Have you been decieved by your Bible translation?

[ClementofA]

And you ignore, ignore, ignore the definitions eternal because it does not fit the universalist agenda.

LOL. I was pointing out how you omitted the other definitions besides eternal & this is your comeback?

Universalists generally admit the words olam & aion/ios sometimes mean eternal, such as in reference to God (since He is endless), but not in regards to punishment.

OTOH those preaching the "good news" of endless tortures obviously don't agree.

According to the Scriptures, God is Love Omnipotent, not a mythical deception infinitely worse than Hitler, Bin Laden & Satan combined.

 

[Doug Melven]

I vaguely remembered saying 'something' along those lines and was honestly thinkingth I might have to apologize. But then I went looking, and you did not read close enough to truly understand what was plainly said. My emphasis of 'flaming fire' had to do with torture, which is 'your opinion'...along with all others who believe in 'eternal hell', 'eternal torment', 'eternal punish-ING'.

Read my original quote again....below.
"I hope this 'flaming fire' of torture (your opinion) isn't anything LIKE the fire that our GOD is."
I added the underline and 'LIKE' to my original quote for even better clarification.

We do believe in just punishment for sins. And Jesus' physical death on the cross paid for the eternal forgiveness of the sins of ALL. But you will still die temporally from the temporal consequence. IOW the 'eternal life' you mentioned having in the last post isn't working so well in the church today with the temporal consequence of sins. Why not?


Now you know why, I hope.


Yup. Different eyes see different things. Something that happens 'during an AGE' is most certainly limited to 'that age' and not ETERNALLY to my eyes. And 'bible students' know there were at least TWO more ages to come, even after 61 AD when Ephesians 2:7 was written. A point which even eliminates that orthodox curse of an eternally unforgiven sin called blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.

KJV EPH 2:7 That in the ages/aion to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.

KJV MAT 12:31 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. 32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world/aion, neither in the world/aion to come.

Of course all other translations interpret a different 'truth'.

Matthew 12:32 And whoever says a word against the Son of man will be forgiven; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.

And Matthew was written 60 years before Ephesians which claims multiples more "ages to come". SO, no unforgivable sin in the bible, to those who see like me.

There are many different uses of fire in the Bible.
Burning bush that was not consumed.
Our God is a consuming fire.
Jesus said He came to bring fire and He couldn't wait till it was accomplished Luke 12:49
John said Jesus will baptize with fire.

Fire can be used for cleansing or punishment.
1 Corinthians 3 refers to our works being burnt up, but we saints shall be saved yet so as by fire.
But when He says He is taking vengeance, there is no cleansing, only punishment. Think of the rich man in hell.
He was being tormented, not cleansed.

You seem to think after being punished for awhile, indeterminate time, that these people will be cleansed. I don't believe that. Here's why.
Jesus made the payment for everybody's sin, but if you reject that payment, you must make your own payment.
This cannot be done.
Maybe after a millennia of torment they will repent and ask for mercy. Common sense would say they would.
These people who reject Christ are not using common sense.
In Matthew 7 they are saying to Jesus "Look at what we did". As if God should accept them because they were good. Cain tried this, and it didn't work. Nadab and Abihu tried to worship God in there own way and it didn't work.
Then In Matthew 25 these people were saying "We never had a chance, we didn't know".
Sins of ignorance had to be punished as well. And Paul said in Romans 1 that everybody knew God at some point. Then in Romans 2 he says they are without excuse.
But you say after a period of punishment they will repent and ask for mercy.
Look at the Rich man and Lazarus.
The rich man woke up in hell and saw Lazarus being comforted and he was being tormented.
He wanted relief from the flames and he wanted Lazarus to be his servant and dip the tip of his finger in water and cool his tongue. Abraham told him no. Then still wanting Lazarus to be his servant he wanted Abraham to send Lazarus to his brothers. Again Abraham said no.
The rich man did not repent, he did not ask for mercy.

 

[Mark Corbett]

You've cherry picked those 2 sources out of many that could have been chosen. Like, for example, Early Church Father universalist Greek scholars whose native tongue was Greek.

"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).

CHURCH FATHERS: Homily 4 on Ephesians (Chrysostom)

Something that is "eternal" doesn't cease. Aionios is finite there. Not endless. Compare Mt.25:46 where the same Greek word is used.

In the quote above you quote John Chrysostom to show an example of aionios meaning “of this age”. That quote does seem to support your view. However, strangely, John Chrysostom also uses aionios in a context where the meaning “eternal” is quite clear.

The English text of the quote below may be found here:

Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Vol. XIII: The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Philippians, Colossians, and Thessalonians.: 2 Thessalonians 1:9,10

The Greek text may be found here:

http://www.documentacatholicaomnia...._In_epistulam_II_ad_Thessalonicenses,_MGR.pdf

I am adding line numbers to help anyone interested match the English translation to the Greek text. These line numbers are from the Greek site, and appear to be their own numbering system. Also, in red, I have noted where Chrysostom uses two important Greek words:

aionios and proskairos

John Chrysostom, Homily 3 on 2 Thessalonians 1:9-10

00431 “Who shall suffer punishment, even eternal (aionios) destruction from the face of the Lord, and from the glory of His might, when He shall come to be glorified in His Saints, and to be marveled at in all them that believed.”

00433There are many men, who form good hopes not by abstaining from their sins, but by thinking that hell is not so terrible as it is said to be, but milder than what is threatened, and temporary (proskairos), not eternal (aionios); and about this they philosophize much. 00434 But I could show from many reasons, and conclude from the very expressions concerning hell, that it is not only not milder, but much more terrible than is threatened.00435 But I do not now intend to discourse concerning these things. 00436 For the fear even from bare words is sufficient, though we do not fully unfold their meaning. 00437 But that it is not temporary (proskairos), hear Paul now saying, concerning those who know not God, and who do not believe in the Gospel, that “they shall suffer punishment, even eternal (aionios) destruction.” 00438 How then is that temporary (prokairos) which is everlasting (aionios)?

Honestly, I’m not sure I could have made up stronger evidence to show that aionios means eternal. Chrysostom repeatedly contrasts aionios with proskairos, and insists that something that is aionios cannot be proskairos. Since proskairos means “temporary”, this is very strong support for aionios meaning “eternal”.

But we do not have to depend on Chyrsostom, writing some three centuries after the New Testament, to make the contrast between aionios and proskairos. The Apostle Paul makes the same comparison:

NIV 2 Corinthians 4:18 So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen, since what is seen is temporary(proskairos), but what is unseen is eternal (aionios).

 

[Mark Corbett]

Since a major topic of this thread is the meaning of aionios, and specifically how Universalists translate it, some of you may be interested in this 3 part thread I recently posted on this very topic:

What Does Aionios Mean in Matthew 25:46 and 2 Thessalonians 1:9? (part 1)

What Does Aionios Mean? (part 2, It is wrong to define aionios based on aion)

What Does Aionios Mean? (Part 3, Looking at the LXX)

 

[Der Alte]

LOL. I was pointing out how you omitted the other definitions besides eternal & this is your comeback?
Universalists generally admit the words olam & aion/ios sometimes mean eternal, such as in reference to God (since He is endless), but not in regards to punishment.
OTOH those preaching the "good news" of endless tortures obviously don't agree.
According to the Scriptures, God is Love Omnipotent, not a mythical deception infinitely worse than Hitler, Bin Laden & Satan combined.

We were discussing your truncated quote from BDAG where you only quoted four subheadings.
.....When I quote from a lexicon I usually quote the complete entry and highlight the definitions I want to emphasize. There may have been a time or 2 where I did not. So please explain to me how I "omitted the other definitions?"
.....You said "Universalists generally admit the words olam & aion/ios sometimes mean eternal, such as in reference to God (since He is endless), but not in regards to punishment." Can you show me where this "rule" is recorded in any grammar or lexicon? Anywhere but your imagination?

 

[Der Alte]

In the quote above you quote John Chrysostom to show an example of aionios meaning “of this age”. That quote does seem to support your view. However, strangely, John Chrysostom also uses aionios in a context where the meaning “eternal” is quite clear.
The English text of the quote below may be found here:
Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Vol. XIII: The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Philippians, Colossians, and Thessalonians.: 2 Thessalonians 1:9,10
The Greek text may be found here:
http://www.documentacatholicaomnia...._In_epistulam_II_ad_Thessalonicenses,_MGR.pdf
I am adding line numbers to help anyone interested match the English translation to the Greek text. These line numbers are from the Greek site, and appear to be their own numbering system. Also, in red, I have noted where Chrysostom uses two important Greek words:
aionios and proskairos
John Chrysostom, Homily 3 on 2 Thessalonians 1:9-10
00431 “Who shall suffer punishment, even eternal (aionios) destruction from the face of the Lord, and from the glory of His might, when He shall come to be glorified in His Saints, and to be marveled at in all them that believed.”
00433There are many men, who form good hopes not by abstaining from their sins, but by thinking that hell is not so terrible as it is said to be, but milder than what is threatened, and temporary (proskairos), not eternal (aionios); and about this they philosophize much. 00434 But I could show from many reasons, and conclude from the very expressions concerning hell, that it is not only not milder, but much more terrible than is threatened.00435 But I do not now intend to discourse concerning these things. 00436 For the fear even from bare words is sufficient, though we do not fully unfold their meaning. 00437 But that it is not temporary (proskairos), hear Paul now saying, concerning those who know not God, and who do not believe in the Gospel, that “they shall suffer punishment, even eternal (aionios) destruction.” 00438 How then is that temporary (prokairos) which is everlasting (aionios)?
Honestly, I’m not sure I could have made up stronger evidence to show that aionios means eternal. Chrysostom repeatedly contrasts aionios with proskairos, and insists that something that is aionios cannot be proskairos. Since proskairos means “temporary”, this is very strong support for aionios meaning “eternal”.

Begin quote

But we do not have to depend on Chyrsostom, writing some three centuries after the New Testament, to make the contrast between aionios and proskairos. The Apostle Paul makes the same comparison:
NIV 2 Corinthians 4:18 So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen, since what is seen is temporary(proskairos), but what is unseen is eternal (aionios).

End quote

I could not agree more. In my list of twenty two verses, above, which define/describe aion as eternity and aionios as eternal I listed 2 Corinthians 4:17-18 and 2 Corinthians 5:1

2 Corinthians 4:17-18
(17) For our light affliction, which is but for a moment, 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/proskairos] but the things which are not seen are eternal [αἰώνιος/aionios​

In this passage “aionios” is contrasted with “for a moment,” vs. 4, and “temporal,” vs. 5. “Age(s)” a finite period, is not the opposite of “for a moment”/”temporal/temporary.” “Eternal” is. “Aionios” by definition here means “eternal.”

2 Corinthians 5:1
(1)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 [αἰώνιος/aionios] in the heavens.​

In this verse “aionios house” is contrasted with “earthly house which is destroyed.” If an “aionios” house is at some time destroyed then it is no different than the earthly house. The aionios house is not destroyed, the opposite of “is destroyed.” Thus “aionios” by definition here means “eternal.” If the tabernacle in heaven is destroyed, it is no different than the earthly tabernacle.
.....Paul also defines/describes aionios as eternal in Rom 1:20 and Rom 16:26.

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,” Paul has used “aidios" and “aionios” synonymously.

 

[gordonhooker]

LOL. I was pointing out how you omitted the other definitions besides eternal & this is your comeback?

Universalists generally admit the words olam & aion/ios sometimes mean eternal, such as in reference to God (since He is endless), but not in regards to punishment.

OTOH those preaching the "good news" of endless tortures obviously don't agree.

According to the Scriptures, God is Love Omnipotent, not a mythical deception infinitely worse than Hitler, Bin Laden & Satan combined.

I am sure people are lining up to hear the "good new" of endless torture... I actually feel sorry for those who picture our loving God as punitive, judgemental God and in doing so read that into scripture.

 

[Almost there]

Absolutely ridiculous question. I quoted more than Barnabas but you chose to address only one which you think you can disprove by spamming several random quotes.
I have addressed the rest of your post several times in other threads

Irrelevant.
Liddell, Scott Jones Lexicon of Classical GreekG166
• αἰώνιος, ον, also α, ον Pl. Ti. 37d, Heb_9:12 : —
1. lasting for an age (αἰών 11), perpetual, eternal (but dist. fr. ἀΐδιος, Plot. 3.7.3), μέθη Pl. R. 363d; ἀνώλεθρον.. ἀλλ' οὐκ αἰώνιον Id. Lg. 904a, cf. Epicur. Sent. 28; αἰ. κατὰ ψυχὴν ὄχλησις Id. Nat. 131 G.; κακά, δεινά, Phld. Herc. 1251.18, D. 1.13; αἰ. ἀμοιβαῖς βασανισθησόμενοι ib.19; τοῦ αἰ. θεοῦ Rom_16:26, Ti.Locr. 96c; οὐ χρονίη μοῦνον.. ἀλλ' αἰωνίη Aret. CA 1.5; αἰ. διαθήκη, νόμιμον, πρόσταγμα, LXX Gen_9:16, Ex. 27.21, To. 1.6; ζωή Mat_25:46, Porph. Abst. 4.20; κόλασις Matt. l.c., Olymp. in Grg. p.278J.; πρὸ χρόνων αἰ. 2Ti_1:9 : opp. πρόσκαιρος, 2Co_4:18.
2. holding an office or title for life, perpetual, γυμνασίαρχος CPHerm. 62.
3. = Lat. saecularis, Phleg. Macr. 4.
4. Adv. -ίως eternally νοῦς ἀκίνητος αἰ. πάντα ὤν Procl. Inst. 172, cf. Simp. in Epict. p.77D.; perpetually, μισεῖν Sch. E. Alc. 338.
5. αἰώνιον, τό, = ἀείζωον τὸ μέγα, Ps.- Dsc. 4.88.
Bauer-Danker, Greek-English Lexicon of the NT (BDAG)
[BDAG] αἰώνιος
• αἰώνιος (ία Pla., Tim. 38b; Jer 39:40; Ezk 37:26; OdeSol 11:22; TestAbr A; JosAs 8:11 cod. A; 2 Th 2:16; Hb 9:12; mss. Ac 13:48; 2 Pt 1:11; AcPl BMM recto 27=Ox 1602, 29; Just., A I, 8, 4 al.; B-D-F §59, 2; Mlt-H. 157),ον eternal (since Hyperid. 6, 27; Pla.; ins, pap, LXX, En, TestSol, TestAbr A, Test12Patr; JosAs 12:12; GrBar 4:16; ApcEsdr; ApcMos 29; Ps.-Phocyl. 112; Just.; Tat. 17, 1; Ath., Mel.; standard epithet for princely, esp. imperial, power: OGI index VIII; BGU 176, 12; 303, 2; 309, 4; Sb 7517, 5 [211/12 AD] κύριος αἰ.; al. in pap; Jos., Ant. 7, 352).
1. pert. to a long period of time, long ago χρόνοις αἰ. long ages ago Ro 16:25; πρὸ χρόνων αἰ. before time began 2 Ti 1:9; Tit 1:2 (in these two last pass. the prep. bears the semantic content of priority; on χρόνος αἰ. cp. OGI 248, 54; 383, 10).
2. pert. to a period of time without beginning or end, eternal of God (Ps.-Pla., Tim. Locr. 96c θεὸν τ. αἰώνιον; IBM 894, 2 αἰ. κ. ἀθάνατος τοῦ παντὸς φύσις; Gen 21:33; Is 26:4; 40:28; Bar 4:8 al.; Philo, Plant. 8; 74; SibOr fgm. 3, 17 and 4; PGM 1, 309; 13, 280) Ro 16:26; of the Holy Spirit in Christ Hb 9:14. θρόνος αἰ. 1 Cl 65:2 (cp. 1 Macc 2:57).
3. pert. to a period of unending duration, without end (Diod. S. 1, 1, 5; 5, 73, 1; 15, 66, 1 δόξα αἰ. everlasting fame; in Diod. S. 1, 93, 1 the Egyptian dead are said to have passed to their αἰ. οἴκησις; Arrian, Peripl. 1, 4 ἐς μνήμην αἰ.; Jos., Bell. 4, 461 αἰ. χάρις=a benefaction for all future time; OGI 383, 10 [I BC] εἰς χρόνον αἰ.; EOwen, οἶκος αἰ.: JTS 38, ’37, 248-50; EStommel, Domus Aeterna: RAC IV 109-28) of the next life σκηναὶ αἰ. Lk 16:9 (cp. En 39:5). οἰκία, contrasted w. the οἰκία ἐπίγειος, of the glorified body 2 Cor 5:1. διαθήκη (Gen 9:16; 17:7; Lev 24:8; 2 Km 23:5 al.; PsSol 10:4 al.) Hb 13:20. εὐαγγέλιον Rv 14:6; κράτος in a doxolog. formula (=εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας) 1 Ti 6:16. παράκλησις 2 Th 2:16. λύτρωσις Hb 9:12.κληρονομία (Esth 4:17m) vs. 15; AcPl Ha 8, 21. αἰ. ἀπέχειν τινά (opp. πρὸς ὥραν) keep someone forever Phlm 15 (cp. Job 40:28). Very often of God’s judgment (Diod. S. 4, 63, 4 διὰ τὴν ἀσέβειαν ἐν ᾅδου διατελεῖν τιμωρίας αἰωνίου τυγχάνοντα; similarly 4, 69, 5; Jer 23:40; Da 12:2; Ps 76:6; 4 Macc 9:9; 13:15) κόλασις αἰ. (TestReub 5:5) Mt 25:46; 2 Cl 6:7; κρίμα αἰ. Hb 6:2(cp. κρίσις αἰ. En 104:5). θάνατος B 20:1. ὄλεθρον (4 Macc 10:15) 2 Th 1:9.πῦρ (4 Macc 12:12; GrBar 4:16.—SibOr 8, 401 φῶς αἰ.) Mt 18:8; 25:41; Jd 7; Dg 10:7 (cp. 1QS 2:8). ἁμάρτημα Mk 3:29 (v.l. κρίσεως, κολάσεω, and ἁμαρτίας). On the other hand, of eternal life (Maximus Tyr. 6, 1d θεοῦ ζωὴ αἰ.; Diod. S. 8, 15, 3 life μετὰ τὸν θάνατον lasts εἰς ἅπαντα αἰῶνα; Da 12:2; 4 Macc 15:3; PsSol 3, 12; OdeSol 11:16c; JosAs 8:11 cod. A [p. 50, 2 Bat.]; Philo, Fuga 78; Jos., Bell. 1, 650; SibOr 2, 336) in the Reign of God: ζωὴ αἰ. (Orig., C. Cels. 2, 77, 3) Mt 19:16, 29; 25:46; Mk 10:17, 30; Lk 10:25; 18:18, 30; J 3:15f, 36; 4:14, 36; 5:24, 39; 6:27, 40, 47, 54, 68; 10:28; 12:25, 50; 17:2f; Ac 13:46, 48; Ro 2:7; 5:21; 6:22f; Gal 6:8; 1 Ti 1:16; 6:12; Tit 1:2; 3:7; 1J 1:2; 2:25; 3:15; 5:11, 13, 20; Jd 21; D 10:3; 2 Cl 5:5; 8:4, 6; IEph 18:1; Hv 2, 3, 2; 3, 8, 4 al. Also βασιλεία αἰ. 2 Pt 1:11(ApcPt Rainer 9; cp. Da 4:3; 7:27; Philo, Somn. 2, 285; Mel., P. 68, 493; OGI 569, 24 ὑπὲρ τῆς αἰωνίου καὶ ἀφθάρτου βασιλείας ὑμῶν; Dssm. B 279f, BS 363). Of the glory in the next life δόξα αἰ. 2 Ti 2:10; 1 Pt 5:10 (cp. Wsd 10:14; Jos., Ant. 15, 376.—SibOr 8, 410 φῶς αἰῶνιον). αἰώνιον βάρος δόξης 2 Cor 4:17; σωτηρία αἰ. (Is 45:17; Ps.-Clem., Hom. 1, 19) Hb 5:9; short ending of Mk. Of unseen glory in contrast to the transitory world of the senses τὰ μὴ βλεπόμενα αἰώνια 2 Cor 4:18.—χαρά IPhld ins; δοξάζεσθαι αἰωνίῳ ἔργῳbe glorified by an everlasting deed IPol 8:1. DHill, Gk. Words and Hebr. Mngs. ’67, 186-201; JvanderWatt, NovT 31, ’89, 217-28 (J).—DELG s.v. αἰών. M-M. TW. Sv.

No offense, but do you sincerely expect anyone to actually read all that?

One of the problems with long posts is that the author has to gain the respect of the readers to expect them to actually read what they write, post. I can find everything you included there with a simple internet search. It doesn't need to be posted, though a link would be handy.

If a post is not thought provoking AND interesting, nobody's gonna read it. There is a reason some non-fiction books are best sellers and some end up in the sale rack.

This is why op-ed pieces, even from respected and interesting authors, have a hard word limit. They want people to read them.

 

[ClementofA]

.....When I quote from a lexicon I usually quote the complete entry and highlight the definitions I want to emphasize. There may have been a time or 2 where I did not. So please explain to me how I "omitted the other definitions?"

See post 36 & your post i was replying to.

.....You said "Universalists generally admit the words olam & aion/ios sometimes mean eternal, such as in reference to God (since He is endless), but not in regards to punishment." Can you show me where this "rule" is recorded in any grammar or lexicon? Anywhere but your imagination?

The vast majority of Greek scholars agree that aion/ios & olam have multiple meanings, including eternal, but also other meanings such as, for examples, age, eon, indefinite period of duration, epoch, era, lifetime, etc. See, for an example, LSJ lexicon:

Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, αἰώνιος

Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, αἰών

 

[Der Alte]

No offense, but do you sincerely expect anyone to actually read all that?
One of the problems with long posts is that the author has to gain the respect of the readers to expect them to actually read what they write, post. I can find everything you included there with a simple internet search. It doesn't need to be posted, though a link would be handy.
If a post is not thought provoking AND interesting, nobody's gonna read it. There is a reason some non-fiction books are best sellers and some end up in the sale rack.
This is why op-ed pieces, even from respected and interesting authors, have a hard word limit. They want people to read them.

Thank you for your one sided criticism. I was quite amused by it, it told me exactly where you are coming from. My post consisted of the definition of a Greek word from two Greek lexicons which was in response to another poster who denies that the Greek word means "eternal." I showed how many times the definition "eternal" appeared in each definition.
.....Now here is the amusing part, my post was 5185 characters long, the response to my post, a few posts later, was 10803 characters long with thirteen links. You criticized the length of my post but although the response was almost twice as long as my post and consisted of copy/pastes from the 13 links, I did not see any criticism of the much longer post. Why do you think that is?
..... Do I think people will read it? Yes I do, people who are interested in the correct definitions of Greek words who might not have access to the two lexicons I quoted from.

 

[Mark Corbett]

I am sure people are lining up to hear the "good new" of endless torture... I actually feel sorry for those who picture our loving God as punitive, judgemental God and in doing so read that into scripture.

I both agree and disagree with your short comment.

I agree that it is not consistent with God's character for him to torture people forever, nor is such a concept consistent with what the Bible teaches.

Some assume that everyone who is not universalist believes in endless torture. That's not true at all. I believe that the final fate of the unrighteous is to perish (John 3:16), experience the destruction of both their body and soul in Hell (Matthew 10:28), and be burned to ashes (2 Peter 2:6).

However, I disagree with the implication that it is inconsistent to view God as punitive, judging, and also loving. The Bible very clearly, repeatedly presents God as all those things.

My view is often called Conditional Immortality. I laid out some of the massive Biblical support for this view in an OP in another thread here.

 

[Der Alte]

... "When Augustine described the Universalists as “indeed very many” (immo quam plurimi), what he meant is that they were a “vast majority” (Ramelli, Christian Doctrine, 11). That is what the Latin word plurimi, from the adjective plurimus, implies. "

Right! "vast majority" because according to the guy who posted this online and his source Ilaria Ramelli "That is what the Latin word plurimi, from the adjective plurimus, implies." We should thank both of them for informing us what Augustine "really meant."
....However, if Augustine had intended to say "vast majority" he would have written "Magna pars" which does in fact mean "vast majority," with no implying about it. This points out the fatal flaw in quoting second hand sources just because they support one's assumptions/presuppositions.

 

[Der Alte]

I am sure people are lining up to hear the "good new" of endless torture... I actually feel sorry for those who picture our loving God as punitive, judgemental God and in doing so read that into scripture.

Is this the same non-punitive, non-judgmental God who destroyed all the thousands of people on the earth men, women, children, infants, except for 8 people, Noah and his family; all the inhabitants of Sodom, Gomorrah and the cities of the plains, men, women, children and infants and who ordered Israel to go into and utterly destroy all the inhabitants of many cities, because of their sinfulness? That sounds punitive and judgmental to me.

 

[ClementofA]

In the quote above you quote John Chrysostom to show an example of aionios meaning “of this age”. That quote does seem to support your view. However, strangely, John Chrysostom also uses aionios in a context where the meaning “eternal” is quite clear.

The English text of the quote below may be found here:

Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Vol. XIII: The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Philippians, Colossians, and Thessalonians.: 2 Thessalonians 1:9,10

The Greek text may be found here:

http://www.documentacatholicaomnia...._In_epistulam_II_ad_Thessalonicenses,_MGR.pdf

I am adding line numbers to help anyone interested match the English translation to the Greek text. These line numbers are from the Greek site, and appear to be their own numbering system. Also, in red, I have noted where Chrysostom uses two important Greek words:

aionios and proskairos

John Chrysostom, Homily 3 on 2 Thessalonians 1:9-10

00431 “Who shall suffer punishment, even eternal (aionios) destruction from the face of the Lord, and from the glory of His might, when He shall come to be glorified in His Saints, and to be marveled at in all them that believed.”

00433There are many men, who form good hopes not by abstaining from their sins, but by thinking that hell is not so terrible as it is said to be, but milder than what is threatened, and temporary (proskairos), not eternal (aionios); and about this they philosophize much. 00434 But I could show from many reasons, and conclude from the very expressions concerning hell, that it is not only not milder, but much more terrible than is threatened.00435 But I do not now intend to discourse concerning these things. 00436 For the fear even from bare words is sufficient, though we do not fully unfold their meaning. 00437 But that it is not temporary (proskairos), hear Paul now saying, concerning those who know not God, and who do not believe in the Gospel, that “they shall suffer punishment, even eternal (aionios) destruction.” 00438 How then is that temporary (prokairos) which is everlasting (aionios)?

Honestly, I’m not sure I could have made up stronger evidence to show that aionios means eternal. Chrysostom repeatedly contrasts aionios with proskairos, and insists that something that is aionios cannot be proskairos. Since proskairos means “temporary”, this is very strong support for aionios meaning “eternal”.

But we do not have to depend on Chyrsostom, writing some three centuries after the New Testament, to make the contrast between aionios and proskairos. The Apostle Paul makes the same comparison:

NIV 2 Corinthians 4:18 So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen, since what is seen is temporary(proskairos), but what is unseen is eternal (aionios).

I understand your interpretation Mark, though let's consider if there might be another equally reasonable interpretation.

Chrysostom is saying some think of punishment as being PROSKAIROS (for a season), rather than AIONION (eonian, pertaining to an eon or eons, age, [long] lasting).

Chrysostom is arguing that Scripture does not say punishment(chastening or corrective discipline) is only for a season, only for a few months, but that it is EONIAN, lasting for a long time, an epoch, age, or ages, eon or eons.

[BTW, similarly, there was an ancient belief of some of the Jewish Rabbis that those who go to Gehenna come out of it later, one view saying they stay up to 12 months maximum.]

The contrast is between a very short time and a very long time.

If you look in English dictionaries, they also make similar contrasts. They say, for example, that "moment" is the opposite [antonym] of "age", eon, etc.. Just as short is the opposite of long.

So i suggest that Chrysostom, and St Paul, was making a similar contrast, between a momentary or seasonal period of time, and another period of time of relatively great duration.

For a meaning of PROSKAIROS being "for a season":

Strong's Greek: 4340. πρόσκαιρος (proskairos) -- in season, i.e. temporary

"It is often claimed that in 2 Corinthians 4:18, “eonian” (aiõnion) must mean “eternal” because it is set in contrast to the word “temporal,” meaning pertaining to time as opposed to eternity. The Greek word, however, translated “temporal” in the AV (proskaira) has no connection with the word for “time” (chronos); in English form, the Greek is literally TOWARD-SEASON, and means “temporary” or “for [only] a part of a season.”

"Contrastive terms need not be antithetical in meaning. Our Lord deemed it sufficient contrast to compare temporary (i.e., a part of a season) with a single season–less than a year (Matt.13:21). Yet here, in 2 Corinthians 4:18, while the contrast is far greater, it does not follow that it is therefore infinite. The contrast is between our afflictions, which last, so to say, but for a brief “partial season,” and our promised, long-enduring “eonian” glory which lasts throughout the oncoming eons, until the consummation, when God is All in all. The eonian life and glory which is our special portion (cp 1 Tim.4:10b; 2 Tim.2:10,11), no more debars the endless life and glory in which we shall participate as well (cp Luke 1:33b; 1 Thess.4:17b; 1 Cor.15:28), than youthful happiness precludes the happiness of maturity.”

Eon As Indefinte Duration, Part Two
A Reply To “Universalism Refuted” Part Four

"Now, in this passage, Paul is using proskairos and aiónios in contrast with each other. But notice that he is not contrasting time (which would be the word "chronos" in Greek) with timelessness. Instead, he is contrasting two different measures of temporal duration (i.e., two different measures of time). In Matthew 13:21, Christ employs proskairos to denote a relatively short measure of time. It is used in reference to those who hear the gospel and endure in their faith for only "a short while" in contrast to those who, after hearing the word, keep it and go on to produce fruit. Christ is not contrasting a temporary period of time with an endless measure of time; rather, Christ is contrasting a relatively short measure of time which does not result in the production of "fruit" with a relatively longer period of time that does (similarly, in Hebrews 11:25, proskairos is translated "a short season" or "fleeting," and denotes the relatively short-lived enjoyment that sin brings). But the opposite of proskairos isn't endless duration, for proskairos doesn't mean finite duration. Its meaning is clearly relative to whatever is in view. Again, when Christ uses the word in Matt 13:21, he isn't contrasting a person who endures in his faith for a finite period of time with a person who endures in his faith for an infinite period of time; he's contrasting a relatively short period of time with a relatively longer period of time (i.e., relative to a person's mortal lifespan)."

"In the context of 2 Corinthians 4-5, proskairos conveys a relatively short measure of time (i.e., duration confined to a mortal lifetime, during which time one can see and experience one's mortal self "wasting away"). Aiónios, on the other hand, while not meaning endless duration, denotes a much longer duration of time (i.e., the duration of the eons to come, the full length of which is not explicitly revealed in Scripture). So when Paul says that "the things that are seen" are proskairos (i.e., fleeting, or pertaining to a relatively short measure of time) while "the things that are unseen" are aiónios (i.e., pertaining to, or enduring through, the eons to come) he places our present, mortal bodies in the former category of things, and our future, immortal bodies in the latter category of things."

"But why does Paul refer to our immortal bodies as "eonian, in the heavens," since this word does not denote endless duration? It's because he has in view the blessing that will be enjoyed exclusively by believers, prior to the time that Paul calls "the consummation" (i.e., when death is abolished by Christ and all are vivified or "made alive" in him). Paul has in view only those who are members of the body of Christ, and the heavenly allotment they alone will enjoy during these coming eons. This blessing for believers (in which they will enjoy immortality in heaven during the final two eons) is eonian in duration, not "eternal." When the last two eons (the eons of Christ's reign) come to an end, the believer will not lose his immortality. He will continue to live. But his life will, at this time, no longer pertain to (or be enduring through) the eons of Christ's reign. The special, eonian salvation he enjoyed as a result of being in the body of Christ will have come to an end. For at this time, God's "purpose of the eons" will have reached its goal: all people will have been made immortal and saved, and God will be "all in all." "

That Happy Expectation: January 2015

Even if by aionion Chrysostom means eternal in 2 Cor. 4:18, he still uses aionios of a finite duration no longer than an age in his other quote. Which would indicate that, as you yourself evidently agree, words often have a range of meanings. This is what universalists usually say re the word aionios. The question, then, is, what is its meaning, in the range of its possible meanings, in key passages that speak of punishment of the lost after Christ's return.

 

[ClementofA]

Right! "vast majority" because according to the guy who posted this online and his source Ilaria Ramelli "That is what the Latin word plurimi, from the adjective plurimus, implies." We should thank both of them for informing us what Augustine "really meant."
....However, if Augustine had intended to say "vast majority" he would have written "Magna pars" which does in fact mean "vast majority," with no implying about it. This points out the fatal flaw in quoting second hand sources just because they support one's assumptions/presuppositions.

I don't see any evidence in your post re the "Magna pars" claim. Is this you using "google search" again?

Your other comment is cherry picking from what i posted while ignoring the overall context & comments of what i posted:

"plurimi...'most; or 'a majority'...":

Selections from Latin Classic Authors
edited by Francis Gardner [p.111]:

Selections from Latin Classic Authors

"..."the majority" (plurimi)...":

Diocles of Carystus. 2. Commentary
edited by Philip J. “van der” Eijk [p.271]:

Diocles of Carystus. 2. Commentary

"When Augustine described the Universalists as “indeed very many” (immo quam plurimi), what he meant is that they were a “vast majority” (Ramelli, Christian Doctrine, 11). That is what the Latin word plurimi, from the adjective plurimus, implies. "
Indeed Very Many: Universalism in the Early Church

Latin–English dictionary: Translation of the word "plurimus"

An Elementary Latin Dictionary
By Charlton Thomas Lewis [p.621]:

An Elementary Latin Dictionary

 

[Der Alte]

English-"vast" Latin-"vastus [vastă, vastum], immānis [immane], ingens [ingentis], immensus [immensă, immensum]"
English-"majority"-" māior pars [partis, f.], plērique"
https://www.online-latin-dictionary.com/english-latin-dictionary.php?parola=majority

 

[gordonhooker]

Is this the same non-punitive, non-judgmental God who destroyed all the thousands of people on the earth men, women, children, infants, except for 8 people, Noah and his family; all the inhabitants of Sodom, Gomorrah and the cities of the plains, men, women, children and infants and who ordered Israel to go into and utterly destroy all the inhabitants of many cities, because of their sinfulness? That sounds punitive and judgmental to me.

I will leave the pre-history literal narrative with you...

 

[gordonhooker]

I both agree and disagree with your short comment.

I agree that it is not consistent with God's character for him to torture people forever, nor is such a concept consistent with what the Bible teaches.

Some assume that everyone who is not universalist believes in endless torture. That's not true at all. I believe that the final fate of the unrighteous is to perish (John 3:16), experience the destruction of both their body and soul in Hell (Matthew 10:28), and be burned to ashes (2 Peter 2:6).

However, I disagree with the implication that it is inconsistent to view God as punitive, judging, and also loving. The Bible very clearly, repeatedly presents God as all those things.

My view is often called Conditional Immortality. I laid out some of the massive Biblical support for this view in an OP in another thread here.

In that case we will have to agree to disagree.

 

[Der Alte]

I will leave the pre-history literal narrative with you...

Am I to understand that the "pre-history literal narrative" is faulty and not to be trusted? I don't get that understanding from the quotes I read in the NT.

 

[ClementofA]

My post consisted of the definition of a Greek word from two Greek lexicons which was in response to another poster who denies that the Greek word means "eternal."

I don't deny, & neither do universalists in general, that aion & aionios sometimes means eternal & sometimes do not. Scholars generally agree that these words have a range of meanings. Unlike you who think they are defined as nothing but eternal.

I showed how many times the definition "eternal" appeared in each definition.
....

With you having no qualifications as a Greek scholar, or any evidence of your view being supported by any such, why should anyone accept this?