Salvation for the Dead

Christodoulos · Jun 30, 2017

ClementofA said:
If you want to know how Origen defines aionios, you'ld need to do a study of ALL his uses of the word, not just in one instance, from a mere English translation, which is itself indecisive. And, being a universalist, proves nothing about his use of the word in regards to punishment.

The meaning of a word in any particular context requires you look at the context. The context of the quote you provide has nothing to do with punishment, so it is quite useless as regards determining Origen's view of the word in contexts regarding other subjects such as punishment, the 3 days(aionios) Jonah was in a sea creature, the amount of time(aionios) in the OT a man was to be a slave to another man, how long mountains would last(aionios) that are destroyed, etc.

"In On Principles 3.3.5, Origen gives a clear sign that he understands aiôn in the sense of a succession of aiônes prior to the final apocatastasis, at which point one arrives at the true eternity, that is, aïdiotês. Eternity in the strict sense pertains, according to Origen, to the apocatastasis, not to the previous sequence of ages or aiônes. So too, Origen explains that Christ "reigned without flesh prior to the ages, and reigned in the flesh in the ages" (aiôniôs, adverb). Again, the "coming aiôn" indicates the next world (epi ton mellonta aiôna), where sinners will indeed be consigned to the pur aionion, that is, the fire that pertains to the future world; it may well last for a long time, but it is not, for Origen, eternal.

"In this connection, it seems particularly significant that Origen calls the fire of damnation pur aiônion, but never pur aïdion. The explanation is that he does not consider this flame to be absolutely eternal: it is aiônion because it belongs to the next world, as opposed to the fire we experience in this present world, and it lasts as long as the aiônes do, in their succession. Similarly, Origen never speaks of thanatos aïdios, or of aïdia punishments and torments and the like, although he does speak of thanatos aiônios or death in the world to come (kolaseis aiônioi), i.e. punishment in the world to come.

"Origen was deeply learned in both the Bible and the classical philosophical tradition; what is more, he maintained that damnation was not eternal, but served rather to purify the wicked, who would in the end be saved in the universal apocatastasis. His careful deployment of the adjectives aiônios and aïdios reflects, we have argued, both his sensitivity to the meaning of the latter among the Greek philosophers, and the distinction that is apparently observed in the use of these terms in the Bible. For Origen, this was further evidence in Scripture for the doctrine of universal salvation."

"Terms for Eternity: Aiônios & aïdios" talk part 2

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

The title of the pdf document is interesting, "hope beyond hell". According to the Bible that I read, and the Message that Jesus Christ and Paul and all of the others preached, is, that the ONLY real hope beyond the grave for the lost dead, is that they get saved BEFORE they die and leave this world! This is one of the biggest LIES that the devil has promoted, and many are lapping-up, and sadly, many who would otherwise be "evangelical" born-again christians. There is NO post-death salvation for ANYONE, there is NO hope for ANY sinner who does not repent NOW, BEFORE it is too late. PLEASE do NOT fall for the deceptions of the devil, who is the "father of LIES", and as Christ has said, will deceive even the elect, if it were possible, and we are seen this more and more, as evident right here on this board. People are so blinded to Biblical Truth, and sadly, they do not want to know what the Holy Bible really says. As we can see from those who promote doctrine of demons, that somehow the entire human race will end up in heaven! What complete and utter LIES!!!

CrystalDragon · Jun 30, 2017

Christodoulos said:
Are Roman Catholics anti-Bible and anti-God? Some of their posts here are against what the Bible says and Who God really is!

I could easily show you Bible verses that highlight my point.

Der Alte · Jun 30, 2017

ClementofA said:
If you want to know how Origen defines aionios, you'ld need to do a study of ALL his uses of the word, not just in one instance, from a mere English translation, which is itself indecisive. And, being a universalist, proves nothing about his use of the word in regards to punishment....

There is no valid cogent argument here. Please let me know when you have reviewed all of Origen's uses of aionios, in the original languages, not just the few selective out-of-context instances in the second hand pet sources. you quote.
.....Your objection to Paul and Origen's explanation of the word "Aionios." does not merit consideration. Origen said more than once "the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are unseen are eternal." "All things" not just a select few. Origen defines "aionios" as the opposite of temporary more than once just as Paul did.

2 Corinthians 4:18 While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal..

Note Paul contrasts aionios with temporary. Funny how I am continually commanded to do a complete word study of everything I post, while the one demanding this all he does is copy/paste the same second hand stuff over and over and over without checking anything. So same ol' copy/paste ignored.

2PhiloVoid · Jun 30, 2017

CrystalDragon said:
You wouldn't torture people for not listening, would you?

How do we know God is just? Plenty of things God allows, commands, or says in the Old Testament indicat the opposite.

Crystal......I know you don't intend to come across this way, but the way you make it sound sometimes, it would almost seem it would be appropriate for us all to find the nearest trash can and toss our Bibles in. Just sayin'

Peace,
2PhiloVoid

ClementofA · Jun 30, 2017

Der Alter said:
.....Your objection to Paul and Origen's explanation of the word "Aionios." does not merit consideration.

You basicly ignored all my comments & repeated your lame stuff again.

"In On Principles 3.3.5, Origen gives a clear sign that he understands aiôn in the sense of a succession of aiônes prior to the final apocatastasis, at which point one arrives at the true eternity, that is, aïdiotês. Eternity in the strict sense pertains, according to Origen, to the apocatastasis, not to the previous sequence of ages or aiônes. So too, Origen explains that Christ "reigned without flesh prior to the ages, and reigned in the flesh in the ages" (aiôniôs, adverb). Again, the "coming aiôn" indicates the next world (epi ton mellonta aiôna), where sinners will indeed be consigned to the pur aionion, that is, the fire that pertains to the future world; it may well last for a long time, but it is not, for Origen, eternal.

"In this connection, it seems particularly significant that Origen calls the fire of damnation pur aiônion, but never pur aïdion. The explanation is that he does not consider this flame to be absolutely eternal: it is aiônion because it belongs to the next world, as opposed to the fire we experience in this present world, and it lasts as long as the aiônes do, in their succession. Similarly, Origen never speaks of thanatos aïdios, or of aïdia punishments and torments and the like, although he does speak of thanatos aiônios or death in the world to come (kolaseis aiônioi), i.e. punishment in the world to come.

"Origen was deeply learned in both the Bible and the classical philosophical tradition; what is more, he maintained that damnation was not eternal, but served rather to purify the wicked, who would in the end be saved in the universal apocatastasis. His careful deployment of the adjectives aiônios and aïdios reflects, we have argued, both his sensitivity to the meaning of the latter among the Greek philosophers, and the distinction that is apparently observed in the use of these terms in the Bible. For Origen, this was further evidence in Scripture for the doctrine of universal salvation."

"Terms for Eternity: Aiônios & aïdios" talk part 2

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

ClementofA · Jun 30, 2017

Christodoulos said:
The title of the pdf document is interesting, "hope beyond hell". According to the Bible that I read, and the Message that Jesus Christ and Paul and all of the others preached, is, that the ONLY real hope beyond the grave for the lost dead, is that they get saved BEFORE they die and leave this world! This is one of the biggest LIES that the devil has promoted, and many are lapping-up, and sadly, many who would otherwise be "evangelical" born-again christians. There is NO post-death salvation for ANYONE, there is NO hope for ANY sinner who does not repent NOW, BEFORE it is too late. PLEASE do NOT fall for the deceptions of the devil, who is the "father of LIES", and as Christ has said, will deceive even the elect, if it were possible, and we are seen this more and more, as evident right here on this board. People are so blinded to Biblical Truth, and sadly, they do not want to know what the Holy Bible really says. As we can see from those who promote doctrine of demons, that somehow the entire human race will end up in heaven! What complete and utter LIES!!!

A strange comment from someone who could not refute, and did not answer, my posts to him on the subject, which included a number of Scripture references & discussions. As if declaring something with no Scriptural support has any more validity than allegedly infallible declarations of a pontiff.

I submit the following for your perusal.

"The Lord knows how to deliver the devout out of trial, but to reserve the unrighteous for a day of judgment, to be corrected. (2 Peter 2:9)

Here is an interlinear for your consideration:
οιδεν—κυριος— ευσεβεις εκ πειρασμου ρυεσθαι— αδικους
knows the Lord- devout—out of trial—— to deliver-unrighteous

δε -εις —ημεραν κρισεως—— κολαζομενους τηρειν
but into a day—- of judgment to be corrected to keep (2 Peter 2:9)

The whole strength of this “proof” lies in the translation of the lexical form of κολαζομενους, that is, “κολαζω” as “to correct”. I realize that some may object to this translation, but the Online Bible Greek Lexicon gives the primary meanings of “κολαζω”as:
1. to lop or prune
2. to chastise, correct, punish

Abbott-Smith's A Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament gives the meanings:
1. to curtail, dock, prune
2. to check, restrain
3. to chastise, correct, punish

Originally, the word was used to reference to the pruning of trees, shrubs, or vines with a view to correcting their growth by shaping them. Later it was used figuratively with reference to the correction of people, e.g. Children. To translate the word as “punish” is correct as long as it is understood to be reformative rather than retributive. In English, “punish” may have either connotation, although it is more often taken in the latter sense, or in the sense of administering a penalty.

In Greek, the word “τιμωρεω” has the meaning “to punish” in the retributive sense. Indeed, every lexicon I have checked gives the primary meaning as “to avenge”. Strongs indicates that the word was derived from the two words “τιμη” (honour) and “οὐρος”(guard). Put them together, and you have the concept of a person guarding his honour through vengeance. In recording Paul's own words concerning his treatment of disciples of Christ prior to Paul's becoming a disciple himself, Luke wrote:

Acts 22:5 "as also the high priest bears me witness, and all the council of the elders, from whom I also received letters to the brethren, and went to Damascus to bring in chains even those who were there to Jerusalem to be punished (τιμωρεω).
Acts 26:11 "and I punished (τιμωρεω) them often in every synagogue and compelled them to blaspheme; and being exceedingly enraged against them, I persecuted them even to foreign cities.

One of the best ways to get a sense of how a Greek word is used is to note how it is used in literature. The word is used in 4 Macabees 2:12 to indicate correction of children. No good parent punishes his children out of vengeance, but corrects them out of love.

4 Macabees is thought to have been written sometime between 100 B.C. to 100 A.D., that is, in the period in which the New Testament was written. It seems the author had been strongly moved by his reading of the deeds of Antiochus Ephiphanes against the Jews in 1 and 2 Macabees. So much of his “philosophical” thought and “devout reason” centers around the history he read there. In the following sentence he uses both “τιμωρεω” and “ κολαζω“ in a single sentence!

The tyrant Antiochus was both punished (τιμωρεω) on earth and is being corrected (κολαζω) after his death. (4 Maccabees 18:5)

The Judaistic belief at the time was that people's souls survive death. So the sentence seems to say that while Antochus's enemies got their revenge on him and his armies here on earth, God began to correct his soul after death. The author apparently held that post-mortem punishment was remedial. Otherwise he would not have chosen the word “κολαζω” but would have maintained the word “τιμωρεω” for his punishment after death, too.

Here is an example from the Septuagint translation of Ezekiel 43:10-11:

And you, son of man, show to the household of Israel, the house, and show its appearance and its arrangement,that they may cease from their sins. And they shall receive their κολασις concerning all their doings, and you shall describe the house, and its entrances and its foundation, and all its systems, and you shall make known to them all it regulations and describe them in their presence, and they shall guard all my righteous ordinances and all my commands and do them. (Ezekiel 43:10-11)

In this passage, God states His purpose in asking Ezekiel to show the house to Israel, namely that they may cease from their sins. He immediately follows this with “And they shall receive their κολασις concerning all their doings.” If God wants them to cease from their sins, and then gives them κολασις, is he punishing them retributively, or is He correcting them? The answer seems plain. Furthermore the conclusion of the matter is that the Israelites “will guard all my righteous ordinances and all my commands and do them.”

Surely this is reformation, and not mere revenge for their wrongdoing in the past.
Here is the Concordant translation of the verse in question:

The Lord is acquainted with the rescue of the devout out of trial, yet is keeping the unjust for chastening in the day of judging."

Why is Universal Salvation not Explicit?

Der Alte · Jun 30, 2017

ClementofA said:
You basicly ignored all my comments & repeated your lame stuff again.
"In On Principles 3.3.5, Origen gives a clear sign that he understands aiôn in the sense of a succession of aiônes prior to the final apocatastasis, at which point one arrives at the true eternity, that is, aïdiotês. Eternity in the strict sense pertains, according to Origen, to the apocatastasis, not to the previous sequence of ages or aiônes. So too, Origen explains that Christ "reigned without flesh prior to the ages, and reigned in the flesh in the ages" (aiôniôs, adverb). Again, the "coming aiôn" indicates the next world (epi ton mellonta aiôna), where sinners will indeed be consigned to the pur aionion, that is, the fire that pertains to the future world; it may well last for a long time, but it is not, for Origen, eternal.
"In this connection, it seems particularly significant that Origen calls the fire of damnation pur aiônion, but never pur aïdion. The explanation is that he does not consider this flame to be absolutely eternal: it is aiônion because it belongs to the next world, as opposed to the fire we experience in this present world, and it lasts as long as the aiônes do, in their succession. Similarly, Origen never speaks of thanatos aïdios, or of aïdia punishments and torments and the like, although he does speak of thanatos aiônios or death in the world to come (kolaseis aiônioi), i.e. punishment in the world to come.
"Origen was deeply learned in both the Bible and the classical philosophical tradition; what is more, he maintained that damnation was not eternal, but served rather to purify the wicked, who would in the end be saved in the universal apocatastasis. His careful deployment of the adjectives aiônios and aïdios reflects, we have argued, both his sensitivity to the meaning of the latter among the Greek philosophers, and the distinction that is apparently observed in the use of these terms in the Bible. For Origen, this was further evidence in Scripture for the doctrine of universal salvation."

Do not talk to me about ignoring! That is all you do, whenever I post anything your response is the same ol' copy/paste from tentmakers.
Let me know when you have personally checked out every second hand quote you post. For example I just did a search in Origen De Principiis 3. I checked every occurrence of eternal and eternity. There is nothing in this writing in any way similar to "a succession of aiônes prior to the final apocatastasis, at which point one arrives at the true eternity," The word "eternity' does not occur in De Princ 3. Here is every occurrence of "eternal" in DePrinc 3

For God deals with souls not merely with a view to the short space of our present life, included within sixty years88 or more, but with reference to a perpetual and never-ending period, exercising His providential care over souls that are immortal, even as He Himself is eternal and immortal.

I am, indeed, of opinion250 that, as the end and consummation of the saints will be in those (ages) which are not seen, and are eternal, we must conclude (as frequently pointed out in the preceding pages), from a contemplation of that very end, that rational creatures had also a similar beginning. And if they had a beginning such as the end for which they hope, they existed undoubtedly from the very beginning in those (ages) which are not seen, and are eternal.251
We have a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens,” (2Co_5:1) i.e., in the mansions of the blessed.
But of that body it is said, that it is a house not made with hands, but eternal in the heavens. Since, then, those things “which are seen are temporal, but those things which are not seen are eternal,” (2Co_4:18) all those bodies which we see either on earth or in heaven, and which are capable of being seen, and have been made with hands, but are not eternal, are far excelled in glory by that which is not visible, nor made with hands, but is eternal.

And in this condition, also, we are to believe, that by the will of the Creator, it will abide for ever without any change, as is confirmed by the declaration of the apostle, when he says, “We have a house, not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.”

ClementofA · Jun 30, 2017

Der Alter said:
For example I just did a search in Origen De Principiis 3. I checked every occurrence of eternal and eternity. There is nothing in this writing in any way similar to "a succession of aiônes prior to the final apocatastasis, at which point one arrives at the true eternity," The word "eternity' does not occur in De Princ 3.

What you were reading was not a quote of Origen but a commentary. Here you can find the passage in Origen referred to:

Evagrius's Kephalaia Gnostika: A New Translation of the Unreformed Text from ...
By Ilaria L.E. Ramelli [p.10]
Evagrius's Kephalaia Gnostika

Der Alte · Jun 30, 2017

ClementofA said:
What you were reading was not a quote of Origen but a commentary. Here you can find the passage in Origen referred to:
Evagrius's Kephalaia Gnostika: A New Translation of the Unreformed Text from ...By Ilaria L.E. Ramelli [p.10]

Sorry wrong again, same ol' copy/paste from the same tired ol' sources. What you linked to was a commentary! What I quoted was directly from Origen. Here is a link where you can check the primary source not second hand commentary and twisting from Ilaria Ramelli.
CHURCH FATHERS: De Principiis, Book III (Origen)

Der Alte · Jun 30, 2017

ClementofA said:
A strange comment from someone who could not refute, and did not answer, my posts to him on the subject, which included a number of Scripture references & discussions. As if declaring something with no Scriptural support has any more validity than allegedly infallible declarations of a pontiff.
I submit the following for your perusal.
"The Lord knows how to deliver the devout out of trial, but to reserve the unrighteous for a day of judgment, to be corrected. (2 Peter 2:9)
Here is an interlinear for your consideration:
οιδεν—κυριος— ευσεβεις εκ πειρασμου ρυεσθαι— αδικους
knows the Lord- devout—out of trial—— to deliver-unrighteous
δε -εις —ημεραν κρισεως—— κολαζομενους τηρειν
but into a day—- of judgment to be corrected to keep (2 Peter 2:9)
The whole strength of this “proof” lies in the translation of the lexical form of κολαζομενους, that is, “κολαζω” as “to correct”. I realize that some may object to this translation, but the Online Bible Greek Lexicon gives the primary meanings of “κολαζω”as:
1. to lop or prune
2. to chastise, correct, punish
Abbott-Smith's A Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament gives the meanings:
1. to curtail, dock, prune
2. to check, restrain
3. to chastise, correct, punish
Originally, the word was used to reference to the pruning of trees, shrubs, or vines with a view to correcting their growth by shaping them. Later it was used figuratively with reference to the correction of people, e.g. Children. To translate the word as “punish” is correct as long as it is understood to be reformative rather than retributive. In English, “punish” may have either connotation, although it is more often taken in the latter sense, or in the sense of administering a penalty.
In Greek, the word “τιμωρεω” has the meaning “to punish” in the retributive sense. Indeed, every lexicon I have checked gives the primary meaning as “to avenge”. Strongs indicates that the word was derived from the two words “τιμη” (honour) and “οὐρος”(guard). Put them together, and you have the concept of a person guarding his honour through vengeance. In recording Paul's own words concerning his treatment of disciples of Christ prior to Paul's becoming a disciple himself, Luke wrote:
Acts 22:5 "as also the high priest bears me witness, and all the council of the elders, from whom I also received letters to the brethren, and went to Damascus to bring in chains even those who were there to Jerusalem to be punished (τιμωρεω).
Acts 26:11 "and I punished (τιμωρεω) them often in every synagogue and compelled them to blaspheme; and being exceedingly enraged against them, I persecuted them even to foreign cities.
One of the best ways to get a sense of how a Greek word is used is to note how it is used in literature. The word is used in 4 Macabees 2:12 to indicate correction of children. No good parent punishes his children out of vengeance, but corrects them out of love.
4 Macabees is thought to have been written sometime between 100 B.C. to 100 A.D., that is, in the period in which the New Testament was written. It seems the author had been strongly moved by his reading of the deeds of Antiochus Ephiphanes against the Jews in 1 and 2 Macabees. So much of his “philosophical” thought and “devout reason” centers around the history he read there. In the following sentence he uses both “τιμωρεω” and “ κολαζω“ in a single sentence!
The tyrant Antiochus was both punished (τιμωρεω) on earth and is being corrected (κολαζω) after his death. (4 Maccabees 18:5)
The Judaistic belief at the time was that people's souls survive death. So the sentence seems to say that while Antochus's enemies got their revenge on him and his armies here on earth, God began to correct his soul after death. The author apparently held that post-mortem punishment was remedial. Otherwise he would not have chosen the word “κολαζω” but would have maintained the word “τιμωρεω” for his punishment after death, too.
Here is an example from the Septuagint translation of Ezekiel 43:10-11:
And you, son of man, show to the household of Israel, the house, and show its appearance and its arrangement,that they may cease from their sins. And they shall receive their κολασις concerning all their doings, and you shall describe the house, and its entrances and its foundation, and all its systems, and you shall make known to them all it regulations and describe them in their presence, and they shall guard all my righteous ordinances and all my commands and do them. (Ezekiel 43:10-11)
In this passage, God states His purpose in asking Ezekiel to show the house to Israel, namely that they may cease from their sins. He immediately follows this with “And they shall receive their κολασις concerning all their doings.” If God wants them to cease from their sins, and then gives them κολασις, is he punishing them retributively, or is He correcting them? The answer seems plain. Furthermore the conclusion of the matter is that the Israelites “will guard all my righteous ordinances and all my commands and do them.”
Surely this is reformation, and not mere revenge for their wrongdoing in the past.
Here is the Concordant translation of the verse in question:
The Lord is acquainted with the rescue of the devout out of trial, yet is keeping the unjust for chastening in the day of judging."

The primary source your secondary source did not consult. Note the numerous historical references highlighted in blue.

κόλᾰσις, εως, punishment (so Hippocr. +; Diod. S. 1, 77, 9; 4, 44, 3; Aelian , V.H. 7, 15; Dit., Syll. 2 680, 13; LXX ; Philo , Leg. ad Gai. 7, Mos. 1, 96; Jos. , Ant. 17, 164; Sib. Or. 5, 388).
1. lit. k. uJpomevnein undergo punishment GOxy 6; deinai; k. (4 Macc 8:9 ) MPol 2:4; hJ ejpivmono" k. long-continued torture ibid. kakai; k. tou` diabovlou IRo 5:3. Of the martyrdom of Jesus PK 4 p. 15, 34. The smelling of the odor arising fr. sacrifices ironically described as punishment, injury (
s. kolavzw ) Dg 2:9.
2. of divine retribution ( Diod. S. 3, 61, 5; 16, 61, 1; Epict. 3, 11, 1; Dio Chrys. 80[30], 12; 2 Macc 4:38 al. in LXX ; Philo , Spec. Leg. 1, 55; 2, 196; Jos. , Ant. 1, 60 al. ): w. aijkismov" 1 Cl 11:1. Of eternal damnation ( w. qavnato" ) Dg 9:2 ( Diod. S. 8, 15, 1 k. ajqavnato" ). Of hell: tovpo" kolavsew" AP 6:21 (Simplicius in Epict. p. 13, 1 eij" ejkei`non to;n tovpon aiJ kolavsew" deovmenai yucai; katapevmpontai). ajpevrcesqai eij" k. aijwvnion go away into eternal punishment Mt 25:46 ; MPol 11:2 ( k. aij. as Test. Reub. 5:5, Ash. 7:5; Celsus 8, 48). rJuvesqai ejk th`" aijwnivou k. rescue fr. eternal punishment 2 Cl 6:7. th;n aijwvnion k. ejxagoravzesqai buy one’s freedom fr. eternal pun. MPol 2:3. kakai; k. tou` diabovlou IRo 5:3. k. tino" punishment for someth. (Ezk 14:3 , 4 , 7 ; 18:30 ; Philo , Fuga 65 aJmarthmavtwn k.) e[cein kovlasivn tina th`" ponhriva" aujtou` Hs 9, 18, 1. oJ fovbo" kovlasin e[cei fear has to do with punishment 1J 4:18 ( cf. Phil o, In Flacc. 96 fovbo" kolavsew" ). M-M. *
A Greek-English Lexicon Gingrich & Danker

ClementofA · Jun 30, 2017

[/QUOTE]

Der Alter said:
Sorry wrong again, same ol' copy/paste from the same tired ol' sources. What you linked to was a commentary!

Wrong, sir. My post was not "copy/paste".

Wrong #2. If you had bothered to look at what i linked it quoted Origen.

ClementofA · Jun 30, 2017

Der Alter said:
The primary source your secondary source did not consult. Note the numerous historical references highlighted in blue.

κόλᾰσις, εως, punishment (so Hippocr. +; Diod. S. 1, 77, 9; 4, 44, 3; Aelian , V.H. 7, 15; Dit., Syll. 2 680, 13; LXX ; Philo , Leg. ad Gai. 7, Mos. 1, 96; Jos. , Ant. 17, 164; Sib. Or. 5, 388).
1. lit. k. uJpomevnein undergo punishment GOxy 6; deinai; k. (4 Macc 8:9 ) MPol 2:4; hJ ejpivmono" k. long-continued torture ibid. kakai; k. tou` diabovlou IRo 5:3. Of the martyrdom of Jesus PK 4 p. 15, 34. The smelling of the odor arising fr. sacrifices ironically described as punishment, injury (
s. kolavzw ) Dg 2:9.
2. of divine retribution ( Diod. S. 3, 61, 5; 16, 61, 1; Epict. 3, 11, 1; Dio Chrys. 80[30], 12; 2 Macc 4:38 al. in LXX ; Philo , Spec. Leg. 1, 55; 2, 196; Jos. , Ant. 1, 60 al. ): w. aijkismov" 1 Cl 11:1. Of eternal damnation ( w. qavnato" ) Dg 9:2 ( Diod. S. 8, 15, 1 k. ajqavnato" ). Of hell: tovpo" kolavsew" AP 6:21 (Simplicius in Epict. p. 13, 1 eij" ejkei`non to;n tovpon aiJ kolavsew" deovmenai yucai; katapevmpontai). ajpevrcesqai eij" k. aijwvnion go away into eternal punishment Mt 25:46 ; MPol 11:2 ( k. aij. as Test. Reub. 5:5, Ash. 7:5; Celsus 8, 48). rJuvesqai ejk th`" aijwnivou k. rescue fr. eternal punishment 2 Cl 6:7. th;n aijwvnion k. ejxagoravzesqai buy one’s freedom fr. eternal pun. MPol 2:3. kakai; k. tou` diabovlou IRo 5:3. k. tino" punishment for someth. (Ezk 14:3 , 4 , 7 ; 18:30 ; Philo , Fuga 65 aJmarthmavtwn k.) e[cein kovlasivn tina th`" ponhriva" aujtou` Hs 9, 18, 1. oJ fovbo" kovlasin e[cei fear has to do with punishment 1J 4:18 ( cf. Phil o, In Flacc. 96 fovbo" kolavsew" ). M-M. *
A Greek-English Lexicon Gingrich & Danker

Your post cites Mt.25:46. The Greek word from my post does not occur there. It only occurs twice in the NT, once at 2 Pet.2:9, which your quote makes no mention of.

Christodoulos · Jul 1, 2017

CrystalDragon said:
I could easily show you Bible verses that highlight my point.

then do so!

Light of the East · Jul 1, 2017

Der Alter said:
Sorry wrong again, same ol' copy/paste from the same tired ol' sources. What you linked to was a commentary! What I quoted was directly from Origen. Here is a link where you can check the primary source not second hand commentary and twisting from Ilaria Ramelli.
CHURCH FATHERS: De Principiis, Book III (Origen)

One thing appears to be a problem, sir. Your link takes us to the New Advent site, which is a Latin Translation of the original. This means, of course, that it is erroneous when it translates "aionios" into "aeternal".

Can you show us the original Greek. I think it would be highly informative to this line of discussion to have the original Greek and not a Latin mistranslation.

Light of the East · Jul 1, 2017

Der Alter said:
Sorry wrong again, same ol' copy/paste from the same tired ol' sources. What you linked to was a commentary! What I quoted was directly from Origen. Here is a link where you can check the primary source not second hand commentary and twisting from Ilaria Ramelli.
CHURCH FATHERS: De Principiis, Book III (Origen)

Might I ask a question of you? Why does it bother you so much to think that perhaps the love of God is unending and eternal towards all souls? Why is it bothersome to you to think that perhaps even the worst of sinners could come to a point of turning from his evil?

I certainly want to see everyone who has done harm to another human being to get what is due him for such behavior. But those in the eternal punishment camp seem unsatisfied with punishment unless it lasts forever. Why?

Just curious to have your take on it.

Der Alte · Jul 1, 2017

Light of the East said:
One thing appears to be a problem, sir. Your link takes us to the New Advent site, which is a Latin Translation of the original. This means, of course, that it is erroneous when it translates "aionios" into "aeternal".
Can you show us the original Greek. I think it would be highly informative to this line of discussion to have the original Greek and not a Latin mistranslation.

You accused the English translation of the Latin of being erroneous. Now the burden of proof is on you to support that accusation. You find the Greek of Origen and prove that "aeternal" is erroneous. While you are doing that here is how Origen defines aionios.

Origen De Principiis. Book I. Chap. VI
3.But whether any of these orders who act under the government of the devil, and obey his wicked commands, will in a future world be converted to righteousness because of their possessing the faculty of freedom of will, or whether persistent and inveterate wickedness may be changed by the power of habit into nature, is a result which you yourself, reader, may approve of, if neither in these present worlds which are seen and temporal, nor in those which are unseen and are eternal, that portion is to differ wholly from the final unity and fitness of things. But in the meantime, both in those temporal worlds which are seen,
De Principiis. Book II. Chap. III
6. We must see, moreover, lest perhaps it is with reference to this that the apostle says, “While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen; for the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are unseen are eternal. For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.” (2 Corinthians 4:18-5:1) And when he says elsewhere, “Because I shall see the heavens, the works of Thy fingers,” (Psa_8:3) and when God said, regarding all things visible, by the mouth of His prophet, “My hand has formed all these things,” (Isa_66:2) He declares that that eternal house in the heavens which He promises to His saints was not made with hands, pointing out, doubtless, the difference of creation in things which are seen and in those which are not seen.
De Principiis. Book III chap. VI
4.Since, then, those things “which are seen are temporal, but those things which are not seen are eternal, ” all those bodies which we see either on earth or in heaven, and which are capable of being seen, and have been made with hands, but are not eternal, are far excelled in glory by that which is not visible, nor made with hands, but is eternal.
De Principiis. Book IV. Chap. I.
25. Thy shadow we shall live among the nations;” (Lam_4:20) at the time, viz., when He will more worthily transfer all the saints from a temporal to an everlasting Gospel, according to the designation, employed by John in the Apocalypse, of “an everlasting Gospel.” (Cf. Rev_14:6)
Origen Against Celsus. Book VI. Chap. XIX
Our Paul, moreover, educated by these words, and longing after things “supra-mundane” and “super-celestial,” and doing his utmost for their sake to attain them, says in the second Epistle to the Corinthians: “For our light affliction, which is but for a moment, worketh for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory; while we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are unseen are eternal. ”
De Principiis. Book III. Chap. VI
8.From which it appears to me, that as on this earth the law was a sort of schoolmaster to those who by it were to he conducted to Christ, in order that, being instructed and trained by it, they might more easily, after the training of the law, receive the more perfect principles of Christ; so also another earth, which receives into it all the saints, may first imbue and mould them by the institutions of the true and everlasting law, that they may more easily gain possession of those perfect institutions of heaven, to which nothing can be added; in which there will be, of a truth, that Gospel which is called everlasting, and that Testament, ever new, which shall never grow old.
De Principiis. Book III. Chap. I.
13.For God deals with souls not merely with a view to the short space of our present life, included within sixty years or more, but with reference to a perpetual and never-ending period, exercising His providential care over souls that are immortal, even as He Himself is eternal and immortal.

In 2 Cor 4:7-8 Paul tells us the meaning of aionios, twice. Origen quotes 2 Cor 4:17-18, above.

2 Corinthians 4:17-18
(17) For our light affliction, which is but for a moment, [παραυτίκα] worketh for us a far more exceeding and eternal [αἰώνιος/aionios] weight of glory;
(18) While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal [πρόσκαιρος]; but the things which are not seen are eternal.[αἰώνιος/aionios]
Matthew 25:46
(46) And these shall go away into everlasting [αἰώνιος/aionos] punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.
παραυτίκα parautika
From G3844 and a derivative of G846; at the very instant, that is, momentary: - but for a moment.
πρόσκαιρος proskairos
From G4314 and G2540; for the occasion only, that is, temporary: - dur- [eth] for awhile, endure for a time, for a season, temporal.

Der Alte · Jul 1, 2017

Light of the East said:
Might I ask a question of you? Why does it bother you so much to think that perhaps the love of God is unending and eternal towards all souls? Why is it bothersome to you to think that perhaps even the worst of sinners could come to a point of turning from his evil?
I certainly want to see everyone who has done harm to another human being to get what is due him for such behavior. But those in the eternal punishment camp seem unsatisfied with punishment unless it lasts forever. Why?
Just curious to have your take on it.

See my post immediately above and this.
.....Among the Jews in Israel before and during the time of Jesus was a belief in a place of everlasting torment of the wicked and they called it both sheol and gehinnom.

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, this is according to the ancient Jews, long before the Christian era, NOT the bias of Christian translators.

(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).
… 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, [ שׁאול /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 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 to Isa. xxxiii. 11 (Sanh. 108b).
Link:Jewish Encyclopedia Online
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Talmud -Tractate Rosh Hashanah Chapter 1.
The school of Hillel says: . . . but as for Minim, [follower 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.

When Jesus taught about,

• “ Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:” Matthew 25:41
• "these shall go away into eternal punishment, Matthew 25:46"
• "the fire of hell where the fire is not quenched and the worm does not die, Mark 9:43-48"
• "cast into a fiery furnace where there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth,” Matthew 13:42, Matthew 13:50
• “But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.” Matthew 18:6
• “And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.” Matthew 7:23
• “woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! it had been good for that man if he had not been born. ” Matthew 26:24

These teachings tacitly reaffirmed and sanctioned the existing Jewish view of eternal hell. In Matt. 18:6, 26:24, see above, Jesus teaches that there is a fate worse than death or nonexistence. A fate worse than death is also mentioned in Hebrews 10:28-31.

Heb 10:28-31
28 He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?
30 For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people.
31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

Jesus used the word death 17 times in the gospels, if He wanted to say eternal death in Matt 25:46, that is what He would have said but He didn’t, He said “eternal punishment.” The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection, they knew that everybody died; rich, poor, young, old, good, bad, men, women, children, infants and knew that it had nothing to do with punishment and was permanent. When Jesus taught “eternal punishment” they would not have understood it as death, it would have meant something worse to them.
…..Jesus knew what the Jews, believed about hell. If the Jews were wrong, when Jesus taught about man’s eternal fate, such as eternal punishment, He would have corrected them. Jesus did not correct them, thus their teaching on hell must have been correct.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

The traditional explanation that a burning rubbish heap in the Valley of Hinnom south of Jerusalem gave rise to the idea of a fiery Gehenna of judgment is attributed to Rabbi David Kimhi's commentary on Psalm 27:13 (ca. A.D. 1200). He maintained that in this loathsome valley fires were kept burning perpetually to consume the filth and cadavers thrown into it. However, Strack and Billerbeck state that there is neither archaeological nor literary evidence in support of this claim, in either the earlier intertestamental or the later rabbinic sources (Hermann L. Strack and Paul Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud and Midrasch, 5 vols. [Munich: Beck, 1922-56], 4:2:1030). Also a more recent author holds a similar view (Lloyd R. Bailey, "Gehenna: The Topography of Hell," Biblical Archeologist 49 [1986]: 189.
Source, Bibliotheca Sacra / July–September 1992
Scharen: Gehenna in the Synoptics Pt. 1

Note there is no “archaeological nor literary evidence in support of this claim, [that Gehenna was ever used as a garbage dump] in either the earlier intertestamental or the later rabbinic sources” If Gehenna was ever used as a garbage dump there should be broken pottery, tools, utensils, bones, etc. but there is no such evidence.

“Gehenna is presented as diametrically opposed to ‘life’: it is better to enter life than to go to Gehenna. . .It is common practice, both in scholarly and less technical works, to associate the description of Gehenna with the supposedly contemporary garbage dump in the valley of Hinnom. This association often leads scholars to emphasize the destructive aspects of the judgment here depicted: fire burns until the object is completely consumed. Two particular problems may be noted in connection with this approach. First, there is no convincing evidence in the primary sources for the existence of a fiery rubbish dump in this location (in any case, a thorough investigation would be appreciated). Secondly, the significant background to this passage more probably lies in Jesus’ allusion to Isaiah 66:24.”
(“The Duration of Divine Judgment in the New Testament” in The Reader Must Understand edited by K. Brower and M. W. Ellion, p. 223, emphasis mine)
G. R. Beasley-Murray in Jesus and the Kingdom of God:
“Ge-Hinnom (Aramaic Ge-hinnam, hence the Greek Geenna), ‘The Valley of Hinnom,’ lay south of Jerusalem, immediately outside its walls. The notion, still referred to by some commentators, that the city’s rubbish was burned in this valley, has no further basis than a statement by the Jewish scholar Kimchi (sic) made about A.D. 1200; it is not attested in any ancient source.” (p. 376n.92)
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/20113-the-burning-garbage-dump-of-gehenna-is-a-myth/

Light of the East · Jul 1, 2017

You accused the English translation of the Latin of being erroneous. Now the burden of proof is on you to support that accusation.

I wasn't accusing. I was asking if there is a translation problem from Greek to Latin inasmuch as we know that the Latins translated aionios as aeternal, the words having different meanings. I don't know if I am "reading into" your post, but I get the sense, reading you, that you are in a state of constant high blood pressure.

You find the Greek of Origen and prove that "aeternal" is erroneous. While you are doing that here is how Origen defines aionios.

I've already done some searching and found some interesting stuff. I am interested in the truth - that's it. Unfortunately, I am having a hard time finding a Greek original of De Principis.

Origen De Principiis. Book I. Chap. VI
3.But whether any of these orders who act under the government of the devil, and obey his wicked commands, will in a future world be converted to righteousness because of their possessing the faculty of freedom of will, or whether persistent and inveterate wickedness may be changed by the power of habit into nature, is a result which you yourself, reader, may approve of, if neither in these present worlds which are seen and temporal, nor in those which are unseen and are eternal, that portion is to differ wholly from the final unity and fitness of things. But in the meantime, both in those temporal worlds which are seen,

It seems here that you are making a claim that because the next world (s) are eternal, that the punishment in them is eternal. I don't see it here. I also notice that you have cut off the last portion of the quote. Why?

I must thank you for challenging me, for I have looked up these quotes, and in Chapter 6 I find this:

"The end of the world, then, and the final consummation, will take place when every one shall be subjected to punishment for his sins; a time which God alone knows, when He will bestow on each one what he deserves. We think, indeed, that the goodness of God, through His Christ, may recall all His creatures to one end, even His enemies being conquered and subdued."

Sounds like universal salvation to me. So what you are doing is what so many people do when they defend their turf -- cherry-picking that which supports your position and ignoring the rest. Tsk tsk tsk!

But lest you think that I myself am cherry-picking, let us read on a bit:

"But if even that unreserved declaration of the apostle do not sufficiently inform us what is meant by enemies being placed under His feet, listen to what he says in the following words, For all things must be put under Him. What, then, is this putting under by which all things must be made subject to Christ?"

In the picture of hell which you hellists so love, there are those who are still cursing God, still filled with hatred for God, still in rebellion in their hearts, still would kill God Himself if they could but find the power. Nothing has changed in the cosmos, but instead, the whole rebellion of a part of Creation, mankind, continues forever without abatement. Is that your idea of what it means to be "in subjection?" An annihilationist could make a better claim for "in subjection" than that, for at least in the annihilationist view of eternity, there is no rebellion existing. They have been wiped out.

In short, I find your argument not only weak, but seeing as how you cherry-picked the quotes from De Principiis, dishonest.

PS: I found the rest of the first quote from De Principiis, and it proves your dishonesty. Read the whole thing and if you will stop deceiving yourself and read it, you will see that Origen speaks of instruction of the wicked here on earth and instruction of the wicked in the next life by the angels:

"3. It is to be borne in mind, however, that certain beings who fell away from that one beginning of which we have spoken, have sunk to such a depth of unworthiness and wickedness as to be deemed altogether undeserving of that training and instruction by which the human race, while in the flesh, are trained and instructed with the assistance of the heavenly powers; and continue, on the contrary, in a state of enmity and opposition to those who are receiving this instruction and teaching. And hence it is that the whole of this mortal life is full of struggles and trials, caused by the opposition and enmity of those who fell from a better condition without at all looking back, and who are called the devil and his angels, and the other orders of evil, which the apostle classed among the opposing powers. But whether any of these orders who act under the government of the devil, and obey his wicked commands, will in a future world be converted to righteousness because of their possessing the faculty of freedom of will, or whether persistent and inveterate wickedness may be changed by the power of habit into nature, is a result which you yourself, reader, may approve of, if neither in these present worlds which are seen and temporal, nor in those which are unseen and are eternal, that portion is to differ wholly from the final unity and fitness of things. But in the meantime, both in those temporal worlds which are seen, as well as in those eternal worlds which are invisible, all those beings are arranged, according to a regular plan, in the order and degree of their merits; so that some of them in the first, others in the second, some even in the last times, after having undergone heavier and severer punishments, endured for a lengthened period, and for many ages, so to speak, improved by this stern method of training, and restored at first by the instruction of the angels, and subsequently by the powers of a higher grade, and thus advancing through each stage to a better condition, reach even to that which is invisible and eternal, having travelled through, by a kind of training, every single office of the heavenly powers. From which, I think, this will appear to follow as an inference, that every rational nature may, in passing from one order to another, go through each to all, and advance from all to each, while made the subject of various degrees of proficiency and failure according to its own actions and endeavours, put forth in the enjoyment of its power of freedom of will."

You would probably do better to argue with a lazy person who will take your arguments as gospel rather than someone willing to do a little research.

My point stands.

JacksBratt · Jul 1, 2017

Light of the East said:
Might I ask a question of you? Why does it bother you so much to think that perhaps the love of God is unending and eternal towards all souls? Why is it bothersome to you to think that perhaps even the worst of sinners could come to a point of turning from his evil?

I certainly want to see everyone who has done harm to another human being to get what is due him for such behavior. But those in the eternal punishment camp seem unsatisfied with punishment unless it lasts forever. Why?

Just curious to have your take on it.

I am considered to be a very forgiving person. Sometimes, to my own consequence, too forgiving. Despite the posts that I have had on this forum. The biting words and harsh retorts... I am a person who hates conflict and my angst toward anyone is very short lived. I can count the real enemies I have had in my 56 years of life on one hand and not even use all my fingers.

So, I understand your question. I, as a human, have no person that I can think of, whether I know them personally or if they are a person that I have heard about, that has committed any crime that I would consider sentencing to an eternity of torment.

This goes for Hitler, Bundey, OJ, Nero, nobody that I would sentence to an "eternity" of torment.

The problem with this is:

1/ I am human and not God
2/ God knows what the just consequences are for each
3/ The bible is totally silent on any hint that the eternal punishment is anything but eternal and no hint of a time limit or a time when the wrong has been atoned for.

So, I can only go by what God has said in the Holy bible.

The bottom line.... Now is the time for salvation. After death...it's too late.

Any recourse for these unsaved people after that......we'll have to wait and see.
However, if your going by the information we have... it doesn't look good for them.

Ron Gurley · Jul 1, 2017

After the Body/Soul combo of Man "dies", his SPIRIT
returns to God who gave it for JUDGMENT.

"PURGATORY" is not a "spiritual realm"...ONLY:
1. heavenly realms
2. "lake of fire" realm

Ecclesiastes 12 (NASB)...Remember God in Your Youth: AT DEATH...
7 then the dust (Body/Soul combo) will return to the earth as it was, (Genesis 2:7)
and the SPIRIT (breath of life) will return to God who gave it. (Genesis 1:26)
8 “Vanity of vanities,” says the Preacher, “all is vanity!”

Isaiah 42:5
Thus says God the Lord,
Who created the heavens and stretched them out,
Who spread out the earth and its offspring,
Who gives "breath" to the people on it (Body/Soul combo) And
SPIRIT to those who walk in it,

Hebrews 9:27
And inasmuch as it is appointed for men (Body/Soul combo) to "die" once
and after this comes judgment, (of immortal SPIRIT)

Bodies (sarx / flesh) are mortal. They die a natural death when the heart / brain fail.
Souls (psyches) are mortal and have a MYSTERIOUS union with Body. They die a natural death with the Body.
Spirits (pnuema) are immortal, made in the image and likeness of the God of pure and perfect spirit.
The Body / Soul combo "houses" the Spirit.

All SPIRITS will be JUDGED by God for their acts / omissions while in the Body / Soul.

Romans 14:10 ...for BELIEVERS ONLY!
But you, why do you judge your brother? Or you again, why do you regard your brother with contempt? For we will all stand before the "judgment seat of God". (Jesus' "bema" awards platform)

2 Corinthians 5:10 ...for BELIEVERS ONLY!
For we must all appear before the "judgment seat of Christ", so that each one may be recompensed for his deeds in the BODY( /Soul?), according to what he has done, (WORKS!) whether good or bad.

1 Peter 4:6
For the gospel has for this purpose been preached even to those who are dead, (OLD Abraham's Bosom)
that though they are judged in the flesh as men,
they may live in the spirit according to the will of God.

1 Corinthians 6:19
Or do you not know that your BODY (/Soul) is a temple of (God) the Holy Spirit who is in you,
whom you have from God, and that you are not your own?

Salvation for the Dead

Active Member

Well-Known Member

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Downhill Prevention!

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Well-Known Member

This is me about 1 yr. old.

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

I'm Just a Singer in an OCA Choir

I'm Just a Singer in an OCA Choir

This is me about 1 yr. old.

This is me about 1 yr. old.

I'm Just a Singer in an OCA Choir

Searching for Truth

What U See is What U Get!

Similar threads