinas’s Summa theologiae. Then compare, for instance, Barsanuphius, Victorinus of Pettau, Gaudentius of Brescia, Maximus of Turin, Tyconius, Evodius of Uzala, or Orientius, listed among “the 68” (and mostly ignorant of Greek). McC’s statement, “there are no unambiguous cases of universalist teaching prior to Origen” (p. 823), should also be at least nuanced, in light of Bardaisan, Clement, the Apocalypse of Peter’s Rainer Fragment, parts of the Sibylline Oracles, and arguably of the NT, especially Paul’s letters.

"Certainly, “there was a diversity of views in the early church on the scope of final salvation.” Tertullian, for instance, did not embrace apokatastasis. But my monograph is not on patristic eschatology or soteriology in general, but specifically on the doctrine of apokatastasis. Thus, I treated the theologians who supported it, and not others."

The Christian Doctrine of Apokatastasis: The Reviews Start Coming In
SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class journal research

Ilaria Ramelli, The Christian Doctrine of Apokatastasis: A Critical Assessment from the New Testament to Eriugena (Brill, 2013. 890 pp.)

Scholars directory, with list of publications:

Ilaria L.E. Ramelli - ISNS Scholars Directory

https://www.tentmaker.org/books/hope_beyond_hell.pdf
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

mkgal1

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33
Supporter
Jun 22, 2007
27,339
7,349
California
✟551,233.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Just saying "from Harvard" does not give any credence to anything.
I was merely saying where I got the quotes from. That's all. I don't try to elevate my stance by using descriptions like, "highly respected"......"admired by many"....."very credible"..."REAL scholars"....etc.
This post was quoted verbatim from 15. Origen, Eusebius, the Doctrine of Apokatastasis, and Its Relation to Christology, Ilaria Ramelli
If I want to have a discussion with Ilaria Ramelli, Ph.D. (Classical Philology and Culture of the Ancient World), I will go to her website.

Earlier you'd asked for supportive writings of St Gregory of Nyssa and Origen (and citations)...."credible, verifiable, historical evidence" is what you'd written. There it is (with all the work cited).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Rajni
Upvote 0

ClementofA

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jul 10, 2016
5,459
2,197
Vancouver
✟310,073.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
And had you bothered to actually read those sources you would have seen how real scholars determine where the word "aionios" should be translated "eternal" etc. and where it is used hyperbolically. In support of their translations they provide historical evidence.

I have read all your 9 sources & many other lexicons, dictionaries, translations, etc, and as a rule they generally say very little if anything on how they assign 'eternal' to passages such as Mt.25:46. Of course if they said otherwise, who would buy their books, LOL!

Then many people bow down to them like they are an infallible authority & kiss the ring. The funny thing is they don't even agree with each other.

"The Third Law of Theology: For every theologian there is an equal and opposite theologian."

1 John 2:27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.



.....Unlike universlists, translation is not done based on personal assumptions/presuppositions.

Where is your evidence any universalists translated olam, aion or aionios based on doctrinal bias?

Your "qualified" men following the Douay & KJV traditions of men of "the church" of the Inquisitions, Crusades & dark ages have been caught in a deception (Jer.8:8-9):

Considering, then, that the Greek word aionios has a range of meanings, biased men should not have rendered the word in Mt.25:46 by their theological opinions as "everlasting". Thus they did not translate the word, but interpreted it. OTOH the versions with age-lasting, eonian & the like gave faithful translations & left the interpreting up to the readers as to what specific meaning within the "range of meanings" the word holds in any specific context. What biased scholars after the Douay & KJV traditions of the dark ages "church" have done is change the words of Scriptures to their own opinions, which is shameful.

Jeremiah 8:8 "How can you say, 'We are wise, And the law of the LORD is with us'? But behold, the lying pen of the scribes Has made it into a lie.
9 "The wise men are put to shame, They are dismayed and caught; Behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD..."





The words are only ambiguous to those who refuse to consult accredited language resources but rely solely on online books written by people with zero qualifications in Hebrew, Greek or any other relevant field, e.g. Hope Beyond Hell.

Even a blind man could see from your own 9 sources the ambiguity.


Really very simple. I speak more than one language. When I speak in another language I depend on the meaning that a native speaker assigns to a word.

Then you should understand, as do your lexicons & many other equally valid sources, that the words aion, olam & aionios are used of finite duration.


I posted several quotes from the ECF. How did the ECF use the word "aionios?" See my

What do these carefully select alleged "quotes" in English from a solitary biased translator prove? Nothing. An objective study of the word from all writers of the time they are not.

"Of course there were antiuniversalists also in the ancient church, but scholars must be careful not to list among them — as is the case with the list of “the 68” antiuniversalists repeatedly cited by McC on the basis of Brian Daley’s The Hope of the Early Church — an author just because he uses πῦρ αἰώνιον, κόλασις αἰώνιος, θάνατος αἰώνιος, or the like, since these biblical expressions do not necessarily refer to eternal damnation. Indeed all universalists, from Origen to Gregory Nyssen to Evagrius, used these phrases without problems, for universalists understood these expressions as “otherworldly,” or “long-lasting,” fire, educative punishment, and death. Thus, the mere presence of such phrases is not enough to conclude that a patristic thinker “affirmed the idea of everlasting punishment” (p. 822). Didache mentions the ways of life and death, but not eternal death or torment; Ignatius, as others among “the 68,” never mentions eternal punishment. Ephrem does not speak of eternal damnation, but has many hints of healing and restoration. For Theodore of Mopsuestia, another of “the 68,” if one takes into account also the Syriac and Latin evidence, given that the Greek is mostly lost, it becomes impossible to list him among the antiuniversalists. He explicitly ruled out unending retributive punishment, sine fine et sine correctione."

The Christian Doctrine of Apokatastasis: The Reviews Start Coming In
SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class journal research

Ilaria Ramelli, The Christian Doctrine of Apokatastasis: A Critical Assessment from the New Testament to Eriugena (Brill, 2013. 890 pp.)

Scholars directory, with list of publications:

Ilaria L.E. Ramelli - ISNS Scholars Directory



–• 1917 JPS Daniel 12:2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to reproaches and everlasting abhorrence.


The context supports the view that both the life & the punishment referred to in v.2 are of finite duration (OLAM), while v.3 speaks of those who will be for OLAM "and further".

2 From those sleeping in the soil of the ground many shall awake, these to eonian life
and these to reproach for eonian repulsion." 3 The intelligent shall warn as the warning
of the atmosphere, and those justifying many are as the stars for the eon and further."
(Dan.12:2-3, CLOT)

The Hebrew word for eonian (v.2) & eon (v.3) above is OLAM which is used of limited durations in the OT. In verse 3 of Daniel 12 are the words "OLAM and further" showing an example of its finite duration in the very next words after Daniel 12:2. Thus, in context, the OLAM occurences in v.2 should both be understood as being of finite duration.

Compare v.3:

l·oulm u·od
for·eon and·futurity

http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/OTpdf/dan12.pdf

OJB Hashem shall reign l’olam va’ed.
Yahweh shall rule to the eon and beyond (Exo 15:18)
Universal Version Bible The Torah By William Petr

Habbukah 3:6:

JPS Tanakh 1917
He standeth, and shaketh the earth, He beholdeth, and maketh the nations to tremble; And the everlasting[olam] mountains are dashed in pieces, The ancient[olam] hills do bow; His goings are as of old[olam].

Young's Literal Translation
He hath stood, and He measureth earth, He hath seen, and He shaketh off nations, And scatter themselves do mountains of antiquity, Bowed have the hills of old, The ways of old are His.

CLV
He stands and is measuring the earth; he sees and is letting loose the nations. And the mountain ranges of futurity are scattering; the eonian hills bow down; his goings are eonian.

Daniel 12:2:

Young's Literal Translation
'And the multitude of those sleeping in the dust of the ground do awake, some to life
age-during, and some to reproaches -- to abhorrence age-during. (Dan.12:2)

Rotherham
and, many of the sleepers in the dusty ground, shall awake,—these, [shall be] to age-
abiding life, but, those, to reproach, and age-abiding abhorrence; (Dan.12:2)

https://www.tentmaker.org/books/hope_beyond_hell.pdf
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

mkgal1

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33
Supporter
Jun 22, 2007
27,339
7,349
California
✟551,233.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
What did aionios mean to native Greek speakers who did not have years of indoctrination by pastors who insist that aionios does not mean eternal? Why don't we ask some early Greek writers.
St Gregory of Nyssa is an example of one such writer.
For credible Greek languages sources on the meaning of aionios see my [post #1093] And here is the complete definition of Olam from the Theological Wordbook of the old Testament.

1631a II עלם ('ôlam) forever, ever, everlasting, evermore, perpetual, old, ancient, world, etc.

Just look at the translated verses, though. How can "olam" mean "forever" when there's evidence it's NOT forever (in relation to Sodom, for instance).

ETA Bible verses:

"Sodom and Gomorra and the neighboring towns are now displayed as an example by suffering the punishment of eternal fire."~Jude 1:7

and

"As for your sisters, Sodom and her daughters and Samaria and her daughters will return to their former state. You and your daughters will also return to your former state. "~Ezekiel 16:55

Are you suggesting the translations are in error....?



The thing is.....there is no "winner" in this debate. There're 3 main views of eternity that are all accepted by the Church (because it's far too ambiguously written about). I think the best attitude is to believe "dare we hope" as Hans Urs von Balthasar wrote:
images
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,576
6,063
EST
✟992,249.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I was merely saying where I got the quotes from. That's all. I don't try to elevate my stance by using descriptions like, "highly respected"......"admired by many"....."very credible"....etc.
I have not used any of those terms. The problem is it appears that your entire quote was a copy/paste from Ilaria L.E. Ramelli which you did not identify as such.
Earlier you'd asked for supportive writings of St Gregory of Nyssa and Origen (and citations)...."credible, verifiable, historical evidence" is what you'd written. There it is (with all the work cited).
And another problem you did not quote Gregory of Nyssa or Origen. You quoted from Ilaria Ramelli some truncated quotes allegedly from Gregory and Origen. Have you actually read anything written by either one? Did you happen to read Ilaria Ramelli's qualifications. Ph.D. (Classical Philology and Culture of the Ancient World) Nothing in this discipline which would qualify her to write books on the NT and Greek.
 
Upvote 0

ClementofA

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jul 10, 2016
5,459
2,197
Vancouver
✟310,073.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Did you happen to read Ilaria Ramelli's qualifications. Ph.D. (Classical Philology and Culture of the Ancient World) Nothing in this discipline which would qualify her to write books on the NT and Greek.

What qualifies you to be the judge of who is qualified?

Can you read the hearts of men & know if they were being moral or honest in their opinions?

Do you know they weren't influenced by their theological biases or evil motives like filthy lucre & position?

For all you know they could have been influenced or possessed by demonic spirits.

There is more to determining an accurate understanding of what ancient writers meanings were than having a balloon sized head full of PHDs in dead languages. There are also disciplines in logic, history, etc. Ramelli's expertise probably surprasses your sources in certain regards.

In fact, your sources tend to ignore Origen & other Early Church Father universalists use of words such as aionios & kolasis. They prefer the gay pagan Plato & the gay King James tradition.

Jeremiah 8:8 "How can you say, 'We are wise, And the law of the LORD is with us'? But behold, the lying pen of the scribes Has made it into a lie.
9 "The wise men are put to shame, They are dismayed and caught; Behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD..."


"The Third Law of Theology: For every theologian there is an equal and opposite theologian."

1 John 2:27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.

https://www.tentmaker.org/books/hope_beyond_hell.pdf
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

mkgal1

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33
Supporter
Jun 22, 2007
27,339
7,349
California
✟551,233.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
I have not used any of those terms. The problem is it appears that your entire quote was a copy/paste from Ilaria L.E. Ramelli which you did not identify as such.
If one were to use the links I had embedded, all the citations and link to the article were there.

You have used words like, "REAL scholars"....."credible sources".... and such.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,576
6,063
EST
✟992,249.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I have read all your 9 sources & many other lexicons, dictionaries, translations, etc, and as a rule they generally say very little if anything on how they assign 'eternal' to passages such as Mt.25:46. Of course if they said otherwise, who would buy their books, LOL!
Then many people bow down to them like they are an infallible authority & kiss the ring. The funny thing is they don't even agree with each other.
"The Third Law of Theology: For every theologian there is an equal and opposite theologian."
1 John 2:27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.
Where is your evidence any universalists translated olam, aion or aionios based on doctrinal bias?
Your "qualified" men following the Douay & KJV traditions of men of "the church" of the Inquisitions, Crusades & dark ages have been caught in a deception (Jer.8:8-9):
Considering, then, that the Greek word aionios has a range of meanings, biased men should not have rendered the word in Mt.25:46 by their theological opinions as "everlasting". Thus they did not translate the word, but interpreted it. OTOH the versions with age-lasting, eonian & the like gave faithful translations & left the interpreting up to the readers as to what specific meaning within the "range of meanings" the word holds in any specific context. What biased scholars after the Douay & KJV traditions of the dark ages "church" have done is change the words of Scriptures to their own opinions, which is shameful.
Jeremiah 8:8 "How can you say, 'We are wise, And the law of the LORD is with us'? But behold, the lying pen of the scribes Has made it into a lie.
9 "The wise men are put to shame, They are dismayed and caught; Behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD..."
Even a blind man could see from your own 9 sources the ambiguity.
Then you should understand, as do your lexicons & many other equally valid sources, that the words aion, olam & aionios are used of finite duration.
What do these carefully select alleged "quotes" in English from a solitary biased translator prove? Nothing. An objective study of the word from all writers of the time they are not.
Same specious objections over and over If you call someone biased you have to prove it, you have not and cannot do that so that accusation is meaningless. No you carefully select alleged quotes from people with no, zero, none qualifications in either Greek or Hebrew.
"Of course there were antiuniversalists also in the ancient church, but scholars must be careful not to list among them — as is the case with the list of “the 68” antiuniversalists repeatedly cited by McC on the basis of Brian Daley’s The Hope of the Early Church — an author just because he uses πῦρ αἰώνιον, κόλασις αἰώνιος, θάνατος αἰώνιος, or the like, since these biblical expressions do not necessarily refer to eternal damnation. Indeed all universalists, from Origen to Gregory Nyssen to Evagrius, used these phrases without problems, for universalists understood these expressions as “otherworldly,” or “long-lasting,” fire, educative punishment, and death. Thus, the mere presence of such phrases is not enough to conclude that a patristic thinker “affirmed the idea of everlasting punishment” (p. 822). Didache mentions the ways of life and death, but not eternal death or torment; Ignatius, as others among “the 68,” never mentions eternal punishment. Ephrem does not speak of eternal damnation, but has many hints of healing and restoration. For Theodore of Mopsuestia, another of “the 68,” if one takes into account also the Syriac and Latin evidence, given that the Greek is mostly lost, it becomes impossible to list him among the antiuniversalists. He explicitly ruled out unending retributive punishment, sine fine et sine correctione."
Biased unsupported quote from someone who has no stated qualifications in Hebrew or Greek or any relevant discipline.

The context supports the view that both the life & the punishment referred to in v.2 are of finite duration (OLAM), while v.3 speaks of those who will be for OLAM "and further".
2 From those sleeping in the soil of the ground many shall awake, these to eonian life
and these to reproach for eonian repulsion." 3 The intelligent shall warn as the warning
of the atmosphere, and those justifying many are as the stars for the eon and further."
(Dan.12:2-3, CLOT)

The Hebrew word for eonian (v.2) & eon (v.3) above is OLAM which is used of limited durations in the OT. In verse 3 of Daniel 12 are the words "OLAM and further" showing an example of its finite duration in the very next words after Daniel 12:2. Thus, in context, the OLAM occurences in v.2 should both be understood as being of finite duration.
Compare v.3:
l·oulm u·od
for·eon and·futurity
OJB Hashem shall reign l’olam va’ed.
Yahweh shall rule to the eon and beyond (Exo 15:18)
Universal Version Bible The Torah By William Petr

Habbukah 3:6:
JPS Tanakh 1917
He standeth, and shaketh the earth, He beholdeth, and maketh the nations to tremble; And the everlasting[olam] mountains are dashed in pieces, The ancient[olam] hills do bow; His goings are as of old[olam].
Irrelevant! Now you are using unqualified translations i.e. Young's and Rotherham to criticize translations by Hebrew speaking Jews. One or two examples of hyperbolic language does not prove anything. There are actual stones and a devil but Peter was not either one when Jesus called him that. There were actual foxes but Herod was not one when Jesus called him that. There is actual thunder but James and John were not actually sons of thunder when Jesus called them that. Hyperbole! Hyperbole! Hypebole! Hyperbole does not change the inherent meaning of a word.
Young's Literal Translation
He hath stood, and He measureth earth, He hath seen, and He shaketh off nations, And scatter themselves do mountains of antiquity, Bowed have the hills of old, The ways of old are His.
CLV
He stands and is measuring the earth; he sees and is letting loose the nations. And the mountain ranges of futurity are scattering; the eonian hills bow down; his goings are eonian.
Daniel 12:2:
Young's Literal Translation
'And the multitude of those sleeping in the dust of the ground do awake, some to life
age-during, and some to reproaches -- to abhorrence age-during. (Dan.12:2)

Rotherham.
All irrelevant as is the book hope beyond hell.

Robert Young (1822-1888) was a Scottish editor and publisher who became proficient in several ancient languages through self-study. Below I reproduce the biographical article on Young in The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge edited by Samuel M. Jackson (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1964 reprint), vol. XII, p. 490.
YOUNG, ROBERT: Lay theologian and orientalist; b. at Edinburgh Sept. 10, 1822; d. there Oct. 14, 1888. He received his education at private schools, 1827-38; served an apprenticeship to the printing business, 1838-45, using his spare time to study the oriental languages; became a communicant in 1842; joined the Free Church, and became a Sabbath-school teacher in 1843. In 1847 he took up printing and bookselling on his own account, proceeding to publish books that tended to further the study of the Old Testament and its ancient versions; his first publication was an edition with translation of Maimonides' 613 precepts.
...
Young's translation is designed to assist students in the close study of the Biblical text by reproducing in English the Hebrew and Greek idioms, in an exceedingly literal translation. In the New Testament his translation is based on the text of Estienne 1550. The character of the version may be judged from the sample passage below. It will be noticed that the English is highly unnatural. In the pursuit of minute accuracy, Young tries to represent the Greek tenses with certain English tenses consistently, he tries to adhere to the word-order of the original, and he consistently translates a Greek word with the same English word in all of its occurrences. But in doing these things, he often fails to give the sense of the Greek correctly in English. It is doubtful whether the translation is really of much help to those who do not know Greek, because here the English is being forced to observe rules of the Greek language. The reader must become familiar with Greek syntax and vocabulary in order to make sense of the English! Regarding Young's translation of the Old Testament, F.F. Bruce writes that "it is largely vitiated by an eccentric theory about the tenses of the Hebrew verb." (The English Bible: A History of Translations, p. 132.) The method of the translation and its rationale—including his theory of the Hebrew tenses—are fully explained in the Prefaces.
Young's Literal Translation
New Testament, 1872. Joseph Bryant Rotherham, The New Testament: newly translated from the Greek text of Tregelles and critically emphasised, according to the logical idiom of the original; with an introduction and occasional notes. London: Samuel Bagster and Sons, 1872.
The translation itself is very difficult and peculiar, and indeed it can scarcely be called English. It resembles the kind of barbarous and occasionally absurd output one gets from translation software applications. The reason is, Rotherham produced the version in the same way that a computer would—he mechanically reproduced the order of the Greek words, no matter how unatural the result in English; he used the same English gloss for all occurrences of a Greek word, without any regard for contextual appropriateness; and he rendered the tenses of the Greek verbs into stereotyped English tenses, without any allowance for the differences between English and Greek grammar. He also did such things as refrain from using the English definite article "the" where the text did not have the Greek article, despite the fact that English usage does not correspond to Greek usage in this matter. Moreover, he seems to have had uninformed notions about the meaning of various Greek words, often preferring a 'root' meaning arrived at by some etymological fallacy. And so we see in the page above such renderings as "Why any longer am even I as a sinner to be judged;" (following the Greek word order); "do we screen ourselves" (giving an eccentric 'root' meaning to the Greek word); "a way of peace they did not get to know" (omitting the article, and attempting to represent the Greek aorist with a 'punctiliar' verbal tense in English), and so forth. Some flagrant examples of these tendencies to be found on other pages are:
Rotherham Version
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,576
6,063
EST
✟992,249.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
What qualifies you to be the judge of who is qualified?....
Their stated or listed qualifications. That someone has written something and had it printed does not make them qualified in whatever subject they wrote on. Anyone with enough money can do that. Here are the "qualifications" of the person who wrote hope beyond hell from his web page.
What qualifies Gerry to write on this theme? He has extensively reflected upon, read the works of others, and for many years wrestled with and studied the Scriptures on this topic. He has found solid Biblical evidence for his conclusion of hope. Having agonized for most of his life over hell he understands the contradictions it brings upon the Christian faith. Gerry thought, “Who am I to write such a book?” Then he recalled 1Co. 1:26-29, “God has chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise…that no flesh should glory in his presence.” This along with Mt 10:27 and 11:25 spurred him on.
ABOUT – Hope Beyond Hell
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

ClementofA

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jul 10, 2016
5,459
2,197
Vancouver
✟310,073.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Their stated or listed qualifications.


Who did the 12 follow, Jesus or those (Pharisees, Sadducees & scribes) with "qualifications"?

"Jesus warned His disciples to “watch out and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and the Sadducees,” which was their false teaching (Matt. 16:6,12)."

The Pharisees taught everlasting torments.

"Not giving heed to Jewish myths, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth." (Titus 1:14). Jesus said re the Pharisees: "...in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men." (Mt.15:8-9)

"But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in." (Matthew 23:13)

"Woe to you, blind guides! You say, 'If anyone swears by the temple, it means nothing; but if anyone swears by the gold of the temple, he is bound by his oath.'" (Matthew 23:16)

"Woe to you experts in the law! For you have taken away the key to knowledge. You yourselves have not entered, and you have hindered those who were entering." (Luke 11:52)

Jeremiah 8:8 "How can you say, 'We are wise, And the law of the LORD is with us'? But behold, the lying pen of the scribes Has made it into a lie. 9 "The wise men are put to shame, They are dismayed and caught; Behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD..."

Student: What is a theological cemetery?
MASTER: An institution of higher learning, approved of men.
Student: What's buried there?
Master: The truth of God.

1 Timothy 4:1 "Now the spirit is saying explicitly, that in subsequent eras some will be withdrawing from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and the teachings of demons, 2 in the hypocrisy of false expressions, their own conscience having been cauterized;"
10 For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe. 11 These things command and teach.

1 Corinthians 1:18 Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise.
19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.
20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?
1 Corinthians 1:27 But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong.

Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. (Jn.14:6)

Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth (Jn.16:13a)

https://www.tentmaker.org/books/hope_beyond_hell.pdf

"The Third Law of Theology: For every theologian there is an equal and opposite theologian."
 
Upvote 0