Opiate of the Theologians

anna ~ grace · Nov 13, 2019

LittleLambofJesus said:
Good post.
We can only hope and pray that loved ones and friends who have died never knowing the Christ, as we have, that mercy will be shown to them.
My dad wasn't a religious person, but I can say he was more Christian than some pew-warming Christians today, and I pray I will meet him again in the afterlife.....

An interesting commentary by a favorite commentator of mine:

Kindgdom Bible Studies Savior of the World Series Part 1

It is estimated that about one hundred and sixty billions of human beings have lived on the earth in the six thousand years since Adam's creation. Of these, the very broadest estimate that could be made with reason would be that less than three billion were truly saints of God. This broad estimate would leave the immense aggregate of one hundred and fifty seven billions (157,000,000,000) who went to their graves without faith and hope in the only name given under heaven or among men whereby we must be saved. Indeed, the vast majority of these never knew or heard the name of Jesus, and could not believe in Him of whom they had not heard..........
Or did He, from the foundation of the world, make a wretched and merciless provision for their hopeless, eternal torment, as many of His children claim? Can you really believe that is the plan by which the all-wise, all-merciful, loving God is working out His purpose here on earth? WHAT IS THE TRUTH?

Paul, in I Tim. 2:1-6, gives the answer! "I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for ALL MEN ... for this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;
who WILL HAVE A-L-L M-E-N TO BE SAVED, and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; who gave Himself a RANSOM FOR ALL, to be testified in due time."
This text is one of rare beauty. It is indeed like a precious diamond, the effulgence of whose radiance dazzles the mind. It is a drop of pure distilled essence, whose fragrance fills the rooms of the heart. It is a joy forevermore and a challenge to everyone who reads it with an understanding heart. It should be engraved upon the heart of every saint of God. There is so much depth to that text that I am afraid that we often do not even perceive it. It is like a beautiful sky of deep rich blue and one cannot even begin to grasp the vast depth above us. So it is with this passage!.........................
================================

I heard a homily once, that God gives sufficient grace for all to be saved. But that not all of that grace is *efficient*, meaning, not all will respond to and cooperate with that grace, sadly. How this works, we don't exactly know. It's a mystery between God, and the Soul. Between Christ, and the Soul.

What helps me, is to remember that I, too, might wind up in Hell. It's definitely possible. That's a sobering thought. I have met Hindus and Muslims who are more forgiving, generous, humble, reverent, and charitable than I am, and that affects me. A lot. Without Christ, they seem to be able to obey Christ, at least ethically, better than me.

chevyontheriver · Nov 13, 2019

redleghunter said:
Noticed the author of the piece linking the modern Universalist authors with communists. This was quite interesting.

Not actually Communists as in Lenin and company, but some form of Socialists, of which there were many sorts.

A little more than a century ago, a largely forgotten group of prerevolutionary Russian thinkers pursued a project known as “God-Building” (bogostroitel’stvo). These writers were socialists who—unlike Lenin—viewed religion not as an intractable foe but as a potential ally in the quest for human solidarity. Anatoly Lunacharsky claimed that “the true Social Democrat is the most deeply religious of all human beings.” Yet an obstacle prevented the marriage of religion with socialism, namely, the particularity and parochialism of the Christian God. “God-Building” was necessary because the Russian Orthodox God was simply too narrow. One character in Maxim Gorky’s novel Mother (1906) gave voice to the “God-Builders” as follows: “We have got to change our God. . . . It is necessary . . . to invent a new faith; it is necessary to create a God for all.” This last phrase—“to create a God for all”—might almost serve as a general slogan for twenty-first-century Christian universalism. As I hope to show, the recent arguments favoring universalism have not only distanced themselves from traditional accounts of the afterlife, but have also—to a surprising degree—moved away from a traditional Christian doctrine of God.

Phil W · Nov 13, 2019

chevyontheriver said:
He did say that. And Christians used to put stock in the words of Jesus as if he knew something. I guess I still do think so.

Christians STILL put stock in the things Jesus said.
It is how we can determine who is really a Christian.

BryanJohnMaloney · Nov 14, 2019

DennisTate said:
The idea of a version of us in another time line being lost.. . but then here we are in this time line and we come to salvation... is a strange idea.... but God can do anything so I kind of like this idea.

Kind of liking an idea has nothing to do with its truth value. I kind of like the idea of having as much worldly wealth as Warren Buffet.

Darn. Still hasn't happened.

BryanJohnMaloney · Nov 14, 2019

Der Alter said:
the argument that the Greek word aion never means eternity and the word aionios never means eternal

That's a very odd claim that you nicely refute. Most of my experience with the terminology is the phrase "Aionios ton Aionion" used in the Greek Liturgy. Literally, it's "unto the ages of ages", but it's figuratively "forever and ever"--eternity. How English speakers decided that the Greek didn't mean what it meant can be mystifying.

Der Alte · Nov 14, 2019

BryanJohnMaloney said:
That's a very odd claim that you nicely refute. Most of my experience with the terminology is the phrase "Aionios ton Aionion" used in the Greek Liturgy. Literally, it's "unto the ages of ages", but it's figuratively "forever and ever"--eternity. How English speakers decided that the Greek didn't mean what it meant can be mystifying.

IMHO instead of adjusting their theology to align with scripture, presto chango they change scripture to align with their theology. As for "Aionios ton aionion" that is a Hebraism called Epizeuxis, doubling for emphasis. Hebrew lacked superlatives so for emphasis they would double words. See e.g. Gen 2:17 KJV reads "you shall certainly die." The Hebrew is "dying you shall die."
Cf. Bullinger "Figures of Speech used in the Bible" p. 190 ff
Figures of speech used in the Bible:

BryanJohnMaloney · Nov 14, 2019

The Greeks appreciated poetic construction, too, so they often preserved them.

Der Alte · Nov 14, 2019

BryanJohnMaloney said:
The Greeks appreciated poetic construction, too, so they often preserved them.

Bullinger's book covers both Hebrew and Greek. The book can be downloaded at the link above.

redleghunter · Nov 14, 2019

Der Alter said:
[previous post continued]

[10]John 6:58
(58) This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your ancestors ate manna and died, but whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.[αἰώνιος/aionios]
In this verse Jesus contrasts “aionios life” with “death.” If “live aionios” is only a finite period, a finite period is not opposite “death.” Thus “aionios” by definition here means “eternal.”

[11]John 10:28
(28) I give them eternal [αἰώνιος/aionios] life, and they shall never [αἰών/aion] perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand.
In this verse Jesus pairs “aionios” and “aion” with “[not] snatch them out of my hand.” If “aion/aionios” means “age(s), a finite period,” that is not the opposite of “[not] snatch them out of my hand’” “Aionios life” by definition here means “eternal life.”

[12]1 John 2:17
(17) The world and its desires pass away, but whoever does the will of God lives forever. [αἰών/aion]
In this verse “aionios” is contrasted with “pass away,” “lives aionios” cannot mean a finite period, A “finite period” is not opposite of “pass away.” Thus “lives aionios” by definition here means “lives eternally.”

[13]1 Peter 5:10
(10) And the God of all grace, who called you to his eternal [αιωνιον/aionion] glory in Christ, after you have suffered a little while, [ολιγον/oligon] will himself restore you and make you strong, firm and steadfast.
In this verse “aionios” is contrasted with “little while” Does Jesus give His followers a finite period of glory then they eventually die? Thus “aionios” here, by definition, means “eternal.”

[14]Romans 2:7
(7) To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, [ἀφθαρσία/apftharsia] he will give eternal [αἰώνιος/aionios] life.
In this verse “aionios” is paired with “immortality.” If “aionios” is only a finite period, believers cannot seek for “a finite period,” and “immortality” at the same time. But they can seek for “eternal life” and “immortality” at the same time. Thus by definition “aionios life” here means “eternal life.”

[15]1 Timothy 1:17.
(17) Now unto the King eternal, [αἰών/aion] immortal, [ ̓́αφθαρτος/aphthartos] invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever [αἰών/aion] and ever [αἰώνιος/aionios]. Amen.
In this verse “aion” is paired with “immortal.” “Aion” cannot mean “age(s),” a finite period and be immortal at the same time. Thus “aion” by definition here means “eternal.”

[16]Revelation 14:11
(11) And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever:[εις αιωνας αιωνων/eis aionas aionon] and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.
In this verse “aionas aionon torment” is paired with “no rest day or night.” If “aionas, aionon” means “a finite period” at some time they would rest, “Aionas, aionon” by definition here means “forever and forever.”

[17]John 3:15
(15) That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal [αιωνιον] life.
In this verse Jesus pairs “aionion” with “shall not perish.” Believers could perish in a finite period, “aionion life” by definition here means eternal life.

[18]John 3:16
(16) For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting [αιωνιον] life.
In this verse Jesus pairs “aionion” with “should not perish.” Believers could eventually perish in a finite period, thus by definition “aionion life” here means eternal or everlasting life.

[19]John 5:24
(24) Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting [αἰώνιος] life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.
In this verse Jesus pairs “aionios” with “shall not come into condemnation” and “passed from death unto life.” “Aionios” does not mean “a finite period,” by definition here it means “eternal,” unless Jesus lets His followers come into condemnation and pass into death.

[20]Romans 5:21
(21) That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal [αἰώνιος] life by Jesus Christ our Lord.
In this verse “aionios life” is contrasted with death. “A finite period life” is not opposite death, “eternal life” is. “Aionios life” by definition here means ‘eternal life.”

[21]Ephesians 3:21
(21) to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all generations, for ever [του αιωνος/tou aionios] and ever! [των αιωνων/ton aionion] Amen.
In this verse “tou aionios ton aionion” is paired with “throughout all generations.” "Age(s)" a finite period cannot refer to "all generations." By definition “tou aionios ton aionion” means forever and ever.

[22]John 8:51
(51) Very truly [αμην αμην/amen amen] I tell you, whoever obeys my word will never [ου μη εις τον αιωνα/ou mé eis ton aiona] see death."
According to noted Greek scholar Marvin Vincent "The double negative “ ου μη/ou mé” signifies in nowise, by no means." Unless Jesus is saying whoever obeys Him will die, i.e. see death, unto the age, by definition aion means eternity.

Thank you for this most excellent exegesis. Where does Matthew 25:46 fall into the list given?

redleghunter · Nov 14, 2019

Der Alter said:
Cf. Bullinger

Not to be confused with EW Bullinger.

ViaCrucis · Nov 15, 2019

It seems that it is absolutely essential to make a distinction between dogmatic capital-U Universalism and the hopefulness of universal restoration. The former isn't orthodox, the latter is. It isn't orthodox to say "All WILL be saved", but it is orthodox to say "We hope that all might be saved."

The former is a dogmatic statement that simply can't be made; the latter is a hopeful prayer rooted in the Church's faith in Christ as Savior and refusing to pass judgment where only God can judge.

It simply isn't the Church's job or business to say who will or won't be saved; our "job" is to preach the Gospel and trust in Jesus Christ.

-CryptoLutheran

Der Alte · Nov 15, 2019

redleghunter said:
Thank you for this most excellent exegesis. Where does Matthew 25:46 fall into the list given?

Jesus used the word "aionios"/eternal approximately 30 times. Jesus never used it to refer to anything that could not be eternal. In 7 verses John 3:15, John 3:16, John 3:36, John 4:14, John 5:24, John 6:27 and John 10:28 "aionios" is defined by comparison or contrast with other adjectives or adjectival phrases. I think we can safely say that "aionios" in Matt 25:46 means "eternal."

FineLinen · Nov 15, 2019

redleghunter said:
Not until the nineteenth century did any Christian body make universal salvation its official teaching.

The Beautiful Heresy- Christian Universalism: The Early Church

Philip Schaff: New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, Vol. VII: Liutprand - Moralities - Christian Classics Ethereal Library

Philip Schaff: Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia Vol. : 0105=81 - Christian Classics Ethereal Library

FineLinen · Nov 15, 2019

redleghunter · Nov 16, 2019

ViaCrucis said:
It seems that it is absolutely essential to make a distinction between dogmatic capital-U Universalism and the hopefulness of universal restoration. The former isn't orthodox, the latter is. It isn't orthodox to say "All WILL be saved", but it is orthodox to say "We hope that all might be saved."

The former is a dogmatic statement that simply can't be made; the latter is a hopeful prayer rooted in the Church's faith in Christ as Savior and refusing to pass judgment where only God can judge.

It simply isn't the Church's job or business to say who will or won't be saved; our "job" is to preach the Gospel and trust in Jesus Christ.

-CryptoLutheran

I believe the essay addressed this early on.

zippy2006 · Nov 16, 2019

redleghunter said:
I believe the essay addressed this early on.

Part of the argument of the essay is that the two are historical bedfellows:

By century’s end, the earlier debates over inclusivism had become passé, and the new arena of controversy was universalism, either in a hopeful, Balthasarian vein, which seeks to affirm the possibility of universal salvation, or in an assertive, Moltmannian version, which makes it a divine imperative. Among today’s young Christian theologians, Balthasarian tentativeness is fast yielding to ever more strident affirmations of the necessity of salvation for all—as in David Bentley Hart’s recent book, That All Shall Be Saved.

redleghunter · Nov 16, 2019

zippy2006 said:
Part of the argument of the essay is that the two are historical bedfellows:

By century’s end, the earlier debates over inclusivism had become passé, and the new arena of controversy was universalism, either in a hopeful, Balthasarian vein, which seeks to affirm the possibility of universal salvation, or in an assertive, Moltmannian version, which makes it a divine imperative. Among today’s young Christian theologians, Balthasarian tentativeness is fast yielding to ever more strident affirmations of the necessity of salvation for all—as in David Bentley Hart’s recent book, That All Shall Be Saved.

There’s something to say about someone who can write an essay and state his argument up front and early.

hedrick · Mar 17, 2020

redleghunter said:
Not only at odds with the tradition, dogmatic universalists who insist that all must be saved have always struggled to support their views with Christian Scripture. Many have chosen simply to ignore the Old Testament and the Book of Revelation, adopting a biblical canon-within-the-canon. Others have created a Pauline canon-within-the-canon, insisting that certain verses point toward universal salvation (1 Cor. 15:28), whereas others plainly do not (2 Thess. 1:9). Perhaps the foremost Pauline scholar alive today, N. T. Wright, has said that the Pauline texts do not support universalism.

I don't think it's feasible to support UR without making at least some distinctions among the Biblical authors. While it's the most straightforward reading of Paul (with all due respect to Wright), it's very hard to understand the Rev as supporting it. Possibly also the OT, as you suggest.

I suspect annihilation has started appearing among Evangelicals because it's at least possible to read all the strands of the NT and OT as consistent with it. I believe among groups not committed to inerrancy, this isn't such an issue, and UR would be more natural. For those not committed to inerrancy, the Rev isn't a fatal problem. Jesus' language (except maybe in Matthew) could be read as speaking of temporary punishment (and in some cases hypothetical or hyperbolic).

Opiate of the Theologians

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Well-Known Member

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Thank You Jesus!

Thank You Jesus!

Confessional Lutheran

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Thank You Jesus!

Dragonsworn

Thank You Jesus!

Senior Veteran

Similar threads