About hell

[childofGod31]

The truth about hell
What is hell anyways?

We took some pagan beliefs (like a devil with a pitchfork) or like a literal lake with screaming souls - and started to believe all that. Some atheists say that we are superstitious and would believe the tales. In this case it's true. Everything in Revelation is figurative. Why did we take the lake of fire to be literal? - Because pagans in Greek world believed that. So we decided that it would be a good idea to join them. But we didn't decide that. It's our anscestors that decided to do that. We just follow their lead.

We have this very narrow and very simplistic belief: all the people who know Jesus in this life will go to heaven and the rest of the earth (throughout all the ages) will be tortured forever in some lake of fire. What kind of a horrible universe are we living in? How can we call God a God of love if "only a few will make it" but the rest of the entire creation would be tortured in hell for the eternity? Oh sure, some of us will get to enjoy the bliss of heaven while all the ones we love will be tortured at the same time. Isn't this the greatest form of selfishness you have ever known? And how could it possibly be true? Isn't God teaching us to self sacrifice, to love our enemies, to deny ourselves? How can He expect us to be so selfish at the same time? It's because it's not true. We were deceived.

How can God who loved the world so much that He gave His Son for us, then decide that most of His creation (which He claims to love) He will torture forever in hell? Can you, a mother who dearly loves her child and would be willing to die for him/her, be forever in bliss, while knowing that your child will be tortured forever? And could you call this God a God of love? Honestly?

And let's say that we would have no knowledge. But God would. Can He be a God of love and enjoy bliss forever while knowing about all the others being tortured? And He would know. We are IN HIM. Everything is known to Him and His senses. Or is He not LOVE? Or a different kind of love than ours? We claim that He loves sinners and wants to save them. But when they did not choose Him, did He stop loving them? His love is everlasting. It doesn't stop. So if He did not stop loving them (and if Jesus cried over Jerusalem) that means that God would be forever grieving? Then why did He create hell in the first place? It's not that I am questioning God. I am simply saying that the ideas we made up do not come together in harmony. They keep contradicting themselves.

God told to one person (and I know for a fact that he hears from God) about the idea of hell: "I am wroth with them". And "they profane My Name". (wroth means angry. profane means to slander, to speak untruths)

But did you even think of how we are going to be in heaven when Jesus is going to be on the earth?

When some false idea is given to people from one generation to the next, then the latest generations start to believe that it's real and it's the truth (IF THEY DON'T SEARCH OUT THE TRUTH FOR THEMSELVES).

One funny example is this: one lady was frying fish in the skillet. But before putting a fish there, she would cut off parts of it on both ends. Her daughter said: mommy, why are you doing that? Mommy said: because my mom did that. And then the grandaughter went to grandma and asked her about it. Grandma said: I did that because my skillet was too small...

You see the point? Sometimes we keep doing the same thing without knowing why. I don't know about holy rollers. But let's imagine for example that some people were kind of jumping a little from being filled with the Spirit. And let's say that their offspring keep doing the same thing (like they did) EXCEPT that they are NOT filled with the Spirit. So I think that's how things are. Some things were done for a special purpose and some things were said with something in mind. But we now read and don't know the spirit of the letter. We don't know the meaning behind the words. We get totally different idea of what we read now (then those people who KNEW what was behind the written text).

We see God as judge. Let's face it. We do. We say that He is love but we SEE Him as judge mostly. Why do you think that people in churches are most judgemental? Because they believe that God is a judge and they act like God (in their thinking). But did you notice that love is missing? It's because people do not see God as love. They missed the point of the entire Gospel. Jesus said: it's about loving God and loving others. And we decided that it's about judging everybody who doesn't conform to certain ideas.

Some say: God's holiness comes before His love. Wherever did you hear that? Jesus said: For God SO LOVED the world (which was condemned) that He sent His Son to die for us. Jesus said: mercy triumphs over judgement!

Where did we get the idea that judgement triumphs over mercy? It was passed on from generation to generation, probably from the dark ages, when Catholics burned good Christians. Why do we carry ideas from the dark ages into our light?

We search and we study. But it's all done by human effort and human wisdom. The true knowledge comes only when a person "walks with God" just like Enoch and Abraham and David and Moses.

We say: oh, but those were great people, we can't be like them.
But they were people. And we are people. Why were they greater than us? Why can't we be great? Did heroes only exist back then? Did people stop being born like them? We don't even try. Oh, we think we can never be like Paul. Why not? Was Paul the only person on earth like that? Was that a one time occurence when Paul was born? And nobody like Paul was born ever since?

I know Catholic church has a tendency to make icons and idols out of the saints of previous day. WHY? Did God ever say something like that to do?
And we are very proud that we don't make idols and icons out of saints like they do. But notice, we DID THAT. We did that in our hearts while they did that visually. We put them above other people. We call them saints and mean that we can never be like them. It's heresy. Notice how deceiver deceived us. We are so proud that we are not doing that, while we are so blind to the fact that we already DID THAT.

The devil wants us to think that so we would not even try. Our teacher and example is Jesus, not people. We should not put anybody between God and us, but Jesus. Why did we stick Peter in-between God and us?

Catholic church did that first. And we are very proud that we don't make idols like they do. And yet, why do we think that Peter is something greater than us? Only Jesus is greater than us. Only Jesus! People are all the same. All are brothers. Only one is teacher - JESUS! We made idols out of saints just like Catholic church and we didn't even notice it. That's how great is the evil one at his deception.

We actually have lots of ideas from Catholic church. We say that Bible is Holy. So sometimes we go to extremes in handling it. But we don't treat the Spirit of God who lives in us as holy. We offer our body for something that God won't approve. Do you see how we were deceived? We put the BOOK above the Spirit of God. We made the Bible our idol.


Hell came from the dark ages as well. Hell was instituted because people ruled by fear and gained power by fear. It suited them to mix all kinds of ideas into the Bible message to make people fear God and to OBEY THE POPE. And we swallowed that. The translators swallowed that too and translated according to those beliefs. When we read the Word, we filter everything through those beliefs. We base our doctrines on false premises. They came from the dark ages, where the power of darkness ruled over the people.

Just so we are clear, I am not accusing, but simply trying to make us wake up from this strong deception and delusion. I was one of the deceived until God told me directly: hell is not eternal. All people will be saved eventually. That's when I woke up from this deception. It's impossible to know the truth unless God reveals it to you. And God reveals it to those who "walk with God". So please, start walking with God, and stop believing the evil one's lies. Make time for Him every day to think of Him, to talk to Him, to love Him. Put aside everything else. Seek the kingdom first. Look at this doctrine closely, see how terrible it is. See how unloving it is. And don't be deceived. Don't claim that God is love and then deny it by saying that He will torture MOST of His creation forever in hell which He Himself created.

Believe me, there ARE other ways of seeing things we are used to seeing the wrong way. Find them. Don't settle for this deception. The lake of fire (which is figurative) was prepared for the devil and his angels, not for people. And God did not change his mind and decided to add people there, no. He said it so that we would understand what it's about. But it's hard to know until He reveals more. Until He reveals who the devil and his angels really are. But those who do not seek will never find. Please seek, knock, and it will be opened to you. Don't spread this false idea anymore and thus blaspheme the name of God.

I wrote about this in detail here and I hope that some will take time to read so that they will be able to see how the verses COULD be seen, instead of being filtered through the false ideas of eternal hell. I don't have all the answers. But I have enough to give me hope. And I hope you will find that hope too.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7437431/

 

[depthdeception]

I find the concept of universal salvation to be philosophically equivalent to Reformed theology in that both eventually dissolve any meaningful concept of human self-will into oblivion in their attempts to buttress what are philosophically weak and juvenile conceptions of divine will.

To argue for universal salvation requires that God's will inevitably annihilates human will, for in such a theological schema it is impossible that any might choose to forever reject God. However, if we destroy the meaning and force of human will, we concomitantly undermine the reasonableness of the reconciliation that universalism suggests. After all, it is our relationality that is primarily the mark of the divine image within us. In this imaging, we reflect the eternal communion which exists within the Godhead as all three persons of the Trinity willingly give themselves, one to the other.

If, however, all are reconciled, the image of God within humanity is fundamentally destroyed, for the "reconciliation" which might be supposed is actually quite vacuous, and the salvation of humans is really nothing more than a unilateral drama enacted by the divine person (as in Reformed theology). In this scenario, reconciliation (or damnation, for that matter), would be meaningless altogether, for there would be no relational aspect of humanity by which either concept could be adjudicated.

 

[Jpark]

There is a lake of fire! I would gladly see people tormented in hell btw.

1 Peter 3:19 is not teaching universalism!

 

[JamesAH]

I would gladly see people tormented in hell btw.

Are you a sadist or something?

 

[depthdeception]

I would gladly see people tormented in hell btw.

Including yourself?

 

[Hentenza]

Thread moved to UT from Soteriology.

 

[Jpark]

Are you a sadist or something?

I can get very demonized sometimes.

Including yourself?

Yeah, sure. Life on earth is hell anyways. It's about to get worse because of the Revelation 9 demons.

 

[depthdeception]

Yeah, sure. Life on earth is hell anyways. It's about to get worse because of the Revelation 9 demons.

Well, at least you're consistent.

 

[Jpark]

Well, at least you're consistent.

Yes. Life on earth is a hell. That's for sure.

But when the demons come, life on earth is hell, the lake of fire, on earth.

 

[Albion]

The truth about hell
What is hell anyways?

We took some pagan beliefs (like a devil with a pitchfork) or like a literal lake with screaming souls - and started to believe all that. Some atheists say that we are superstitious and would believe the tales. In this case it's true. Everything in Revelation is figurative. Why did we take the lake of fire to be literal? - Because pagans in Greek world believed that. So we decided that it would be a good idea to join them. But we didn't decide that. It's our anscestors that decided to do that. We just follow their lead.

Who's the "we" here? I don't believe in the pitchforks and literal lakes of fire, etc., nor do any Christians I know personally. But they do believe that we are may be separated from God in the afterlife and, knowing what was lost, feel the pain of that in some way.

God told to one person (and I know for a fact that he hears from God)

I consider THAT to be much less credible than any of the descriptions of hell you've been saying are not credible.

We see God as judge. Let's face it. We do.

That's because the Bible says he is, not because of some cultural weakness.

But did you notice that love is missing? It's because people do not see God as love.

Maybe they think that love is not the same as permissiveness. Do you cease to love if you feel you must send your child to bed when he says he's not tired? Or take away that knife when he says he enjoys playihg with it? Love is not "anything goes."

They missed the point of the entire Gospel. Jesus said: it's about loving God and loving others. And we decided that it's about judging everybody who doesn't conform to certain ideas.

Do you remember that Jesus told some who came to him to stop what they were doing? That would not be love as you've defined it here.

Where did we get the idea that judgement triumphs over mercy?

Probably from Bible verses such as the ones that say "Judgment is mine, saith the Lord," "He that judgeth me is the Lord," and the various passages that tell of God judging all men on the last day.

 

[Armistead14]

The threat of eternal torture is like a gun pointed to a person's head. It turns a loving invitation into spiritual rape. A further problem is that an eternal punishment is pointless, since it does not rehabilitate or heal.

Sadly, the Roman Church twisted scripture in it's need to control man and no better tool could be had than one of fear and torture. It is also sad that when the church under a government system accepted hell and torture, they deemed it OK, even Godly to torture their fellow man. The early church for 500 years believed in universal salvation.

If Hell is real, why are its roots in paganism, rather than the Bible? Many nations surrounding Israel in the Old Testament believed in Hell-like punishment in the afterlife, for they served bloodthirsty and evil “gods,” while Israel simply taught the grave (sheol) and a hope of a resurrection.

If Hell is real, why was the revelation of it first given to pagan nations, instead of God’s covenant people? Did God expect Israel to learn about the afterlife from the Pagan Gentiles? If so, why did He repeatedly warn Israel to not learn of thier ways?

Does it not appear strange that Paul never once spoke of hell in any of his letters, one commissioned by God to preach the gospel to all nations. Wouldn't Paul had warned people of it?

If Hell is real, and the devil is the one who deceives people into going there, isn’t he ultimately the winner in the war for souls? After all, traditional interpretation of the Bible says that more people will end up in Hell than in Heaven. If so, how can we really call Satan the defeated enemy and Christ the victor?


And through Him making peace by the blood of His Cross, to reconcile all things to Himself; through Him, whether the things on the earth, or the things in the heavens. (Col 1:20)




​

 

[JamesAH]

Who's the "we" here? I don't believe in the pitchforks and literal lakes of fire, etc., nor do any Christians I know personally

Hmmm I thought Anglican's believed in a literal LOF.

 

[Albion]

Hmmm I thought Anglican's believed in a literal LOF.

Very, very few, I'd say. And Anglicans are not into the rapture, pre- or post-mill, dispensations, predicting the end of the age, or any of the other issues that would incline one towards a literal interpretation of such matters.

 

[JamesAH]

I'll tell you one thing is for sure. Whether you believe in a literal LOF or not, the idea of beings separate from God is more frightening and terrifying than being burned alive.

A separation from God is being separate from:

God himself the one true being that can fulfill our hearts desire,the all knowing One that can educated you for eternity the separation from such knowledge will leave one completely empty and void of all things.

Love. The idea of beings separate from love scares me more than being burned alive. The idea that a heart will have no longer love in it is a nightmare so unimaginable horrific it's not even worth going into detail because it's that horrifying.

Peace,Joy and Happiness. Adding to the horrors of no love come no peace,joy or happiness which leaves nothing but despair,sorrow and sadness.

Combine those and you got something that will terrify the most alpha man alive. The idea of being separate from those attributes puts me into tears if I were to think about what it would be like being without those.

That my friends should terrify you more than being burned alive. For the absence of those things is a unimaginable terror beyond terrors. More than being burned,pitched forked or insert any other torture here.

 

[laconicstudent]

The early church for 500 years believed in universal salvation.

Oh?

St. Justin Martyr, 151 A.D.

No more is it possible for the evildoer, the avaricious, and the treacherous to hide from God than it is for the virtuous. Every man will receive the eternal punishment or reward which his actions deserve. Indeed, if all men recognized this, no one would choose evil even for a short time, knowing that he would incur the eternal sentence of fire. On the contrary, he would take every means to control himself and to adorn himself in virtue, so that he might obtain the good gifts of God and escape the punishments (“First Apology” 12).

We have been taught that only they may aim at immortality who have lived a holy and virtuous life near to God. We believe that they who live wickedly and do not repent will be punished in everlasting fire (“First Apology” 21).

[Jesus] shall come from the heavens in glory with his angelic host, when he shall raise the bodies of all the men who ever lived. Then he will clothe the worthy in immortality; but the wicked, clothed in eternal sensibility, he will commit to the eternal fire, along with the evil demons (“First Apology” 52).

Athenagoras of Athens, 175 A.D.

We are persuaded that when we are removed from the present life we will live another life, better than the present one...or, if they fall with the rest, they will endure a worse life, one in fire. For God has not made us as sheep or beasts of burden, who are mere by-products. For animals perish and are annihilated. On these grounds, it is not likely that we would wish to do evil. (“Apology”)

St. Theophilus of Antioch, 181 A.D.

Give studious attention to the prophetic writings [the Bible] and they will lead you on a clearer path to escape the eternal punishments and to obtain the eternal good things of God. . . . [God] will examine everything and will judge justly, granting recompense to each according to merit. To those who seek immortality by the patient exercise of good works, he will give everlasting life, joy, peace, rest, and all good things. . . . For the unbelievers and for the contemptuous, and for those who do not submit to the truth but assent to iniquity, when they have been involved in adulteries, and fornications, and homosexualities, and avarice, and in lawless idolatries, there will be wrath and indignation, tribulation and anguish; and in the end, such men as these will be detained in everlasting fire (“To Autolycus” 1:14)

St. Irenaeus, 189 A.D.

[God will] send the spiritual forces of wickedness, and the angels who transgressed and became apostates, and the impious, unjust, lawless, and blasphemous among men into everlasting fire (“Against Heresies” 1:10:1)

The penalty increases for those who do not believe the Word of God and despise his coming. . . . t is not merely temporal, but eternal. To whomsoever the Lord shall say, ‘Depart from me, accursed ones, into the everlasting fire,’ they will be damned forever (“Against Heresies” 4:28:2)

St. Cyprian of Carthage, 252 A.D.

An ever-burning Gehenna and the punishment of being devoured by living flames will consume the condemned; nor will there be any way in which the tormented can ever have respite or be at an end. Souls along with their bodies will be preserved for suffering in unlimited agonies. . . . The grief at punishment will then be without the fruit of repentance; weeping will be useless, and prayer ineffectual. Too late will they believe in eternal punishment, who would not believe in eternal life (“To Demetrian” 24)

So no, it looks like Hell was considered real and eternal very early in the Church.

 

[ParanoidAndroid]

I do not subscribe to Universal Salvation, I do not think it is something taught by the Bible. There is certainly a consequence for not accepting the forgiveness of God through Faith. However, I have never met a Christian that saw this consequence as a place of fiery torture. Most I know simply consider it as eternal separation, though I have regularly met pastors who are simply happy to say, "I don't know what it is, but I sure would rather be with God than not".

Personally, I would describe the consequence for not repenting as simply a second and eternal death. The Lake of Fire in Revelation actually states that - "the lake of fire, which is the second death" (Revelation 20:14). I don't think it says "the lake of burning forever in torment", just "the second death".

In other words, like many atheists believe, when you're dead you're dead, and the dead know nothing! For lack of a better way to describe it - food for the worms. I would describe this as the fate of the one who has chosen to disobey God and not accept his offer of salvation. It is certainly a punishment, but it is a Just punishment, not disproportionate to the crime.

There are several other issues I have with the opening post, but to keep my answer confined solely to the thread question, I'm going to end with this. I have a 3,500 word essay I wrote on the topic of hell, which I'm happy to share if anyone wants, but it's too long to just whack on to this thread and expect everyone to read. Thanks for reading.

~ PA

 

[Armistead14]

If Hell was real, why did the first comparatively complete systematic statement of Christian doctrine ever given to the world by Clement of Alexandria, A.D. 180, contain the tenet of universal salvation?

If Hell was real, why did the first complete presentation of Christianity (Origen, 220 A.D.) contain the doctrine of universal salvation?

If Hell was real, why do neither the Apostles Creed, nor the Nicean Creed, two foundational “doctrinal statements” for the early church, contain the concept of Hell?

If Hell was real, why did Church leaders as late as the fourth century AD acknowledge that the majority of Christians believed in the salvation of all mankind?

If Hell was real why did the early church appoint an avowed universalist as the President of the second council of the church of Constantinope in the fourth century? (Gregory Nazianzen, 325-381).

If Hell was real why did not a single Church council for the first five hundred years condemn Universalism as heresy considering the fact that they made many declarations of heresy on other teachings?

If Hell was real why didn't Epiphanius (c. 315-403) the "hammer of heretics" who listed 80 heresies of his time not list universalism among those heresies?

If Hell was real, since most historians would acknowledge today that Origen was perhaps the most outstanding example of universalism in the church, when Methodius, Eusibius, Pamphilus, Marcellus, Eustathius, and Jerome made their lists of Origen’s heresies, why wasn’t universalism among them?

If Hell was real and found in the original Greek manuscripts of the Bible, why is it that it was primarily those church leaders who either couldn't read Greek (Minucius Felix, Tertullian), or hated Greek as in the case of Augustine, that the doctrine of Hell was advocated? Those early church leaders familiar with the Greek and Hebrew (the original languages of the Bible) saw universal salvation in those texts. Those who advocated Hell got it from the Latin, not from the original Greek and Hebrew. Who would more likely be correct--those who could read the original languages of the Bible or those who read a Latin translation made by one man (Jerome)?

If Hell was real then why did four out of six theological schools from 170 AD to 430 AD teach universal salvation while the only one that taught Hell was in Carthage, Africa, again were Latin was the teaching language, not Greek?

If Hell was real and a serious heresy, why was it not until the sixth century when Justinian, a half-pagan emperor, tried to make universalism a heresy? Interestingly, most historians will acknowledge that Justinian's reign was among the most cruel and ruthless.

No, anyone that truly studies the bible understading the historical politics of how a pagan concept became a christian doctrine can clearly see poor Latin with a greed for power introduced a God of torture.​

 

[Armistead14]

I do not subscribe to Universal Salvation, I do not think it is something taught by the Bible. There is certainly a consequence for not accepting the forgiveness of God through Faith. However, I have never met a Christian that saw this consequence as a place of fiery torture. Most I know simply consider it as eternal separation, though I have regularly met pastors who are simply happy to say, "I don't know what it is, but I sure would rather be with God than not".

Personally, I would describe the consequence for not repenting as simply a second and eternal death. The Lake of Fire in Revelation actually states that - "the lake of fire, which is the second death" (Revelation 20:14). I don't think it says "the lake of burning forever in torment", just "the second death".

In other words, like many atheists believe, when you're dead you're dead, and the dead know nothing! For lack of a better way to describe it - food for the worms. I would describe this as the fate of the one who has chosen to disobey God and not accept his offer of salvation. It is certainly a punishment, but it is a Just punishment, not disproportionate to the crime.

There are several other issues I have with the opening post, but to keep my answer confined solely to the thread question, I'm going to end with this. I have a 3,500 word essay I wrote on the topic of hell, which I'm happy to share if anyone wants, but it's too long to just whack on to this thread and expect everyone to read. Thanks for reading.

~ PA

God won't seperate his creation from himself.

Col:15-20
15He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. 17He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. 19For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, 20and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.

Note all things were created by him him and for him, all powers, all authorities, visible and invisble. Christ is before and things and holds all things together...These same all thing are what, the same all things that he reconciles through the cross.

Tell me, what things in the heavens, what powers, could be reconciled by the cross. Some beings in the heavens needed to be reconciled. It's easy to note that through the cross ALL of God's creation including the things in heaven will be reconciled through the work of the cross in God's order of timing.

Christains sadly try to twist this verse, saying why Christ is over all things in heaven and earth, the cross reconciles only some things or things that accept him..Not what the bible teaches, nor what the verse says unless you want to rewrite the verse to same he reconciles some things. It doesn't say only things that accept him, it says ALL things regardless.

Philippians 2:9-11: "Therefore also God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name,that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those who are in heaven, and on earth, and under the earth,and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."

The bible is clear, all these things that God reconciled will willingly bow and confess Christ. Sadly, hellfire Christians try to use this verse in that God will force all unbelivers in the crowd to fall and confess his name like it or not..To think that a supreme God would want such false praise. This is not false praise, this is all of God's reconciled creation willingly prasing and confessing Christ to the glory of God. God demands perfect praise, not brainwashed or forced praise.

How sad and demeaning to God that people that many will be COERCED by God [made to say "uncle" so to speak] when Christ is victorious over all of the earth.

It doesn't even make sense, if the lost will just be tossed into hell, when will they have time to join in with EVERY tongue to confess Christ.

 

[laconicstudent]

If Hell was real, why did the first comparatively complete systematic statement of Christian doctrine ever given to the world by Clement of Alexandria, A.D. 180, contain the tenet of universal salvation?

Interesting how you don't quote it.

If Hell was real, why did the first complete presentation of Christianity (Origen, 220 A.D.) contain the doctrine of universal salvation?

Interesting how you don't quote it.

If Hell was real, why do neither the Apostles Creed, nor the Nicean Creed, two foundational “doctrinal statements” for the early church, contain the concept of Hell?

Why would they? The Creeds don't contain a lot of things, they contain the central tenets of the faith that are considered essential for salvation.

If Hell was real, why did Church leaders as late as the fourth century AD acknowledge that the majority of Christians believed in the salvation of all mankind?

They didn't.

If Hell was real why did the early church appoint an avowed universalist as the President of the second council of the church of Constantinope in the fourth century? (Gregory Nazianzen, 325-381).

Citation needed.

If Hell was real why did not a single Church council for the first five hundred years condemn Universalism as heresy considering the fact that they made many declarations of heresy on other teachings?

Because it didn't exist to condemn.

If Hell was real why didn't Epiphanius (c. 315-403) the "hammer of heretics" who listed 80 heresies of his time not list universalism among those heresies?

Because it had been soundly refuted by saints who lived two hundred years before him, as you can easily see in my above posting. Which you apparently ignored.

If Hell was real, since most historians would acknowledge today that Origen was perhaps the most outstanding example of universalism in the church, when Methodius, Eusibius, Pamphilus, Marcellus, Eustathius, and Jerome made their lists of Origen’s heresies, why wasn’t universalism among them?

Citation needed.

If Hell was real and found in the original Greek manuscripts of the Bible, why is it that it was primarily those church leaders who either couldn't read Greek (Minucius Felix, Tertullian), or hated Greek as in the case of Augustine, that the doctrine of Hell was advocated?

You can see into the past and learn who was fluent in what language. What a fascinating talent.

Those early church leaders familiar with the Greek and Hebrew (the original languages of the Bible) saw universal salvation in those texts.

No, they didn't. Did you even read my post?

Those who advocated Hell got it from the Latin, not from the original Greek and Hebrew. Who would more likely be correct--those who could read the original languages of the Bible or those who read a Latin translation made by one man (Jerome)?

No, they didn't, since just about every single one of my quotes predates Jerome.

If Hell was real then why did four out of six theological schools from 170 AD to 430 AD teach universal salvation while the only one that taught Hell was in Carthage, Africa, again were Latin was the teaching language, not Greek?

They didn't.

If Hell was real and a serious heresy, why was it not until the sixth century when Justinian, a half-pagan emperor, tried to make universalism a heresy?

Because it hadn't been seen as requiring the incredible effort, expense and inconvenience of such an endeavor? You do realize that they didn't exactly have airplanes or teleconference calls back then, right?

Interestingly, most historians will acknowledge that Justinian's reign was among the most cruel and ruthless.

So irrelevant.

No, anyone that truly studies the bible understading the historical politics of how a pagan concept became a christian doctrine can clearly see poor Latin with a greed for power introduced a God of torture.

I have already demonstrated that this is not the case. I really find it annoying when people ignore my posts and proceed to repeat what I've already refuted.
​

 

[laconicstudent]

It doesn't even make sense, if the lost will just be tossed into hell, when will they have time to join in with EVERY tongue to confess Christ.

The second event will probably take place immediately prior to the first, I should think.