Church Fathers & Universalism since Early Church times

Der Alte · Jan 4, 2018

ClementofA said:
It addressed one of your mistranslated quotes.

You fixed nothing you do not have the education or experience to know when anything is or is not correctly translated.

And why did you misquote me, making it appear i said something i didn't, but which you were saying? I fixed that above.

Rubbish! I have never misquoted you. I click the quote feature and what you posted appears in the reply window.
I don't do links. Say it here or no reply.

ClementofA · Jan 4, 2018

Der Alter said:
Rubbish! I have never misquoted you. I click the quote feature and what you posted appears in the reply window.
I don't do links. Say it here or no reply.

See your misquote in post 69.

ClementofA · Jan 4, 2018

Der Alter said:
You fixed nothing you do not have the education or experience to know when anything is or is not correctly translated.

I proved the underlying Greek word for a word you posted in English is aionios. It was mistranslated in your quote, as proven by this:

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..."

"After all, not only Walvoord, Buis, and Inge, but all intelligent students acknowledge that olam and aiõn sometimes refer to limited duration. Here is my point: The supposed special reference or usage of a word is not the province of the translator but of the interpreter. Since these authors themselves plainly indicate that the usage of a word is a matter of interpretation, it follows (1) that it is not a matter of translation, and (2) that it is wrong for any translation effectually to decide that which must necessarily remain a matter of interpretation concerning these words in question. Therefore, olam and aiõn should never be translated by the thought of “endlessness,” but only by that of indefinite duration (as in the anglicized transliteration “eon” which appears in the Concordant Version)."

Eon As Indefinte Duration, Part Three

"Add not to His words, lest He reason with thee, And thou hast been found false."(Prov.30:6)

***************************

“I affirm that there is not in the whole voluminous code of the Jewish and Christian Scriptures, from the beginning of Genesis, to the end of Revelation, one single passage,
one solitary text, in which the doctrine of the eternity of hell-torments is taught."

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.

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

Scholar's Corner: The Center for Bible studies in Christian Universalism

Der Alte · Jan 5, 2018

ClementofA said:
It addressed one of your mistranslated quotes. . . .

You have not stated nor demonstrated that you have the requisite education and knowledge to know if any Greek or Hebrew word is "mistranslated." My experience has been anything which proves UR wrong, all URites arbitrarily dismiss it as "mistranslated" whether they know what they are talking about or not. And OBTW quoting any number of UR friendly "scholars," saying something is "mistranslated," is also meaningless without scriptural, grammatical, historical etc. evidence proving beyond a reasonable doubt that it is "mistranslated" I have been at this forum since Clinton was president and have yet to see such evidence.

Der Alte · Jan 5, 2018

ClementofA said:
I proved the underlying Greek word for a word you posted in English is aionios. It was mistranslated in your quote, as proven by this: . . . [Usual copy paste from UR websites deleted] . . .

See post immediately above. To prove any of my quotes mistranslated will require the same quantity and quality of evidence that would convince you. What does aionios mean?

Romans 1:20
(20) For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal [ἀΐ́διος/aidios] power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
Romans 16:26
(26) But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting [αἰώνιος/aionios] God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:

In Rom 1:20 Paul refers to God’s power and Godhead as “aidios.” Scholars agree “aidios” unquestionably means eternal, everlasting, unending etc. In Rom 16:26 Paul refers to God as “aionios,” therefore Paul considers “aidios” and “aionios” to be synonymous.
..... And yet once again for any who fail to grasp this concept.

Matthew 16:26
(26) For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?[Mark 8:36, Luke 9:25]
Romans 1:8
(8) First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world.
Revelation 12:9
(9) And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

Can a person literally, actually gain the entire planet earth? Was the faith of the Roman church literally, actually spoken of throughout the entire planet earth? Did Satan literally, actually deceive the entire planet earth. What is it called when someone uses an exaggeration to emphasize a point? E.g. “that person was as big as a house.”

ClementofA · Jan 5, 2018

Der Alter said:
...

Already answered. Post 83.

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

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

ClementofA · Jan 5, 2018

Der Alter said:
What does aionios mean?

Since this thread is about church fathers, let's see what they say on the subject, starting with:

"For that his[Satan's] kingdom is of this age,[αἰώνιος] i.e., will cease with the present age[αιώνι] ..." (Homily 4 on Ephesians, Chapter II. Verses 1-3).

Aionios is of finite duration above, not eternal.

Origen speaks of "after eternal life" & "beyond eternal life":

(19) "And after eternal life, perhaps it will also leap into the Father who is beyond eternal life. For Christ is life but he who is greater than Christ is greater than life."

And, again, after eternal life is a oxymoron. Unless eternal is finite in duration. Which it is.

More examples re aion/ios (& olam) being finite:

Eternity in the Bible by Gerry Beauchemin – Hope Beyond Hell

12 points re forever and ever being finite:
For the Lord will NOT cast off FOR EVER:

aionios life, 2 UR views, eon/ian ends, millennial eon, 1 Jn.1:2, Chrysoston, Origen, Dan 12 2-3:
how do people who believe in eternal torture in fire

John 3:36, 3:16, 1 Jn.1:2, aionios life:
Augustine's ignorance & error re Matthew 25:46

Rev.14:9-11 & 20:10 & forever & ever a deceptive translation:
If endless conscious torments were true, is God a monster?

Have you been decieved by your Bible translation?

For the Lord will NOT cast off FOR EVER:

Augustine's ignorance & error re Matthew 25:46

Der Alte · Jan 6, 2018

ClementofA said:
Since this thread is about church fathers, let's see what they say on the subject, starting with:
"For that his[Satan's] kingdom is of this age,[αἰώνιος] i.e., will cease with the present age[αιώνι] ..." (Homily 4 on Ephesians, Chapter II. Verses 1-3).
Aionios is of finite duration above, not eternal.

Is this supposed to be from a church father? I don't see a name anywhere.

Origen speak of "after eternal life" & "beyond eternal life":

(19) "And after eternal life, perhaps it will also leap into the Father who is beyond eternal life. For Christ is life but he who is greater than Christ is greater than life."

This is a blatantly false statement and you know it is false. Does Origen say that there is anything at all "after eternal life" for believers? Does Origen say that there is anything at all "beyond eternal life" for believers? Please show us where Origen says anything like that?
.....This is all the evidence anyone needs to see to know how deceptive, corrupt and bankrupt UR is. Since God created life including "eternal life" of course God is beyond eternal life. But where does Origen say that there is anything after eternal life" for believers? As long as you continue to post this blatantly false out-of-context quote I will expose it. Once again Origen in-context.

(18) For, as there, the bridegroom leaps upon souls that are more noble-natured and divine, called mountains, and skips upon the inferior ones called hills, [Song 2:8] so here the fountain that appears in the one who drinks of the water that Jesus gives leaps into eternal life. [John 4:14]
(19) And after eternal life, perhaps it [the fountain vs. 18]will also leap into the Father who is beyond eternal life. For Christ is life but he who is greater than Christ is greater than life.

Origen does not definitively say there is anything for believers "after eternal life." What Origen is actually saying is "after the fountain leaps into eternal life PERHAPS it, the fountain, also leaps in the the Father." But reading in-context destroys UR. Later in the same writer Origen says this about "eternal life."

(6o) And he has explained the statement, But “he shall not thirst forever:” as follows with these very words: for the life which comes from the well is eternal and never perishes, as indeed, does the first life which comes from the well,; the life he gives remains. For the grace and the gift of our Savior is not taken away, nor is it consumed, nor does it perish, when one partakes of it. P. 81
Commentary on the Gospel According to John

Eternal life “never perishes,””remains.””is not taken away,””[is not] consumed,””[does not] perish.”

ClementofA · Jan 6, 2018

Since this thread is about church fathers, let's see what they say on the subject, starting with:

"For that his[Satan's] kingdom is of this age,[αἰώνιος] i.e., will cease with the present age[αιώνι] ..." (Homily 4 on Ephesians, Chapter II. Verses 1-3).

Aionios is of finite duration above, not eternal.

Der Alter said:
Is this supposed to be from a church father? I don't see a name anywhere.

The reference that was given is to a work by the ECF Chrysostom.

Der Alter said:
Does Origen say that there is anything at all "after eternal life" for believers?

He refers, according to you, to the fountain. In John 4 it is the well of life Jesus gives that springs up into life aionios. Origen says there is an "after aionios life" (mistranslated eternal life in many translations) & a "beyond life aionios":

(19) And after eternal life, perhaps it will also leap into the Father who is beyond eternal life.

And, again, after eternal life is a oxymoron. Unless eternal is finite in duration. Which it is.

More examples re aion/ios (& olam) being finite:

Eternity in the Bible by Gerry Beauchemin – Hope Beyond Hell

12 points re forever and ever being finite:
For the Lord will NOT cast off FOR EVER:

aionios life, 2 UR views, eon/ian ends, millennial eon, 1 Jn.1:2, Chrysoston, Origen, Dan 12 2-3:
how do people who believe in eternal torture in fire

John 3:36, 3:16, 1 Jn.1:2, aionios life:
Augustine's ignorance & error re Matthew 25:46

Rev.14:9-11 & 20:10 & forever & ever a deceptive translation:
If endless conscious torments were true, is God a monster?

Have you been decieved by your Bible translation?

For the Lord will NOT cast off FOR EVER:

Augustine's ignorance & error re Matthew 25:46

Der Alte · Jan 6, 2018

ClementofA said:
Since this thread is about church fathers, let's see what they say on the subject, starting with:
"For that his[Satan's] kingdom is of this age,[αἰώνιος] i.e., will cease with the present age[αιώνι] ..." (Homily 4 on Ephesians, Chapter II. Verses 1-3).
Aionios is of finite duration above, not eternal.
The reference that was given is to a work by the ECF Chrysostom.

Is the work of Chrysostom inspired scripture? Since they are not is Chrysostom quoting scripture in this 14 word quote?

Ephesians 2:1-3
(1) And you were dead in the trespasses and sins
(2) in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience—
(3) among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.

The words "satan,""αἰώνιος/aionios,"" or αιώνι/aioni do not occur in Eph 2;1-3 thus are Chrsysostom's opinion about something or other, not scripture therefore not relevant.

ClementofA · Jan 6, 2018

Der Alter said:
Is the work of Chrysostom inspired scripture?

Is BDAG & it's references to pagan writers inspired?

Chrysostom's theology is not relevant, but his use of Koine NT Greek words:

"For that his[Satan's] kingdom is of this age,[αἰώνιος] i.e., will cease with the present age[αιώνι] ..." (Homily 4 on Ephesians, Chapter II. Verses 1-3).

Aionios is of finite duration above, not eternal.

More examples re aion/ios (& olam) being finite:

Eternity in the Bible by Gerry Beauchemin – Hope Beyond Hell

12 points re forever and ever being finite:
For the Lord will NOT cast off FOR EVER:

aionios life, 2 UR views, eon/ian ends, millennial eon, 1 Jn.1:2, Chrysoston, Origen, Dan 12 2-3:
how do people who believe in eternal torture in fire

John 3:36, 3:16, 1 Jn.1:2, aionios life:
Augustine's ignorance & error re Matthew 25:46

Rev.14:9-11 & 20:10 & forever & ever a deceptive translation:
If endless conscious torments were true, is God a monster?

Have you been decieved by your Bible translation?

For the Lord will NOT cast off FOR EVER:

Augustine's ignorance & error re Matthew 25:46

Der Alte · Apr 22, 2018

ClementofA said:
begin

"Augustine himself, [Where?] after rejecting apokatastasis, and Basil [Where?] 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, [Where?] 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; [Where?] Ignatius, as others among “the 68,”[Where?] never mentions eternal punishment. Ephrem does not speak of eternal damnation, but has many hints of healing and restoration [Where?] . 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. [Where?]

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 [Where?] , 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.[Who cares?]

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, [Where?] 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, [Where?] listed among “the 68” (and mostly ignorant of Greek).[How does she know? What language did they read the scriptures in if not 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.[Where?]
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."
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:.[Irrelevant how many "scholars" hold a particular opinion]

End

straykat · Apr 22, 2018

The afterlife was specifically allowed to be for debate. I think we're all invited to simply join in. The early Church was definitive in it's councils, but never tried to dogmatize everything (not until later with the Roman bishops).

ClementofA · Apr 23, 2018

Der Alter said:
[Irrelevant how many "scholars" hold a particular opinion]

That's another quote to add to your list along with such gems as:

Der Alter said:
Irrelevant not scripture.

Then are also all your quotes re Jewish beliefs & opinions irrelevant? And your quotes of church fathers? And opinions of lexicons? And BDAG references to non scriptural usages of aionios? So you won't be quoting any of these ever again, since they are, as you say, "Irrelevant not scripture"?

Unique Proof For Christian, Biblical Universalism

ClementofA · Aug 28, 2018

TheBibleIsTruth said:
Complete rubbish! there is NO such thing as "evangelical" universalism.

Really?

https://forum.evangelicaluniversalist.com/

ClementofA · Aug 28, 2018

Der Alter said:
I prefer to have a discussion one to one in this forum NOT loads and loads of copy/paste which do not directly address what I post.

But my post did directly address the mis-translation of Barnabas you gave.

Pneuma3 · Aug 29, 2018

Marvin Knox said:
Here are some of the last words on the subject of salvation from the last book of the Bible:

"Outside are the dogs and the sorcerers and the immoral persons and the murderers and the idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices lying.............
I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book. He who testifies to these things says, “Yes, I am coming quickly.” Amen. Come, Lord Jesus. The grace of the Lord Jesus be with all. Amen."

How could the doctrine of universal salvation be true when the Lord Himself makes it a point to tell us (just before signing off for the Church age) that there will be dogs, sorcerers, immoral persons, murderers, idolaters, and liars looking in with no access to the tree of life and the holy city when God makes all things new?

Any supposed "church father" who taught that everyone will be saved eventually was either ignorant of the scriptures or willingly teaching against the clear testimony of the Book of Revelation. The same is true for everyone who teaches universal salvation now.

I hope those teaching universal salvation know what that means.

If not just read the bold print above and repent while there's still time.

Please don't be mad at me for being blunt. As much as I hate to be the bearer of bad news - I'm not the one making the rules.

This is not exactly spiritual rocket surgery. It's all there in black and white.

"Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, knowing that as such we will incur a stricter judgment." James 3:1

Now lets look at some scripture that shows forth what happens AFTER the new heaven and earth has been established, AFTER the New Jerusalem has been set up, and AFTER all judgment has passed, the saints within the city gates, the sinner outside of the gates of the city.

Note: pay special attention to who is without the gates of the city.

Revelation 22:14-17

14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.

Who is it that is without the gates of the city?

Who is it that has right to the tree of life?

15 For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.

Do these scriptures not show that those without the gates of the city, the

dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie, have right to the tree of life? Do these scriptures not show that those without the gates may enter in through the gates into the city?

Of course they do, for who else is without the gates of the city but the dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.

16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star. 17 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.

AFTER the new heaven and earth has been established, AFTER the New Jerusalem has been set up, and AFTER all judgment has passed the doctrines of eternal torment and annihilation teach that the Spirit and the bride no longer say come, that those who hear cannot come, that those who thirst cannot come and take of the water of life freely.

Thus the doctrines of eternal torment and annihilation teach a different Gospel then the TRUE Gospel we are commanded to teach, which is:

1 Timothy 4:9-11

9This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptation. 10For 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. 11These things command and teach.

John 4:42

42 They told the woman, "We no longer have faith in Jesus just because of what you told us. We have heard him ourselves, and we are certain that he is the Savior of the world!"

1 John 4:14

14 And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son the Saviour of the world.

Pneuma3 · Aug 29, 2018

HereIStand said:
If universalism is true, then it's hard to see a point to Christ warnings about hell, Paul's missionary journeys, and the evangelistic efforts of any other Christians.

Why preach the gospel at all?

Without a doubt this is one of the most frequent question asked of me, everywhere I post I come across this question. A lady on tents ask me this question years ago

Here is my answer to this question

For me the reason Jesus was sent and the reason Jesus sends us is to free people through Him from sin and death. Salvation is not complete just because one believes Jesus died for them. Believing is only the starting point on our journey toward full salvation, for we are reconciled by His death, but saved by His life.

All men everywhere are already reconciled by His death, this is a done deal because He died 2000 years ago for all men's reconciliation and mans belief or unbelief CANNOT change this fact. If someone does not believe Jesus died for then simply does not change the fact that He did.

So then all men everywhere have already been reconciled, but not all men are yet saved from sin and death.

Therefore Jesus send us out in order to proclaim His salvation by His LIFE.
His death reconciled all men, but His LIFE is what saves all men, this salvation is not a one time deal as such, but is a long process of walking in His LIFE and forsaking our own. Taking up the cross and following Him and enduring unto the end that we might be saved.

Thus we are told to proclaim His death and therefore His reconciliation for all men as a FACT that cannot be disputed , and we are to do this so that the entire world can have the same hope in His LIFE that we to have. Thus it is not by His death that sin and death are defeated but by His LIFE.

When we witness about that which Jesus done, we are first to tell all men that they have been reconciled because of His death, this fact breathes hope into the world that God does indeed love them. Then after people become aware of the fact of this reconciliation by His death we are to proclaim His resurrection. And it is because of the fact that He was resurrected OUT OF DEATH that the world is given hope of the same resurrection OUT OF DEATH. We are NOT saved from death, we are saved OUT OF DEATH, for it was while we were DEAD in sin that He died and was raised to life again for us.

So the resurrection is a moving from DEATH to LIFE, so as He died for all men, so to did He rise for all men, and this is the gospel of the good new toward ALL MEN EVERYWHERE.

If one believes Jesus died for all men, should it not go without saying that when He rose again that it was for all men also? Can we really separate His death from His resurrection? If so, how then can DEATH be swallowed up of LIFE?

God bless

I wrote this in response to a lady who asked the question if all are saved why preach the gospel at all?

After reading my answer this was her reply back to me.

Dear Pneuma,

I totally agree with your description of the gospel. Yes, we are not only dead in Christ but now alive in Christ, praise God. You are right, Christ's death cannot be separated from His resurrection. It was His resurrection that the disciples preached, you are right. It is His resurrection that is the hope for all mankind. The full gospel is the death and resurrection. I agree He died for all, all are reconciled through His death and all are given life through His resurrection, out of death, as you say. I can't however, get past the point of faith (which is given to us by God in His grace anyway, all have the capacity to believe, or reject) and personal response to accepting this truth for ourselves, as revealed by the Spirit to us. I heard John Bevere give a definition of the word 'believe' in as meaning 'to follow'. Believing (in our terms) is first yes, and then taking up our cross daily and living following Christ, I agree is the full walk of salvation. Again, we can only do any of this by God's grace through faith hey.
I feel the Spirit of God on what you have written and thank you.

Marvin Knox · Aug 29, 2018

Pneuma3 said:
Revelation 22:14-17
14 "Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city."

Who is it that is without the gates of the city?

Who is it that has right to the tree of life?

The idolaters etc. and the ones that do His commandments - before their entry within the gates.

The ones that do His commandments have the right to the tree of life - just as it says.

Pneuma3 said:
15 For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.

Do these scriptures not show that those without the gates of the city, the
dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie, have right to the tree of life? Do these scriptures not show that those without the gates may enter in through the gates into the city?

No they do not show that the idolaters etc. have a right to the tree of life.

They show us that some who are initially without the gates get to enter within the gates. That seems to be based on their doing His commandments.

They tell us that the idolaters etc. are also without. But they tell us nothing about their eternal status being outside the gates or within.

Pneuma3 said:
Of course they do, for who else is without the gates of the city but the dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.

What a tortures theology.

Those scriptures merely proclaim that all are without the gates until such time as the ones who do His commandments are allowed in.

They simply do not, logically, tell us what you claim they do.

Pneuma3 said:
16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star. 17 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.

It clearly tells us that Jesus sent His angel to testify to the churches and it tells us that "whosoever will" - a reiteration of what we have been told before by both Jesus and the apostles.

Pneuma3 said:
AFTER the new heaven and earth has been established, AFTER the New Jerusalem has been set up, and AFTER all judgment has passed the doctrines of eternal torment and annihilation teach that the Spirit and the bride no longer say come, that those who hear cannot come, that those who thirst cannot come and take of the water of life freely.

Exactly. Just as the rest of the scriptures tell us.

This scripture tells us no different. The reiteration of the gospel call was issued through John to the churches and not to some supposed persons living after the church age.

Pneuma3 said:
Thus the doctrines of eternal torment and annihilation teach a different Gospel then the TRUE Gospel we are commanded to teach, which is.................

Non sense.

The world we proclaim the gospel to is this world who's God is the devil. It is not to the coming world we are sent.

Your logic is flawed. These passages simply do not logically demand what you claim they must.

Pneuma3 · Aug 29, 2018

Marvin Knox said:
The idolaters etc. and the ones that do His commandments - before their entry within the gates.

The ones that do His commandments have the right to the tree of life - just as it says.

So you believe after the great white throne judgment that there are christian without the gates of the city?

Yet those same scriptures tell us who is without the gates and they are the idolaters etc.

So please explain to me why you believe Christians are without the gate?

Church Fathers & Universalism since Early Church times

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

This is me about 1 yr. old.

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Well-Known Member

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Well-Known Member

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Similar threads