Hell is not permanent.

gort · Mar 30, 2006

EchoPneuma said:
Yes you do. That's exactly what you're doing with that ONE verse that you are trumpeting that supposedly says the sin will "never" be forgiven.

IT'S ONE VERSE, but you are building an entire belief on it. Got another one that says some sin will NEVER be forgiven?

NO?? THen you are PROOFTEXTING that ONE scripture to say that there are sins that will NEVER be forgiven.

Why not go with the whole testimony of scripture that talks about all being reconciled, and all being made alive, and all being made righteous and all being drawn to Jesus?

Pot meet kettle.

It's one verse because it is the one unforgiveable sin.

Your statement:

NO?? THen you are PROOFTEXTING that ONE scripture to say that there are sins that will NEVER be forgiven.

...is erroneous, in that there are not a multiplicity of sins that can never be forgiven, there is but 1 sin never forgiven.

gort · Mar 30, 2006

Merzbow said:
The most ridiculous thing about the whole 'unforgivable sin' of blasphemy claim is that it flatly contradicts the doctrine of sola fide. You can't be saved by faith in Christ alone, you must have faith in Christ and you must also not have blasphemed the Holy Spirit, not even once in your entire life, even way before you became a Christian. I'm sure this would exclude Paul himself, since I'm sure at one point in his persecution of the followers of Jesus he perhaps once, in a moment of anger, uttered a word against the Holy Spirit.

In fact, the exegetical support for works being necessary for salvation in addition to faith is far greater than that for the fundamentalist reading of the nature of the so-called 'unforgivable sin' (I don't believe works is necessary for salvation myself, I'm just saying this to make a point). Either give up sola fide or give up the unforgivable sin. One can't have it both ways.

Just to what depths will some go to try to prove a point?

I'm just totally sure myself that Paul blasphemed the HS.

But I don't remember just where I read that? Can you show us where that was?

gort · Mar 30, 2006

red77 quotes:

In all honesty i dont make wrong assumptions about you....

Sure you have. All ET believers have no empathy for the lost. But let's move forward....

I'm sure you hope that noone goes to hell, the LOF or whatever.....

That's correct. We are told that God desires all to come to repentence. As the believer has the indwelling HS, don't you think that is of utmost concern? The Great Commission? To spread the Truth?

........my point is that you believe in a God that will eternally condemn his creations if they dont make a choice within this lifespan

Sin condemns. Jesus also said we must be reborn to enter the Kingdom. Much more to say about this....

I have family/friends/loved ones who for this message to be true would rob me of all hope....My parents (short of a road to damascus thing) are likely to die agnostics...as with most of the people i care about, some are atheists.....Not one person i know within my circle is a Christian, and so far there's no likelihood of that changing either.........

We all have family members that we worry about. Me Mum died in my living room under hospice care 2 years ago. Growing up, we never went to church. Nobody on her side of the family went to church except for my great gramma. Mom never talked of God that I recall.

As executor of her will, and as I went through her stuff, I found a bible with her hand writing in it from when she was prolly taught by my great gramma. Her mother died some years ago, and I was'nt aware till a year ago that when she was found, there were some religious mags on her coffee table, and not in the trash. Someone had stopped and told her the gospel of Christ Jesus.

Someone also stopped by my grandpas hospital bed when he was dying. He'd told one of his daughter about it, and somehow, he said he felt different. He died a few days later.

My cousin Steve, my age, died a couple months ago from a brain tumor. There was a gathering at his home that his wife put up for folks to go to after the funeral.

While I was eating, I went out into the back yard to look around. They'd lived right next to a river. Steve liked to fish. He had a small boat tied to a 3 foot wide dock that was about 25 long leading out to the water.

I noticed there were 2 empty lawn chairs at the end of the dock.

He spent a lot of time at home before he finally went into a coma. I reckon he spent a lot of time in one of those chairs.

As far as I know, he did'nt believe in God. A self made man, he was, and obstinate somewhat against religion.

But I wonders what he was thinking those days....

EchoPneuma · Mar 30, 2006

daneel said:
It's one verse because it is the one unforgiveable sin.

It's ONE verse. You said that ONE verse was just prooftexting and didn't prove anything. Now you're changing your tune since you're doing it. One verse proves NOTHING unless taken with the WHOLE CONTEXT of scripture....and there are MANY scriptures that talk about universal reconcilation.

Your statement:

...is erroneous, in that there are not a multiplicity of sins that can never be forgiven, there is but 1 sin never forgiven.

And you continuing to trumpet the FALSE premise that "ou" means "never" ,when it doesn't, shows your agenda.

You competely ignore that the rest of that verse in the greek says "into the age". It just doesn't fit in with your doctrine, so just ignrore it and keep spouting the LIE that the verse says "never" be forgiven.

Oh, the depths that someone will go to prove a point.

gort · Mar 30, 2006

katallasso said:
Daneel,

If the lake of fire were everlasting don't you think they would have used a word in their language that meant that and only that? The lake of fire is a very important subject and I do believe they would have wanted to leave no room for doubt.

The word is "aidios"
Lexicon Results for aidios (Strong's 126)

Pronunciation Guide aidios {ah-id'-ee-os}
TDNT ReferenceRoot Word TDNT - 1:168,25 from 104 Part of Speech adj Outline of Biblical Usage
1) eternal, everlasting
For Synonyms see entry 5801

Authorized Version (KJV) Translation Count Total: 2 AV - eternal 1, everlasting 1; 2
Thayer's Lexicon (Help)

Aidios...eternity

Because aidios occurs rarely in the New Testament does not prove that its place was taken by aionios. It just goes to show that less importance was attached to the bare idea of everlastingness than later theological thought has given it. It could be that the Father was more interested in His plan for the ages. Paul uses the word in Rom. 1:20, where he speaks of "the everlasting power and divinity of God." It is also used in Jude 6. The actual use of aidios should tell us something. If there is actually a greek word for "everlasting" why wasn't it used? Worth thinking about.

The word aidios has a context to it. It's in reference to the eternal God, from Rom 1.20.

In Jude 1.6, everlasting, aidios, is in reference to the angels being in chains. I reckon that means eternal means eternal. But the angels are created, and therefore have a starting point in time.

But for eternal, aionios, also has a context to it.

G166
αἰώνιος
aiōnios
ahee-o'-nee-os
From G165; perpetual (also used of past time, or past and future as well): - eternal, for ever, everlasting, world (began).

It can be perpetual, eternal, for ever, everlasting. The important context to arrive at it's meaning is that there is no Scripture to show anywhere after those not found in the Lambs book of life to indicate an end, therefore making it eternal, forever, everlasting, but in the context that, as THE Judgement day is not yet, but the eternality of the LOF will have a beginning in time future and never end, based solely on lack of Scripture indicating an end to it.

I don't think aidios would have been used as a word for that meaning of eternal regarding the LOF.

But, while I've already copped to being ignorant of greek, it seems to me context can define the meaning of the word, just as the english word 'love' has at least 5 different words in the greek. In english the surround contexts derives the meaning of love to differentiate love for family and love for my dog.

Agape prolly has a totally unknow meaning to many.

Havahope · Mar 30, 2006

der alter said:
Back to my original answer. It does not matter. With God all things are possible. If God decrees a thing to happen, it will happen. Body, no body, spiritual, physical, or none of the above.

Der, I certainly agree with that as being the truth. And I agree that it is equally the truth that whatever God desires, He surely will have.
1 Timothy 2:1. "I exhort therefore, that first of all supplications, prayers, intercessions, [and] giving of thanks be made for all men;
2. For kings, and [for] all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.
3. For this [is] good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior;
4. Who will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth.
5. For [there is] one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
6. Who gave himself a ransom for ALL, to be testified in due time."

Der Alter said:
You're right God knows who and who is not saved. The book of life is not for God, it is for us. Just as the Bible is not for God, he knows what he said. It is for us.

If it is for us, then why is He waiting until it is too late to show it to us?

gort · Mar 30, 2006

SS quotes:

fyi, If someone asks you for an example or two they are not asking for you to reapeat the same statement over and over again but to give a real example of what the statement means.

I did. It means what it simple says. To blaspheme the HS.

Such as one who see the holy spirit in action and attributes the work of the spirit to that of the devil.

There's an example. BUt how does one know it is the HS?

Mat 24:24 For false Christs and false prophets will arise and show great signs and wonders; so much so that, if it were possible, they would deceive even the elect.

What if one does not know what the word blaspheme means, could they ever understand what you were saying.

www.dictionary.com is useful.

And once again not forgiven does not mean can not be paid. It means must be paid.

God isn't required to "must be paid" anything. It is His great mercy.

By your reasoning if someone at somepoint has committed blasphemy then from that point on they should feel totally free to commit any and every sin they can think of for the punishement will be the same if it is done once or 1 million times, if it is thier only sin or if it is the first of millions no difference according to you.

logical fallacy via faulty mind reading powers....

try again.

FineLinen · Mar 30, 2006

timlamb said:
I am saying that you do not know what righteousness is. It includes justice, and yes, that includes eternal damnation for those who turn their hearts agains God.

Tim: Does "eternal damnation" apply to the House of God? And, how does regular damnation compare with the greater damnation of the scribes and Pharisees and those whom the Apostle James calls his brothers?

[move]"God must be accomplishing a design invariable and without the shadow of turning, the design to save every one of us everlastingly." -Florence Nightingale-[/move]

FineLinen · Mar 30, 2006

KCDAD said:
OK here my attempt to address your Jewish encyclopedia article. For clarity I printed my responses in Green so they could be distinguished from your article.
Notice, it doesn't take scripture to counter these argument, because these arguments are not based on scripture. All it takes is reason.

Jewish Encyclopedia-GEHENNA

The place where children were sacrificed to the god Moloch was originally in the "valley of the son of Hinnom," to the south of Jerusalem (Josh. xv. 8, passim; II Kings xxiii. 10; Jer. ii. 23; vii. 31-32; xix. 6, 13-14). For this reason the valley was deemed to be accursed, and "Gehenna" therefore soon became a figurative equivalent for "hell." Hell, like paradise, was created by God (Sotah 22a); according to Gen. R. ix. 9, the words "very good" in Gen. i. 31 refer to hell; hence the latter must have been created on the sixth day.SO hell is a good place. Torture, punishment, eternal retribution for temporal violations… Yet opinions on this point vary. According to some sources, it was created on the second day; according to others, even before the world, only its fire being created on the second day (Gen. R. iv., end; Pes. 54a). The "fiery furnace" that Abraham saw (Gen. xv. 17, Hebr.) was Gehenna Abraham saw Gehenna according to this. The Valley of Hinnom in Abraham’s time was a fertile, lovely place… a garden so to speak. (Mek. xx. 18b, 71b; comp. Enoch, xcviii. 3, ciii. 8; Matt. xiii. 42, 50; 'Er. 19a, where the "fiery furnace" is also identified with the gate of Gehenna). Opinions also vary as to the situation, extent, and nature of hell. The statement that Gehenna is situated in the valley of Hinnom near Jerusalem, in the "accursed valley" (Enoch, xxvii. 1 et seq.), means simply that it has a gate there. IS this literal or figurative? If literal it is nonsense. It was in Zion, and had a gate in Jerusalem (Isa. xxxi. 9). It had three gates, one in the wilderness, one in the sea, and one in Jerusalem ('Er. 19a).

"The earth is one-sixtieth of the garden, the garden one-sixtieth of Eden [paradise], Eden one-sixtieth of Gehenna; hence the whole world is like a lid for Gehenna. Oh I see, now it is clear that the former reference was not literal. How could they measure a real place Gehenna based on a flat world view of the Earth? Some say that Gehenna can not be measured" (Pes. 94a). It is divided into seven compartments (Sotah 10b); a similar view was held by the Babylonians (Jeremias, "Hölle und Paradies bei den Babyloniern," pp. 16 et seq., Leipsic, 1901; Guthe, "Kurzes Bibel-wörterb." p. 272, Tübingen and Leipsic, 1903). Because of the extent of Gehenna the sun, on setting in the evening, passes by it, and receives from it its own fire (evening glow; B. B. 84a). A fiery stream ("dinur") falls upon the head of the sinner in Gehenna (Hag. 13b). This is "the fire of the West, which every setting sun receives. I came to a fiery river, whose fire flows like water, and which empties into a large sea in the West" (Enoch, xvii. 4-6).

The fire of Gehenna never goes out (Tosef., Ber. 6, 7; Mark ix. 43 et seq.; Matt. xviii. 8, xxv. 41; comp. Schwally, l.c. p. 176); there is always plenty of wood there (Men. 100a). This fire is sixty times as hot Hmmmm, Do you notice the Hebrew trend here to repeat symbolic numbers? Just like rain for 40 days and nights, 40 years in the wilderness, 40 days in the desert…? as any earthly fire (Ber. 57b). There is a smell of sulfur in Gehenna IS it really sulfur or rotten eggs? (Enoch, lxvii. 6).

In Isa. lxvi. 16, 24 it is said that God judges by means of fire. Gehenna is dark in spite of the immense masses of fire; it is like night This is of course not literal… fire gives off light, but there can be no light in hell because God is light and light represents wisdom.(Yeb. 109b; comp. Job x. 22). The same idea also occurs in Enoch, x. 4, lxxxii. 2; Matt. viii. 12, xxii. 13, xxv. 30 (comp. Schwally, l.c. p. 176).

It is assumed ASSUMED????? You mean they do not know this? that there is an angel-prince in charge of Gehenna. He says to God: "Put everything into my sea; nourish me with the seed of Seth; I am hungry." But God refuses his request, telling him to take the heathen peoples (Shab. 104). God says to the angel-prince: "I punish the slanderers from above, and I also punish them from below with glowing coals" [Note, When does this end??] ('Ar. 15b). The souls of the sons of Korah were burned, and the angel-prince gnashed his teeth at them on account of their flattery of Korah (Sanh. 52a). Gehenna cries: "Give me the heretics and the sinful [Roman] power" ('Ab. Zarah 17a).

It is assumed oops assumed again. in general that sinners Can you define this? Is there anyone who is not a sinner? go to hell immediately after their death. The famous teacher Johanan b. Zakkai wept before his death because he did not know whether he would go to paradise or to hell (Ber. 28b). The pious go to paradise, and sinners to hell" [Note, When does this end??] (B. M. 83b). Paradise must be a real lonely place… let’s see, there would be Jesus, er no, he’s at the right hand of God sitting on his throne. God can’t be in Paradise because it is a real place with measured limits. God is infinite. So that would leave… Elijah?

They are cast into Gehenna to a depth ahhh, like high rise condos… the most desired are at the top…commensurate with their sinfulness. They say: "Lord of the world, Thou hast done well; Paradise for the pious, Gehenna for the wicked" [Note, When does this end??] ('Er. 19a).

There are three categories of men; You gotta love this… there are three kinds of people in the world: those who always sin, those who never sin, and all the rest. HA! the wholly pious and the arch-sinners are not purified, but only those between these two classes (Ab. R. N. 41). A similar view is expressed in the Babylonian Talmud, which adds that those who have sinned themselves but have not led others into sin remain for twelve months in Gehenna; "after twelve months It takes that long in a fire 60 times hotter than anything on Earth? their bodies are destroyed, their souls are burned, and the wind strews the ashes under the feet of the pious. Good thing there are many pious or there would be ashes all over the place.But as regards the heretics, etc., and Jeroboam, Nebat's son, hell shall pass away, but they shall not pass away" (R. H. 17a; comp. Shab. 33b).

The felicity of the pious in paradise excites the wrath of the sinners who behold it when they come from hell (Lev. R. xxxii.). The Book of Enoch (xxvii. 3, xlviii. 9, lxii. 12) paraphrases this thought by saying that the pious rejoice in the pains of hell suffered by the sinners. This here is sick and incomprehensible. Abraham takes the damned to his bosom ('Er. 19a; comp. Luke xvi. 19-31).

When Nebuchadnezzar descended into hell, all its inhabitants were afraid that he was coming to rule over them (Shab. 149a; comp. Isa. xiv. 9-10). The Book of Enoch also says that it is chiefly the heathen who are to be cast into the fiery pool Gehenna is actually a fiery pool then… when they call it a pit, they were being metaphorical? So was Enoch right or not? Is it just the heathen (GENTILES) or is it all the sinners? on the Day of Judgment (x. 6, xci. 9, et al.). "The Lord, the Almighty, will punish them on the Day of Judgment by putting fire and worms into their flesh, so that they cry out with pain unto all eternity" (Judith xvi. 17).

The sinners in Gehenna will be filled with pain when God puts back the souls into the dead bodies But the dead bodies were destroyed! What does destroyed mean here? on the Day of Judgment, according to Isa. xxxiii. 11 (Sanh. 108b). Enoch also holds (xlviii. 9) that the sinners will disappear like chaff before the faces of the elect. There will be no Gehenna in the future world, however, for "God will take the sun out of its case, and it will heal the pious with its rays and will punish the sinners [Note, When does this end??] (Ned. 8b).

It is frequently said that certain sins will lead man into Gehenna. The name "Gehenna" itself is explained to mean that unchastity will lead to Gehenna HUH? The Greek which means “Valley of Hinnom” actually really and truly means something completely different? (הנס = חנס ; 'Er. 19a); so also will adultery, idolatry, pride, mockery, hypocrisy, anger, etc. Where did they get all this? They don’t read Strong. (Sotah 4b, 41b; Ta'an. 5a; B. B. 10b, 78b; 'Ab. Zarah 18b; Ned. 22a).

This document is only for those who wish to know the truth regarding mile high ice cream cones!

The redemption of men from every tongue, people and race is far from being the whole story of Christ's work of atonement as John understands it. For he hears the choirs of heaven joined by the voices of the whole creation in a final outburst of praise. This should not be dismissed as mere hyperbole. John knows only too well that there is much on earth and under the earth and in the sea which has no inclination to join in the worship of Christ, and that these hostile elements are represented even in heaven. But such is his confidence in the universality of Christ's achievement that his vision cannot stop short of universal response. He agrees with Paul that God has already in the Cross reconciled the whole universe to himself, and that to make His act of amnesty and reconciliation known to the world is the royal and priestly task of the church, the success of which is already anticipated in the heavenly Amen. -Geo. B. Caird-

Havahope · Mar 30, 2006

timlamb said:
If we were all arested for being Christians in Afghanistan, and they used this thread as evidence, how many of us do you think they could convict?

All of us.

timlamb said:
And if we were killed, which ones would have been martyred for Christ?

Only God knows that.

timlamb said:
A while back I nearly begged the moderators to lock up this thing, I really don't think there is anything to be gained from carrying this any farther, but I can't seem to stay away.
Strangely, I have become comfortable here and even developed some unexplainable attatchment for some of you.

Have you stopped to think that there might be a reason why you keep getting drawn back to this thread?

I know what you mean by forming attachments to the other posters in this thread. Why, I have even grown to like old Der. I know he doesn't mean all those nasty things that he says about us. At first I had a nick name for him. It was "dirty altar". But I didn't dare call him that in any of my posts for fear that I would get a warning point against me. So I decided that it would be better just to call him "Der" and not have to worry about it. Once I got that impulse under control, then it was easier to be able to like him. Now please don't anyone laugh at me. I had to work really hard on that.

timlamb said:
I have learned much so it has not been a waste, but I, like you, I am sure, have only become stronger in my beliefs. I think I said something like this about 500 posts ago and it got totally ignored.
I'll check back to see if anyone of you had anything to say worth reading, but if I try to post, tell me to get to work.
see ya
timlamb

Bye timlamb. Good luck with your book. And keep in mind that "God moves in mysterious ways." And just when we think we know everything that God has to show us, He shows us something else that we needed to know.

FineLinen · Mar 30, 2006

Rev. 5:13

And I heard the voice of everything created in Heaven, upon earth, under the earth and such as are upon the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying. Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto Him that sits upon the throne, and unto the Lamb unto the ages of ages.

Every created thing= Pan ktisma=

Every creature in a still wider antiphonal circle beyond the circle of angels, from all the four great fields of life (in heaven, upon the earth, under the earth (as in verse 3, with on the seas "epi thv talasshv" added). No created thing is left out. This universal chorus of praise to Christ from all created life reminds one of the profound mystical passage in Romans 8:20-22 concerning the sympathetic agony of creation (ktisiv) in hope of freedom from the bondage of corruption. If the trail of the serpent is on all creation, it will be ultimately thrown off. -A.T. Robertson Word Pictures Of The N.T.-

[move]If the trail of the serpent is on all creation, it will be ultimately thrown off![/move]

Soul Searcher · Mar 30, 2006

daneel said:
I did. It means what it simple says. To blaspheme the HS.

and round and round we go.
Looks like there is no point in attempting to talk with you on this subject at all.

God isn't required to "must be paid" anything. It is His great mercy.

So in his great mercy he neither forgives nor accepts due payment according to you?

logical fallacy via faulty mind reading powers....

try again.

Ok so where is my error?
Have you not said that if a person blasphemes the HS they will never be forgiven?
Have you not also said that there is no way to make amends or pay for this sin?
Have you not also indicated that the same will suffer an eternity in hell?
Is it possible to suffer a greater penalty?
What is the penalty if one comits the act of blasphemy more than once?, more than 100 times?, a million?
Do other sins combined with this one or many add to the eternity of punishment somehow?
Is what I said a logical fallacy as you state or is it exactly on the mark of what you have been saying?

timlamb · Mar 31, 2006

I have to say something about blasphemy. After reading definations and biblical statements, and considering what must constitute blasphemy, I don't think anyone could truely blaspheme the Holy Spirit and ever have a heart for God. I don't think you can blaspheme some one you don't know, it has to be an intentinal vile act. No one accedentaly commits blasphemy. Only pure hatered for God could be so vile.
But the bible does specifically say it is unforgivable, hence no second chance, no allincompasing salvation.

Der Alte · Mar 31, 2006

Havahope said:
[SIZE=-1]If it is for us, then why is He waiting until it is too late to show it to us?[/SIZE]

If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

Der Alte · Mar 31, 2006

Gregory of Nyssa, poster boy for Universalism, or is he?

Volume V. Gregory of Nyssa: Dogmatic Treatises; Select Writings and Letters

"In the treatise, De Pauperibus Amandis, II. p. 240, he says of the last judgment that God will give to each his due; repose eternal to those who have exercised pity and a holy life; but the eternal punishment of fire for the harsh and unmerciful: and addressing the rich who have made a bad use of their riches, he says, 'Who will extinguish the flames ready to devour you and engulf you? Who will stop the gnawings of a worm that never dies?'"

http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-05/Npnf2-05-07.htm#P180_18498

Gregory of Nyssa On the Making of Man [380 AD]

Now as the soul attracts again to itself that which is its own and properly belongs to it, what labour, I pray you, that is involved for the Divine power, could be a hindrance to concourse of kindred things when they are urged to their own place by the unspeakable attraction of nature, whatever it may be? For that some signs of our compound nature remain in the soul even after dissolution is shown by the dialogue in Hades, where the bodies had been conveyed to the tomb, but some bodily token still remained in the souls by which both Lazarus was recognized and the rich man was not unknown.

http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-05/Npnf2-05-36.htm#P2994_2024295

Gregory of Nyssa On Virginity

Then this grasping after money and superiority engenders either anger with his kith and kin, or pride towards his inferiors, or envy of those above him; then hypocrisy comes in after this envy; a soured temper after that; a misanthropical spirit after that; and behind them all a state of condemnation which ends in the dark fires of hell. You see the chain; how all follows from one cherished passion. Seeing, then, that this inseparable train of moral diseases has entered once for all into the world, one single way of escape is pointed out to us in the exhortations of the inspired writings; and that is to separate ourselves from the life which involves this sequence of sufferings. If we haunt Sodom, we cannot escape the rain of fire; nor if one who has fled out of her looks back upon her desolation, can he fail to become a pillar of salt rooted to the spot. We cannot be rid of the Egyptian bondage, unless we leave Egypt, that is, this life that lies under water29 , and pass, not that Red Sea, but this black and gloomy Sea of life. But suppose we remain in this evil bondage, and, to use the Master's words, "the truth shall not have made us free," how can one who seeks a lie and wanders in the maze of this world ever come to the truth? How can one who has surrendered his existence to be chained by nature run away from this captivity?

This simile, then, of the torrent holds; human life is a tossing and tumultuous stream sweeping down to find its natural level; none of the objects sought for in it last till the seekers are satisfied; all that is carried to them by this stream comes near, just touches them, and passes on; so that the present moment in this impetuous flow eludes enjoyment, for the after-current snatches it from their view. It would be our interest therefore to keep far away from such a stream, lest, engaged on temporal things, we should neglect eternity. How can a man keep for ever anything here, be his love for it never so passionate? Which of life's most cherished objects endures always?

All other delights also deceive the bodily eye for a time, and then pass behind the veil of oblivion. Nature's inevitable changes are many; they agonize him whose love is passionate. One way of escape is open: it is, to be attached to none of these things, and to get as far away as possible from the society of this emotional and sensual world; or rather, for a man to go outside the feelings which his own body gives rise to. Then, as he does not live for the flesh, he will not be subject to the troubles of the flesh. But this amounts to living for the spirit only, and imitating all we can the employment of the world of spirits. There they neither marry, nor are given in marriage. Their work and their excellence is to contemplate the Father of all purity, and to beautify the lines of their own character from the Source of all beauty, so far as imitation of It is possible.

http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-05/Npnf2-05-31.htm#P2642_1797990

Gregory of Nyssa On the Soul and the Resurrection Argument

We shall be like God so far that we shall always contemplate the Beautiful in Him. Now, God, in contemplating Himself, has no desire and hope, no regret and memory. The moment of fruition is always present, and so His Love is perfect, without the need of any emotion. So will it be with us. God draws "that which belongs to Him" to this blessed passionlessness; and in this very drawing consists the torment of a passion-laden soul. Severe and long-continued pains in eternity are thus decreed to sinners, not because God hates them, nor for the sake alone of punishing them; but "because what belongs to God must at any cost be preserved for Him." The degree of pain which must be endured by each one is necessarily proportioned to the measure of the wickedness.

That, said the Teacher, is my meaning; and also that the agony will be measured by the amount of evil there is in each individual. For it would not be reasonable to think that the man who has remained so long as we have supposed in evil known to be forbidden, and the man who has fallen only into moderate sins, should be tortured to the same amount in the judgment upon their vicious habit; but according to the quantity of material will be the longer or shorter time that that agonizing flame will be burning; that is, as long as there is fuel to feed it. In the case of the man who has acquired a heavy weight of material, the consuming fire must necessarily be very searching; but where that which the fire has to feed upon has spread less far, there the penetrating fierceness of the punishment is mitigated, so far as the subject itself, in the amount of its evil, is diminished. In any and every case evil must be removed out of existence, so that, as we said above, the absolutely non-existent should cease to be at all. Since it is not in its nature that evil should exist outside the will, does it not follow that when it shall be that every will rests in God, evil will be reduced to complete annihilation, owing to no receptacle being left for it?

The Teacher answered: The expressions of that narrative of the Word are certainly material; but still many hints are interspersed in it to rouse the skilled inquirer to a more discriminating study of it. I mean that He Who parts the good from the bad by a great gulf, and makes the man in torment crave for a drop to be conveyed by a finger, and the man who has been ill-treated in this life rest on a patriarch's bosom, and Who relates their previous death and consignment to the tomb, takes an intelligent searcher of His meaning far beyond a superficial interpretation. For what sort of eyes has the447Rich Man to lift up in hell, when he has left his bodily eyes in that tomb? And how can a disembodied spirit feel any flame? And what sort of tongue can he crave to be cooled with the drop of water, when he has lost his tongue of flesh? What is the finger that is to convey to him this drop? What sort of place is the "bosom" of repose? The bodies of both of them are in the tomb, and their souls are dis-embodied, and do not consist of parts either; and so it is impossible to make the framework of the narrative correspond with the truth, if we understand it literally; we can do that only by translating each detail into an equivalent in the world of ideas. Thus we must think of the gulf as that which parts ideas which may not be confounded from running together, not as a chasm of the earth. Such a chasm, however vast it were, could be traversed with no difficulty by a disembodied intelligence; since intelligence can in no time79 be wherever it will.

Note, Gregory teaches the story of Lazarus and the rich man as factual.

What then, I asked, are the fire and the gulf and the other features in the picture? Are they not that which they are said to be?

http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-05/Npnf2-05-37.htm#P3468_2242372

Der Alte · Mar 31, 2006

Another poster boy for Universalism. Again, NOT!

Clement of Alexandria VI.-From the Book on the Soul.

All souls are immortal, even those of the wicked, for whom it were better that they were not deathless. For, punished with the endless vengeance of quenchless fire, and not dying, it is impossible for them to have a, period put to their misery.

http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-02/anf02-79.htm#P10261_2871673

Clement of Alexandria Exhortation to the Heathen

For the author of evil, torment has been prepared; and so the prophet Zecharias threatens him: He that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee; lo, is not this a brand plucked from the fire? What an infatuated desire, then, for voluntary death is this, rooted in mens minds! Why do they flee to this fatal brand, with which they shall be burned, when it is within their power to live nobly according to God, and not according to custom? For God bestows life freely; but evil custom, after our departure from this world, brings on the sinner unavailing remorse with punishment.

http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-02/anf02-50.htm#P2691_785581

Clement of Alexandria Who is the Rich Man that Shall Be Saved?

For though sparing, and aiming at testing, who will receive meritoriously or not, it is possible for you to neglect some that are loved by God; the penalty for which is the punishment of eternal fire.

http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-02/anf02-86.htm#P10493_2903393

Der Alte · Mar 31, 2006

Merzbow said:
[size=-1]I agree COMPLETELY with the dictionary definitions you posted. Now PLEASE go back and highlight the FIRST definitions meaning LASTING FOR AN AGE instead of the LATER definitions. We're really sick and tired of you pulling this stunt again and again. Der Alter, I'm not going anywhere. Every time you do this I'm going to respond and point out how you once again highlight the non-primary definitions of the word. We can argue again and again in other messages about how Plato and so on used this word. But when you put up dictionary definitions, don't insult our intelligence. We can see just as clearly as you are what the primary definitions are.[/size]

We have a huge contradiction here, first you say, I agree COMPLETELY with the dictionary definitions you posted. Definitions, plural, implies more than one definition. COMPLETELY means everything I posted in that definition.

Then you say, The first definitions. and The primary definitions. What are these first and primary definitions?

If you agree COMPLETELY with all the definitions I posted, why do I then see something about, non-primary definitions of the word, and LATER definitions. Do you mean to tell us now, that [size=+1]αιων[/size]/[size=+1]αιωνιος[/size] have more than one meaning?

For weeks virtually every universalist here has been copy/posting the godless drivel from hellmakers which supposedly proves that [size=+1]αιων[/size]/aion/[size=+1]αιωνιος[/size]aionios, never, ever, means eternal, forever, etc. Now suddenly you are talking about primary and non-primary, meanings and someone else is agreeing with you.

Would you please enlighten us, what, are those, non-primary and LATER definitions? Do those definitions show that [size=+1]αιων[/size]/aion/[size=+1]αιωνιος[/size] do in fact have the meaning, eternal, forever, unending, as I, and other non-URs, have said all along?

After weeks of me posting the definition of [size=+1]αιων[/size]/aion/[size=+1]αιωνιος[/size] from the Liddell-Scott-Jones classical Greek lexicon, and you and others quoting the definition, highlighting this and that, and repeatedly saying that [size=+1]αιων[/size]/aion/[size=+1]αιωνιος[/size], never, ever, meant eternal, forever, now you finally admit that the LSJ definition lists other definitions beside limited time, age enduring, etc.

And evidently you dont see anything at all hypocritical about this. Is this what is meant when the universalist crowd says truth, honesty, and integrity and showing love for their fellow man?

Maybe you can help me out, you are presenting yourself as an expert on Greek lexicons. I have looked for the rule that says only primary definitions are valid and secondary definitions are false and invalid. Due to length I have posted a guide in using a Greek lexicon in the next post. Can you please show us all where everything you said about "primary, non-primary" or "later definitions" is stated? I'm sure it must be factual, you surely wouldn't be making all this stuff up, being so concerned with the truth, as you let on.

To demonstrate your truthfulness just show us where this actual guide to using a lexicon says what you claim for "primary, non-primary" or "later definitions"

Der Alte · Mar 31, 2006

Using the BDB
For a sample, let's read and decode the very first entry on p.1. The main entry is given as: A, a, T6. This is not a word per se, but the first letter of the Greek alphabet, given in both upper and lower case. The inclusion of the article T6 tells us that when this letter is used as a word in the text, it is treated as a neuter gender word. The next item in the entry, "inded." is an abbreviation found in list 8 on p. lxvii and means "indeclinable." In other words, this "word" never takes case endings and is always spelled "a." The next note in parentheses (s. aX~a) teUs us to also see (s. is in list 8, p. lxxvi) the entry under the word 6X~a (which you will find on p.48).

The next portion of the entry is printed in bold face Roman type and gives the definition of the word. In this instance the entry A, a, T6 is defined as "first letter of the Greek Alphabet." The inclusion of an actual dictionary definition may not seem significant if this is your first exposure to a Greek lexicon, yet it is a startling change from almost all previous Greek lexicons in any language.22 Traditionally lexicons have given only translation glasses-one word equivalents in the target language that suggest how the particular Greek word might be translated (see Danker's Foreword to BDAG, p. viii, first paragraph). BDAG does include suggested formal equivalents following the definition. These are given in bold italic type. In our sample entry, we are told that this word is translated as alpha.

We are then told to compare (cp. = list 8, p. lxiii) SibOr 5, 15. if you are somewhat conversant with NT studies, you might guess that this refers to the Sibylline Oracles-and you would be correct. If not, you would turn first to abbreviation list 8 where you would find Sibor on p. lxxvi. It is listed as a reference to Oracula Sibyllina (Latin for Sibylline Oracles) which date from the second and third centuries A.D. We are also referred to list 5, which takes us to p. xlix. Here we find the full entry giving the bibliographical information of the published editions of the Sibylene Oracles that have been cited in BDAG-that edited byj. Gef***en in 1902 and by A. Kurfess in 1951. The "5, 15" gives the location/reference of the passage which Danker wants us to compare.

Returning to our sample entry we next read "hence as numeral a' = 1." This tells us that the letter alpha functions in Greek not only as the first letter of the alphabet, but also as the equivalent of our English numeral 1. (Note that in this case it is written with a "prime sign" following: a'.) We are then told parenthetically that this a' can be used either for the cardinal one (= e'( or the ordinal first (= rrpwro~). An example of a' used (presumably! I haven't checked) as an ordinal may be found in TestSol. This will send us scurrying back to list 8 again. On p. lxxvii we learn that this refers to the Testament of Solomon, a writing dating somewhere from the first to the third century A.D. The reference to "List 2" directs us to the full entry on p. xxxiv where the 1922 edition of C. H. McC own is cited. Comparing the lexical entry with list 2 also enables us to note the example that BDAG cites is in "PvindobBosw at 18:34." List 2 includes reference to a specific papyrus manuscript of the Testament of Solomon, Papyrus Vindobonensis, edited by K. Preisdendonz. (What the "B osw" means, I have no idea!) We are also told that a is often used in the sense of "first" in the papyri.

As we press on into this entry, following the parenthetical note and a colon, we learn that a' is used to mean "first" (i.e., rrpw'rn) in the titles of letters, citing 1 Corinthians, 1 The ssalonians, 1 Timothy, 1 Peter, 1 John, and 1 Clement as examples. (The parenthetical note within this statement suggests alternate equivalents: rrpwre'pa and np6Tepov.) At the end of this sentence "e'vTo~~ Hm 1, title" informs us that it appears with the word E'VTO~~ (commandment) in (the Shepherd [i.e., pastor] of) Hermes, in the section titled Mandates (= EvTo~~ ).23 It is, in other words, not only used in titles of books, but also in headings of sections within a work. And we finally reach a period-the end of the first sentence in the entry.

The next few sentences discuss the symbolic use of the letter a. "As a symbolic letter A signifies the beginning, ~ the end." Following this statement is a bibliographical reference: "FBoll, Sphaera 1903, 469f£" This is a book by F. Boll titled Sphaera published in 1903; we are directed specifically to a discussion that begins on p.469 and continues for several pages (ff). We can find Boll listed in abbreviation section 8 on p. lxi or on p. lii (section 6), but this particular book (sphaera) is not listed. In the Boll entry that is given, note the equal sign after the bold face listing: " = FB.," This is the first (F) and last (B.) initial of the author's name. This will be helpful if we attempt to further identif~ the work cited. (In cases where BDAG does not give complete information on books, it is often because they are recognized reference works or well-known major studies-at least to specialists! Your recourse here is to turn to library catalogs and search by author or title or to do a web search. In this case a Google web search <www.google.com> for "Sphaera" and "Boll" will enable you to discover that Franz Boll published Sphaera: Neuegriechische Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der Stern bilder [spheres: New Greek Texts and an Examination ofthe History ofthe Constellations]. Although published in 1903, it was reprinted in 1967. (Boll died in 1924.) Our search this time has turned up a major work that most of you cannot read since it is written in German, but the same process will other times lead you to works in English or Spanish or French or Italian-some of which languages you can read.24

Returning to BDAG's entry on alpha, we are next told that "The two [letters, i.e., a and w] came to designate the universe and every kind of diving and superhuman power. Two more bibliographical entries follow which discuss this statement. The first is listed as: "S. Rtzst., Poim. 256f£ Erlbsungsmyst. 244." Turning first to abbreviation list 8, we find on p. lxxvi the entry" Rtzst." and are told that this refers to RReitzensten who appears in list 6. There is also a sub list here that gives "Poim" as "Poimandres." Note that the "S." is not an initial. BDAG does not use a period and space with names. Reitzensten's first initial is "R" not "S." The "S." is the abbreviation further down p. lxxvi and means "see." If we turn back to list 6, all that we add is that Reitzensten's book Poimandres was published in 1904. Since it is also in German, most of you will stop at that point. If you were more serious in your research, or simply were curious, you could pursue this further. I did so by checking the Luther Seminary library catalog on the web (they have one of the larger collections of German theological works). That catalog shows the full title as Poimandres: Studien zuv griechisch-dgyptischen and flu hchristlichen literature [Poimandres: Studies in Greek-Egyptian and Early Christian Literature], Leipzig, 1904. Reprint: Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellchaft, 1966.

"Poimandres" (also spelled Poemandes or Poemander) means "Shepherd of men" (rroLprjv and a"v6pc~ and is the title of the most famous of the Hermetic literature

24That most Americans ignore everything not written in English is unfortunate and a commentary on both our provincialism and the anti-intellectualism of our culture in general and our churches in particular.
(Corpus Hermeticum, or Hermetica; Poimandres is sometimes also used as the name for the entire Corpus rather than just the first document).25

Returning to BDAG, the second bibliographical entry is another work by Franz Boll, listed here as "Aus d. Offb.Joh. 1914, 26f." Turning to list 8, p. lxi, provides a slightly longer title ("Aus der Offenb. johannis") and refers us to list 6, p. lii, where we are given the full title: Aus der offenbarungjohannis. A search of the Luther Seminary catalog gives the complete bibliographical data: Aus der Ofienbarungjohannis: hellenistische Studien zum Weltbild der Apokalypse [The Revelation from John: Hellenistic Studies in the Worldview ofthe Apocalypse]. Leipzig: B. G. Teubuer, 1914. Reprinted in the series: Studien zur Geschichte des antiken Weltbildes und der griechischen Wissenschaft, 1 (= vol.1 of Studies in the History of Classical Worldviews and Greek Science), Amsterdam: A. M. Hakkert, 1967.

Next we are told that the earliest Christian usage of a and w as symbolic letters occurs in the Sator-anagram of Pompeii which is discussed in "JDanie'lou, Primitive Christian Symbols, tr. DAttwater, '64, 99-101." Checking a library catalog will tell you that the author's name is Jean Danie'lou, the translator's ("tr.") name is Donald Attwater and that the publisher is Helicon Press in Baltimore.26

BDAG then cites the phrase EYW eLpi TO a~~a KaL T6 w~ which occurs several times in Revelation. You will need to look at your Greek testament to understand the entry at this point. We are told the letters a and w are explained as "beginning and end" in Rev. 1:8 v.1. The abbreviation is expanded in list 8, p. lxxviii, as "variae lectiones," Latin for variant readings. Your Greek text (either UBS4 or NA27) has the ....... w' phrase, but no
reference to "first and last." The textual apparatus, however, indicates an insertion following this phrase: a'pxn' KaL TE'AO~, which occurs in some texts. If this reading were original (it probably isn't), then John would be equating 6A~a with apxn' (beginning). Even if this is not original, it still illustrates the same equation, but by a later copyist who inserted it in the text at this point (perhaps because he remembered this combination and assumed that the manuscript from which he was copying [the exemplar] had omitted it by mistake, whereas what he remembered occurred in Rev. 21:6 or 22:13 instead). Note that BDAG does not use bold face text for "1:18" at this point because that text has ~ not a-and the entry we are looking at is for the letter a, not the word ~ (If BDAG cited Rev. 1:8 v.1. under the article on aA~a ,then it would be in bold face text.)

The next reference cited is Rev. 21:5 (look at it in your Greek testament) which also uses aA~a and apxn' in parallel. He next refers us (S. = see) to an article by 0. Weinreich in ARW (thejournal ArchivfiirReligionswissenschaft, see list 8, p. lxi), vol.19 published in 1919, pp. 180£, which comments on the use of aA~a in Rev. 21:6 (perhaps also Rev. 1:8 v.1., but you would have to check the article to know for sure).

The en try continues with reference to a variant reading (v.1.) in Rev. 1:11 in which a is parallel, not with 6pxn' (beginning), but with TpWTO~ (first): EYW E1~L TO A Kal TO C), 0 flPWTO~ Kat 0 eaxaTO~.27 In this case, the reference 1:11 v.1. is bolded because the text there (in ctr. to 1:8) does use the letter a rather than the word ~ In Rev. 22:13, a is paralleled with both apxn and UpWTO~ (see the text in your Testament).28

Another bibliographical reference occurs here: "(cp. Mal., P.105, 812 [8])." Using the abbreviation lists you can decipher this as follows: The "cp." means "compare" (list 8, p. lxiii). "Mel." is found on list 8, p. lxx, as the abbreviation for Melito of Sardis who lived in the second century A.D. Checking list 5 to which we are referred enables us to identify the "P." as Melito's Paschal Homily (the 1966 edition by 0. Perler and the 1979 edition by S. Hall are cited). The following characters (los, 812 [8]) identiiy the location of the passage in Melito that BDAG suggests we compare.

The next statement tells us that John's use of a'X~a in parallel with flpWTO~ and E~XaTO~ can be found in Isaiah 44:6 and in "related rabbinic symbolism" Isaiah records the proclamation of YHWH that: ~ ';::i i"£J~~ ~ (I am the first and I am the last). This appears in the LXX as Eyw' TTpwTO~ Kal ryw' peTa' TauTa (I am first and I am after these things)-the Hebrew text is a closer parallel than the LXX, which might have been expected from BDAG's reference to rabbinic parallels.

The lexical entry concludes with several additional sources of information. First there is a cross reference to the article in BDAG on C) (S. on C) = see the article on C)). We are also told to see three articles in other published sources:

FCabrol, Dict. d'Arch. I, 1, 1-25. This will not be found in list 8 under the author (Cabrol), but p. lxiv does tell us that Dict. d'Arch. appears in list 6 under "DACL." Thus we find on p. liii the entry "DACL = Dictionnaire d'arche'ologie chre'tienne et de liturgie, ed. FCabrol, HLeclercq, I-XV 1903-53. A bit of sleuthing on the web tells us that this is a 15 vol. encyclopedia edited by Fernand Cabrol and Henri Leclercq titled Dictiona~y of Christian Archaeology and Liturgy, published 1903-53 in Paris by Letouzey et Ane.

FDornseiff, D. Alphabet in Mystik u. Magic2 1925, 17£ This I cannot find anywhere in the abbreviations list in BDAG, but several library catalog searches on the web produced this hit at the Princeton Seminary Library: Franz Dornseif£ Das Alphabet in Mystik und Magic [The Alphabet in Mysticism and Magic] (Leipzig: zentralantiquariat der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik, 1975). This was originally published in part as the author's dissertation in 1916 under the title Buchstabenmystik, and the complete work in 1925 (Leipzig: B. G. Teubner).

R. Charles, HDB I 70. In list 8, p. lxvi we find a listing s.v. HDB to HastDB on list 6. Turning there we find on p. liv that this is the 4 vol. Dictionary of the Bible edited by J. Hastings between 1898 and 1904. (There is a reprint edition: New York: Scribner,
1924.)

There is only one additional piece of information in this entry. At the end of the article the abbreviation "TW" is given. Our now well-used list 8 tells us on p. lxxvi ii that TW stands for Theologisches Wo~terbuch zum NT; tr. GBromiley, Theological Dictionary of the NT. This is the set best known in English simply as TDNT, or sometimes "Kittel." This closing annotation tells us that there is an entry for the same word in TDNT. All entries in BDAG close with this note if the word is listed in TDNT. (Occasionally a vol. number will be given if the entry is not under the same heading.)

http://faculty.bbc.edu/rdecker/documents/UsingBDAG.pdf

FineLinen · Mar 31, 2006

timlamb said:
I am saying that you do not know what righteousness is. It includes justice, and yes, that includes eternal damnation for those who turn their hearts agains God.

Tim, a couple of questions for you regarding damnation?

1. Is all damnation equal?

2. Is the elect House of God subject to eternal damnation?

3. Is the greater damnation of the Scribes and Pharisee's the same greater damnation as those described by the Apostle James as "my brothers", specifically teachers?

4. What is damnation?

[move]"Assuredly the Bible is not the story of sin, deepening into eternal ruin, of God's Son worsted in His utmost effort; it is from the opening to the close the story of grace stronger than sin--of life victorious over every form of death--of God triumphing over evil."[/move]

FineLinen · Mar 31, 2006

Our dear heavenly Father, and Lord of our lives, welcome to the Greek lesson for today. We regret to inform You that what you have purposed in the exaltation of Your beloved Son as all beings in all dimensions of Your world bow before You, to Your praise and celebration, is an action that is certainly in the mood of probability, but it does imply doubt as to the realization of such action. Therefore, our Father, it is possible, and the potential of such action is probable, but do not rest Your sovereign will upon it!

The subjunctive mood indicates action that is possible or potential.

3. Subjunctive Mood.

This is the mood of probability. It implies some doubt as to the reality of the action. It expresses an uncertainty of an action which may or may not happen.

FineLinen:

[move]Every knee, every tongue, all of creation singing in antiphonal worship and celebration, "You Are Lord."[/move]

Hell is not permanent.

pedantric

pedantric

pedantric

Well-Known Member

pedantric

Senior Member

pedantric

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Senior Member

Senior Veteran

The kingdom is within

Senior Veteran

This is me about 1 yr. old. when FDR was president

This is me about 1 yr. old. when FDR was president

This is me about 1 yr. old. when FDR was president

This is me about 1 yr. old. when FDR was president

This is me about 1 yr. old. when FDR was president

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency