Question about eternal damnation

[Pneuma3]

“‘Not every one who is saying to me Lord, lord, shall come into the reign of the heavens; but he who is doing the will of my Father who is in the heavens.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭7:21‬ ‭YLT1898‬‬
Matthew 7:21 ‘Not every one who is saying to me Lord, lord, shall come into the reign of the heavens; but he who is doing the will of my Father who is in the heavens. | Young's Literal Translation 3rd Revision 1898 (YLT1898) | Download The Bible App Now

already explain that, might have been to another poster in this thread.

 

[Pneuma3]

Where does the Bible say God wants to save everyone?

You answered your own question in the next quote.

God wants everyone to believe, repent and to be saved.

If none shall perish and all have eternal life why even mention those who believe? Believing would be completely irrelevant

it is the difference between the firstfruit and the harvest. Do you believe only for yourself or do you believe for the harvest? What good is your salvation if all your loved one perish? (I use perish here according to your understanding of it)

That's why believing is relevant now BRN so the firstfruit can bring in the harvest.

 

[ClementofA]

...

“And every one who shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Spirit it shall not be forgiven.”
‭‭Luke‬ ‭12:10‬

Luke gives a crystal clear example. The words aiṓn and aiṓnios are not even present in this example. Simply put blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven.

What is the consequence that will not be pardoned (or “let off”, Lk.12:10) for blaspheming the Holy Spirit? Luke 12:10 doesn't say. Could it be death, whether in “this age or in the age to come” (Mt.12:32), e.g. the millennium? Perhaps an imminent or immediate death, and or divinely sanctioned capital punishment. A death that ends their opportunity for salvation by grace in their mortal life & ships them off to corrective punishment, such as in a place the rich man (Luke 16:19-31) went to? For as long as it takes. Consider the following passages of Scripture where death is the penalty for blasphemy that the blasphemers were not pardoned from:

27 Also if one person sins unintentionally, then he shall offer a one year old female goat for a sin offering. 28 The priest shall make atonement before the LORD for the person who goes astray when he sins unintentionally, making atonement for him that he may be forgiven. 29 You shall have one law for him who does anything unintentionally, for him who is native among the sons of Israel and for the alien who sojourns among them. 30 But the person who does anything defiantly, whether he is native or an alien, that one is blaspheming the LORD; and that person shall be cut off from among his people. 31‘Because he has despised the word of the LORD and has broken His commandment, that person shall be completely cut off; his guilt will be on him.’” (Numbers 15:27-31)

Moreover, the one who blasphemes the name of the LORD shall surely be put to death; all the congregation shall certainly stone him. The alien as well as the native, when he blasphemes the Name, shall be put to death. (Leviticus 24:16)

28 A man that hath set at nought Moses’ law dieth without compassion on the word of two or three witnesses: 29 of how much sorer punishment, think ye, shall he be judged worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace? (Hebrews 10:28-29)

Compare also these Scripture passages referring to death as the penalty that was not pardoned:

But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Spirit…why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God. 5 And Ananias hearing these words fell down, and gave up the ghost… Then Peter said unto her, How is it that ye have agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord? behold, the feet of them which have buried thy husband are at the door, and shall carry thee out. 10 Then fell she down straightway at his feet, and yielded up the ghost (Acts 5:3-6, 9-10).



If anyone sees his brother committing a sin not leading to death, he shall ask, and God will give him life—to those who commit sins that do not lead to death. There is sin that leads to death; I do not say that one should pray for that. (1 John 5:16)

But the LORD of hosts revealed Himself to me, “Surely this iniquity shall not be pardoned you Until you die,” says the Lord GOD of hosts. (Isaiah 22:14)

20 "Never again will there be in it an infant who lives but a few days, or an old man who does not live out his years; the one who dies at a hundred will be thought a mere child; the one who fails to reach a hundred will be considered accursed. (Isaiah 65:20)

Will God pardon the unpardonable?

Let's say a criminal whose punishment according to God's law of justice is to be stoned to death & he "shall not be pardoned" (i.e. "not be let off" the hook for this crime's punishment), so the people stone him to death. Just because the criminal was "not pardoned" (let off) from the due punishment of stoning and his crime was, in that sense, "unpardonable", that does not mean Love Omnipotent, i.e. God, ceased to love him or was incapable of - forgiving - the criminal for his - sin - postmortem if he confessed & repented.

Compare these verses in Numbers 15 which some commentaries have linked to the Spirit blasphemy Synoptic passages in the New Testament books of Matthew, Mark & Luke:

27 Also if one person sins unintentionally, then he shall offer a one year old female goat for a sin offering. 28 The priest shall make atonement before the LORD for the person who goes astray when he sins unintentionally, making atonement for him that he may be pardoned. 30 But the person who does anything defiantly, whether he is native or an alien, that one is blaspheming the LORD; and that person shall be cut off from among his people. 31‘Because he has despised the word of the LORD and has broken His commandment, that person shall be completely cut off; his guilt will be on him.’” (Numbers 15:27-31)

Moreover, the one who blasphemes the name of the LORD shall surely be put to death; all the congregation shall certainly stone him. The alien as well as the native, when he blasphemes the Name, shall be put to death. (Leviticus 24:16)

Luke 12:10 And everyone who shall be declaring a word against the Son of Man, it shall be pardoned him, yet the one who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit shall not be pardoned.

Luke 12:10 does not say what the penalty for blasphemy is that will "not be pardoned".

Compare the Old Testament passages above, where the penalty was death. Likewise when Ananias & Sapphira lied to the Holy Spirit, they died physically (Acts 5):

But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Spirit…why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God. 5 And Ananias hearing these words fell down, and gave up the ghost… Then Peter said unto her, How is it that ye have agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord? behold, the feet of them which have buried thy husband are at the door, and shall carry thee out. 10 Then fell she down straightway at his feet, and yielded up the ghost (Acts 5:3-6, 9-10).

Compare also the following, which refer to death as the penalty:

If anyone sees his brother committing a sin not leading to death, he shall ask, and God will give him life—to those who commit sins that do not lead to death. There is sin that leads to death; I do not say that one should pray for that. (1 John 5:16)

28 A man that hath set at nought Moses’ law dieth without compassion on the word of two or three witnesses: 29 of how much sorer punishment, think ye, shall he be judged worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace? (Hebrews 10:28-29)

2 Chr.16:16 But they mocked the messengers of God, despising His words and scoffing at His prophets, until the wrath of the LORD against His people was stirred up beyond remedy.
17 So He brought up against them the king of the Chaldeans, who put their choice young men to the sword in the sanctuary, sparing neither young men nor young women, neither elderly nor infirm. God gave them all into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar.

And revealed it hath been in mine ears, By Jehovah of Hosts: Not pardoned is this iniquity to you, Till ye die, said the Lord, Jehovah of Hosts. (Isaiah 22:14)

20 "Never again will there be in it an infant who lives but a few days, or an old man who does not live out his years; the one who dies at a hundred will be thought a mere child; the one who fails to reach a hundred will be considered accursed. (Isaiah 65:20)

What is the consequence that will not be pardoned (or “let off”) for blaspheming the Holy Spirit? Could it be death, whether in “this age or in the age to come” (Mt.12:32), e.g. the millennium? Perhaps an imminent or immediate death, and or divinely sanctioned capital punishment. A death that ends their opportunity for salvation by grace in their mortal life & ships them off to corrective punishment, such as in a place the rich man (Luke 16:19-31) went to? For as long as it takes.

Why would God love those who are committing the unpardonable sin?

Why would a mother not love her son who received "life imprisonment", was "not pardoned" by the governor, served his full sentence & was released from prison after 20 years? If his crime were "unpardonable" according to justice, he was released after serving the punishment for it, and still could be forgiven by his mother & those he harmed.

God is love. Does He cease being love so He can be the opposite of love, i.e. a sadistic monster infinitely worse than Hitler, Bin Laden & Satan combined?

1 Cor.15:27 For “He has put in subjection all under His feet.” But when it may be said that all has been put in subjection, it is evident that the One having put in subjection all to Him is excepted.

So there is only one exception to "all" to be "put...under his feet". Then God will be "in" "all", hence universal salvation:

1 Cor.15:28 And when all shall be subjected unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all under him, that God may be all in all.
​

 

[vinsight4u]

/nvm

 

[vinsight4u]

/nvm

 

[Pneuma3]

In reality (as opposed to your Strawman), I think the eternal destiny of every person is incredibly - and very obviously - important.

So important that Gahanna is only mentioned 8 times in scripture.
First you say that does not matter, now you say it does. Make up your mind.

I'm not going to concede - ever - that the apostles whose letters are found in the NT do not refer to eternal punishment in hell in their letters. As I've demonstrated, they most certainly do. It is a childish maneuver naughty children use with their parents to insist that because the apostles never used the specific phrase "eternal hell" that they therefore never had it in their minds when they wrote of sinners "storing up wrath in the day of wrath," (Romans 2:5-12) of "indignation and wrath" falling upon the unrepentant sinner on Judgment Day, of "tribulation and distress" afflicting those who do evil on God's Day of Judgment, of those who "drink of the wine of the wrath of God" expressed upon the wicked with torment in fire and brimstone (Revelation 14:10), of the unjust reserved by God unto the day of judgment to be punished (2 Peter 2:9), and so on. Children try to use such a manuever when, confronted by their parent about doing something wrong, they retort, "But you never actually said I couldn't light a fire in the kitchen sink!"

famous last words, and you like some are trying to put square pegs in round holes

None of this addresses my point about the parallel in Matthew 25:46. It is a deflection - again.

That tells me you did not even read what I wrote if you did not see the point being addressed.

Concerning aionios and aidios:

W.E Vine explains:

"AIONIOS - describes duration, either undefined but not endless as in Romans 16:25; 2 Timothy 1:9; Titus 1:2; or undefined because endless as in Romans 16:26, and the other sixty-six places in the N.T.
The predominant meaning of aionios, that in which it is used everywhere in the N.T. save the places noted above, may be seen in 2 Corinthians 4:18 where it is set in contrast with proskairos, lit,. 'for a season,' and in Philemon 15 where only in the N.T. it is used without a noun. Moreover it is used of persons and things which are in their nature endless, as, e.g., of God, Romans 16:26; of His power, 1 Timothy 6:16, and of His glory, 1 Peter 5:10; of the Holy Spirit, Hebrews 9:14, and of the redemption affected by Christ, Hebrews 9:12...The use of aionios here shows that the punishment referred to in 2 Thessalonians 1:9, is not temporary, but final, and, accordingly, the phraseology shows that its purpose is not remedial but retributive."

AIDIOS: see EVERLASTING.

"denotes everlasting (from aei, ever), Romans 1:20, R.V., "everlasting," for A.V., "eternal"; Jude 6, A.V. and R.V., "everlasting." Aionios, should always be translated "eternal" and aidios "everlasting." While aionios ...negatives the end either of a space of time or of unmeasured time, and is used chiefly where something future is spoken of, aidios excludes interruption and lays stress upon permanence and unchangeableness."
(Vine's Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words.)

"Indeed, the adjective aionian in this verse (Matthew 25:46) means "everlasting, without end"...this same adjective is predicated of God (the "eternal" God) in Romans 16:26, 1 Timothy 1:7, Hebrews 9:14, 13:8, and Revelation 4:9. The punishment of the wicked is just as eternal as the forever existence of our eternal God...What is particularly determinative here is the fact that the duration of punishment for the wicked forms a parallel with the duration of life for the righteous...It would do violence to the parallel to give it an unlimited signification in the case of eternal life, but a limited one when applied to the punishment of the wicked."
(Reasoning From the Scripture with Jehovah's Witnesses - by Ron Rhodes)

that guy is just all kinds of wrong. that is like saying Hell should always be translated heaven and heaven should always be translated hell, because they are matching up two things with two different meaning and calling them the same. Pure idiocy

 

[ClementofA]

Punishment does not serve a corrective purpose; that is the goal of discipline, of chastisement, in God's economy of things, not punishment.

Actually the Greek word for "punishment" in Mt.25:46 can mean a corrective punishment for the good & betterment of the offender:

According to this alleged quote of Trench κόλασις, as opposed to τιμωρία, has "more the notion of punishment as it has reference to the correction and bettering of the offender (see Philo, Leg, ad Cai. I; Josephus, Antt. ii. 6. 8); it is ‘castigatio,’ and naturally has for the most part a milder use than τιμωρία. Thus Plato (Protag. 323 e) joins κολάσεις and νουθετήσεις together: and the whole passage to the end of the chapter is eminently instructive as to the distinction between the words: οὐδεὶς κολάζει τοὺς ἀδικοῦντας ὅτι ἠδίκησεν, ὅστις μὴ ὥσπερ θηρίον ἀλογίστως τιμωρεῖται, ... ἀλλὰ τοῦ μέλλοντος χάριν ἵνα μὴ αὖθις ἀδικήσῃ; the same change in the words which he employs, occurring again twice or thrice in the sentence; with all which may be compared what Clement of Alexandria has said, Strom. iv. 24; and again vii. 16, where he defines κολάσεις as μερικαὶ παιδεῖαι, and τιμωρία as κακοῦ ἀνταπόδοσις. And this is Aristotle’s distinction (Rhet. i. 10): διαφέρει δὲ τιμωρία καὶ κόλασις· ἡ μὲν γὰρ κόλασις τοῦ πάσχοντος ἕνεκά ἐστιν· ἡ δὲ τιμωρία, τοῦ ποιοῦντος, ἵνα ἀποπληρωθῇ: cf. Ethic. Nic. iv. 5: τιμωρία παύει τῆς ὀργῆς, ἠδονῆν ἀντὶ τῆς λύπης ἐμποιοῦσα. It is to these and similar definitions that Aulus Gellius refers when he says (Noct. Att. vi. 14): ‘Puniendis peccatis tres esse debere causas existimatum est. Una est quae νουθεσία, vel, κόλασις, vel παραίνεσις dicitur; *** poena adhibetur castigandi atque emendandi gratiâ; ut is qui fortuito deliquit, attentior fiat, correctiorque. Altera est quam ii, qui vocabula ista curiosius diviserunt, τιμωρίαν appellant. Ea causa animadvertendi est, *** dignitas auctoritasque ejus, in quem est peccatum, tuenda est, ne praetermissa animadversio contemtum ejus pariat, et honorem levet: idcircoque id ei vocabulum a conservatione honoris factum putant.’ There is a profound commentary on these words in Göschel’s Zerstreute Blätter, part 2, p. 343–360; compare too an instructive note in Wyttenbach’s Animadd. in Plutarch. vol. xii. p. 776." Trench's New Testament Synonyms :: vii. τιμωρία, κόλασις.
So in favor of κόλασις (or κολάζω) being corrective Trench lists quotes from Plato, Aristotle, Philo, Josephus, Aulus Gellius & Clement of Alexandria. To those we could add early church universalists such as Oregon, Gregory Nyssa & many others. Moulton & Milligan continue to add to that list as follows:
"The meaning ";cut short,"; which the presumable connexion with κόλος and κολούω would suggest, seems to be the original sense of the word. In the Paris Thesaurus we find quotations for the meaning ";prune"; (κόλασις τῶν δένδρων), and a number of late passages where the verb denotes ";correcting,"; ";cutting down"; a superfluity. Thus Galen ad Galatians 1:1-24 τὰ γὰρ ἐναντία τῶν ἐναντίων ἰάματά ἐστι, κολάζοντα μὲν τὸ ὑπερβάλλον. Of course this may be a derived sense, like that of castigo and of our ";correct,"; but in any case it is clearly a familiar sense during the NT period, and we cannot leave it out of consideration when we examine this very important word." Strong's #2849 - κολάζω - Old & New Testament Greek Lexicon
In addition to those, under the section on κολάζω in TDNT, J. Schneider notes regarding "inscr. given by Steinleitner from Phrygian and Lydian monuments of the imperial period" that in "these inscriptions the sins punished by deity are those against the deity itself, e.g. violations of the sacred cultic laws. The deity smites the offender with sickness and infirmity, or even punishes himself and his family with death. The sinner can win back the grace of the deity only by open confession of his guilt. In this way alone can he be liberated from sickness and misfortune."
TDNT adds regarding Philo's view of the "legislative power of God" that this "power divides into two branches, the one for the rewarding of the good and the other for the punishment of sinners. Philo's view of God includes the insight that in God mercy is older than punishment (Deus Imm.,76) and that God would rather forgive than punish (Spec.Leg., II,196...). Punishment is for those who are not amenable to reason (Agric.,40). Thus punishment may seem to be the greatest evil, but it is to be regarded as the greatest blessing for fools, loc. cit. This is a Stoic view" ("Theological Dictionary of the New Testament", TDNT, ed. G. Kittel, Vol.3, p.815).
The "New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology and Exegesis" (NIDNTTE, ed. Moises Silva, 2014, Vol. II, p.716-718) concurs with TDNT's remarks above.
NIDTTE also refers to the 5 NT occurrences of the "derived vb. κολαφίζω" (kolaphizo, Strongs # 2852), "to strike (with the fist), fig. torment". It is used twice of "the Jewish leaders who struck Jesus during his trial before the Sanhedrin (Matt 26:67 = Mark 14:65)." (NIDTTE, p.718).
"Then they spat in His face and beat Him with their fists; and others slapped Him," (Mt.26:67; NASB).
There are no indications of an intent to correct Jesus via such actions by these evil human beings. Rather it seems vindictive or sadistic. Likewise with the occurrences of kolaphizo at 1 Pet.2:20 & 1 Cor.4:11, does the "buffeting" or ""to strike (with the fist), fig. torment" have no hint of correction.
In all 4 cases of kolaphizo mentioned so far, they all are at the hands of men & do not indicate a corrective or beneficial purpose to those receiving such "torments". However, in the 5th occurrence of this word in the New Testament, that changes.
In 2 Cor.12:7 is the only one of the 5 that refer to a Divinely given kolaphizo (compare Mt.25:46). In this context the Lord gives Paul a thorn in the flesh to "torment" or "buffet" [κολαφίζῃ] him, not as a sadistic or vindictive retribution with no thought of benefit to Paul, but rather for Paul's own good:
"7 And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure. 8 For this thing I besought the Lord thrice, that it might depart from me. 9 And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. 10 Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses for Christ's sake: for when I am weak, then am I strong."
In Matthew 25:46, like 2 Cor.12:7, is another New Testament instance of Divinely given sufferings, usually translated "punishment" (κόλασιν) (v.46) of "fire" (v.41). Shall it not also be, as the Divinely given sufferings of 2 Cor.12:7, for the good of the recipients?

More importantly, though: if we really want to examine all of the uses of κόλασις – and here just limiting ourselves to the Septuagint – the verses where it’s used are Wisdom 11:13, Wisdom 16:2, Wisdom 16:24, Wisdom 19:4, 2 Maccabees 4:38, 3 Maccabees 1:3, 3 Maccabees 7:10, 4 Maccabees 8:9, Jeremiah 18:20, Ezekiel 14:3, Ezekiel 14:4, Ezekiel 14:7, Ezekiel 18:30, Ezekiel 43:11, Ezekiel 44:12 (and, in the New Testament, Matthew 25:46 and 1 John 4:18). Uses of the verb form κολάζω are found in 1 Maccabees 7:7, 2 Maccabees 6:14, 3 Maccabees 3:26, 3 Maccabees 7:3, 3 Maccabees 7:14, 4 Maccabees 2:12, 4 Maccabees 8:6, 4 Maccabees 18:5, (Old Greek) Daniel 6:12, Wisdom 3:4, Wisdom 11:5, Wisdom 11:8, Wisdom 11:16, Wisdom 12:14, Wisdom 12:15, Wisdom 12:27, Wisdom 14:10, Wisdom 16:1, Wisdom 16:9, Wisdom 18:11, Wisdom 18:22, 1 Esdras 8:24 (and 2 Peter 2:9 and Acts 4:21 in the NT).
I’d do it myself with enough prodding… though, just from a casual glance, there are a few other instances) where it’s unambiguously non-corrective: e.g. 2 Maccabees 4:38 (ἐκεῖ τὸν μιαιφόνον ἀπεκόσμησε, τοῦ Κυρίου τὴν ἀξία αὐτῷ κόλασιν ἀποδόντος); 4 Maccabees 8:9; and 1 Esdras 8:24 (tellingly, in the latter, τιμωρία is a type of κόλασις). Justin Martyr also says something highly relevant in his Apology (8):
> Plato, in like manner, used to say that Rhadamanthus and Minos κολάσειν the wicked who came before them; and we say that the same thing will be done, but at the hand of Christ, and upon the wicked in the same bodies united again to their spirits which are now to undergo [viz. κολασθησομένων] everlasting κόλασιν αἰωνίαν κόλασιν] - and not only, as [Plato] said, for a period of a thousand years.

Clearly the words under consideration are not always used of correction. So in order to determine whether or not their usage in eschatological and/or postmortem passages like Matthew 25:46 & 2 Peter 2:9 is corrective, one must consider the contexts. In that light, therefore, it seems questionable what use there would be in an examination of all of the many ancient Greek occurrences of the words. Will they inform us of the view of the New Testament God of love in regard to how He interprets them in an eschatological context? Or do extrabiblical usages, such as you've cited above, often come under the classification of false gods, fables & myths which are to be rejected, as in:
"Not giving heed to Jewish myths, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth." (Titus 1:14).
2 Timothy 4:4: And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
Do we find out what the real - good - God thinks on a subject by studying what the - evil - false gods think about it? Or how - evil - revengeful, bitter men with sadistic motivations use the words in question? They will punish from their own - evil - motives, whereas the - good - God, Love Omnipotent, always does so from the motive of the betterment of His created beings.
In support of that there is much to be brought forth from the inspired Scriptures & nothing in opposition to it. There are examples where His wrath, destruction, wounding, punishment, anger and torments are intended for the good of those who receive such. And no examples to the contrary.
Mat 18:34 And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due unto him.
Matthew 25:46: “And these shall be coming away into chastening(kolasin) eonian, yet the just into life eonian.” (CLV)...1 John 4:18: “for fear has chastening(kolasin).” (CLV)
The servant who knows the master’s will and does not get ready or does not do what the master wants will be beaten with many blows. But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows. Luke 12:47-48a

 

[Pneuma3]

Nope. Why does Paul make the qualification, "especially of those who believe"? If all men are saved, and Scripture makes it clear belief is necessary to being saved (John 3:16; Romans 10:9-10), then all men are saved by belief. Why, then, the "especially of those who believe" qualification by Paul? It seems obvious to me that Paul caveats "all men" this way precisely so that a universalist construction cannot be put upon his words. Jesus is potentially the Saviour of all men, that is, he is capable of being the Saviour to everyone, but he is only actually the Saviour of those men (and women) who believe.

You say potential savior, Paul says Savior, you change what Paul says to suite you own doctrine. And if you read all of 1 tim 4 you will see Paul telling tim to beware if doctrines of devils the proceed to tell tim exactly what we are commanded to teach. Thus according to Paul that which you believe is a doctrine of devils.

Chapter and verse, please. Where in Scripture may one read, "The wrath of God is the law"? I read,

Read my thread two deaths.

How does love compel? It does so only when we first love the one whose love compels us. The power of my wife's love for me is enormous in its effect upon me and motivates me to love her in return. In regards to God's love, the apostle John explained the same sort of dynamic:


1 John 4:19
19 We love him, because he first loved us.

God does not say to us, "Love me! I command it!" No, He demonstrates His love toward us and in so doing induces us to love Him back. And once this is the case, once we have come - freely - to love God, then it is we may say, "God's love compels me."

You answered your own question (in RED)

No where does Scripture say, "God's wrath is the work of the law which is a schoolmaster that leads us to Christ." Scripture doesn't imply this, either.

read my thread two deaths.

Sure, the world can be saved. Will it, though? No. Only "whosoever believes" is saved (John 3:16) As I already explained - an explanation you have not actually addressed but have merely deflected, by the way - Christ was incarnated to make atonement for the sins of humanity. This he did perfectly. The work of atonement he started, he completely finished. How efficacious that atonement is for every individual, however, is dependent upon them choosing - or not - to avail themselves of it by trusting in Christ as Saviour and Lord. I don't, then, mock God as you say. Such an accusation is just another of the Strawmen you seem to like to use when arguing your position.

you need to really do a study on atonement, because your lack of knowledge is showing.

You do realize I hope that when the high priest made a sin offering that it covered EVERYONE do you not?

 

[FineLinen]

Understand also that I am not advocating for or against an eternal hell. I am simply saying we cant know for sure, so its better to simply play it safe. A pascals wager of sorts. I am also saying its better push doctrines aside and focus on Christ and spread his message of loving one another while letting our self (sin nature) die. It is better to leave the unknown simply as the unknown than to try and figure out what God has planned. Matthew 6:34 comes to mind.

Dear Mr. Faith: The focus is indeed the Lord Jesus Christ who opens blind eyes and hearts. New reading glasses will simply not fill the need!

From the beginning, the foundation for His followers requires the operation of dianoigo without which His words are simply a blur.

"He opened their understanding..."

Dianoigo= to open completely (of the eyes & heart).

Yes, my friend, the foundation for coming to Jesus Christ is wholly based on His call, "You did not choose Me..." the understanding that flows from that Divine call of the Master, follows with our inability within our broken being to grasp one single thing coming from His holy lips! We must know dianoigo, or forever say "how can these things be?"

"The life of grace is not an effort on our part to achieve a goal we set ourselves. It is a continually renewed attempt simply to believe that someone else has done all the achieving that is needed and to live in relationship with that person, whether we achieve or not. If that doesn’t seem like much to you, you’re right: it isn’t. And, as a matter of fact, the life of grace is even less than that. It’s not even our life at all, but the life of that Someone Else rising like a tide in the ruins of our death.” -Robert Farrar Capon-

 

[Pneuma3]

This is talking about Jesus preaching (through the Holy Spirit) to the slaves of sin during the days of Noah. Not the dead

Huh? Just how bad of a preacher do you think Jesus is? back in the day 8 souls out of all humanity, God screwed up again and can only save a few souls after his appearing

 

[ClementofA]

Inasmuch as my point was about the obvious parallel in Matthew 25:46 that makes the eternal life of the righteous correspond to the everlasting punishment of the wicked, this quotation here has no pertinency.

The pertinency is that it opposes your interpretation & you've failed to refute it:

The aionion life & the aionion punishment refer to contrasting eonian destinies pertaining to a finite eonian period to come, e.g. the millennial eon. The verse has nothing to do, & says nothing about, final destiny. Regarding the endless life of the righteous in Christ, other passages address that topic, such as those that speak of immortality, incorruption & being unable to die.

A parallel does not offer contrast, it emphasizes where two different things are the same, where they are in correspondence to one another.

Mt.25:46 contrasts two destinies, one to aionion life & the other to aionion punishment (or correction). If the aion (eon/age) in view is the millennial aion, then the verse says nothing about final destinies, but only contrasting millennial destinies.

And since the eternal life of the righteous is the final destiny of the righteous, it stands to reason that Christ intended his audience to understand that the everlasting punishment of the wicked is their final destiny, too. This is the natural, straightforward reading of Christ's statement.

That interpretation merely assumes what it has failed to provide any evidence or proof for, that aionion in Mt.25:46 means "eternal" in both of its occurrences.


In the Greek Old Testament (LXX, Septuagint) of Isaiah 54:4 the word aionios appears and is used of finite duration:

4 You should not fear that you were disgraced, nor should you feel ashamed that you were berated. For shame everlasting(aionios) you shall forget; and the scorn of your widowhood in no way shall you remember any longer (Apostolic Bible Polygot, LXX)

The same phrase, and Greek words, for "shame everlasting"(aionios) in Isa.54:4 occur again at Dan.12:2 LXX, which i have higlighted within the brackets:

Dan.12:2 καὶ πολλοὶ τῶν καθευδόντων ἐν γῆς χώματι ἐξεγερθήσονται οὗτοι εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον καὶ οὗτοι εἰς ὀνειδισμὸν καὶ εἰς [αἰσχύνην αἰώνιον]
Isa.54:4 μὴ φοβοῦ ὅτι κατῃσχύνθης μηδὲ ἐντραπῇς ὅτι ὠνειδίσθης ὅτι [αἰσχύνην αἰώνιον] ἐπιλήσῃ καὶ ὄνειδος τῆς χηρείας σου οὐ μὴ μνησθήσῃ

Kata Biblon Wiki Lexicon - ??????? - shame/disgrace/dishonor (n.)

Strong's Greek: 152. ??????? (aischuné) -- shame

In Isa.54:4 aionios/eonian is finite: "For shame everlasting[eonian] you shall forget".

Examples of aionios as a finite duration in Koine Greek:

Two Questions

Does aionios always mean eternal in ancient Koine Greek? (paradise, Gospel, hell) - Christianity -  - City-Data Forum

If Jesus wished to express endless punishment, then He would have used expressions such as "endless", "no end" & "never be saved" as per:

How Scripture expresses endless duration (not aion/ios) (paradise, hell, punishment) - Christianity -  - City-Data Forum

Jesus didn't use the best words & expressions to describe endlessness in regards to punishment, because He didn't believe in endless punishment.

ENDLESSNESS not applied to eschatological PUNISHMENT in Scripture:

could an 'eternal punishment' simply mean that once instituted it will not change?

12 points re forever and ever (literally to/into "the ages of the ages") being finite:

For the Lord will NOT cast off FOR EVER:

 

[ClementofA]

I posted:

(2) Another universalist option in interpretating Mt.25:46 is that aionion life refers to a perpetual life that lasts as long as God Almighty wills it to last, so it is endless. OTOH, aionion punishment refers to a perpetual punishment that also lasts as long as Love Omnipotent wills it to last, which is until it has served its useful purpose in bringing the offender to the salvation in their Savior, Who died & shed His blood for their sins. While life is an end in itself, punishment is a means to an end.

This is just adding to Scripture to avoid its clear import.

Any interpretation could be accused of "just adding to Scripture", including your interpretation of Mt.25:46. Shall I just quote Scripture only? (The Greek only? Can you read it?). But that is part of what is at issue, i.e. the proper translation into English of the Greek words in Mt.25:46. And what you think is "its clear import" is just your opinion. You failed to provide any evidence or proof against my proposed interpretation.

Christ offers no hint in Matthew 25:46 or its surrounding context that the everlasting punishment - not discipline which is corrective (see Hebrews 12:5-13) - of the wicked is merely part of a rehabilitative process. Such a rehabilitative reading assumes universalism when reading the verse rather than letting the verse speak for itself.

I could just as easily claim Christ offers no hint to the contrary, i.e. no hint that the aionion punishment/chastening is to be "everlasting". As I detailed in another post to you, the Greek word Christ chose for "punishment" can refer to a corrective chastening.

 

[ClementofA]

You have assumed universalism for the phrase "in all"; universalism, though, is not evident in the verse itself. I already gave a reasonable alternative to such a spurious reading. Nothing you assert here gives me good reason to take your view and abandon mine.

Is it your view that God can be "in" a person & that person not be saved?

1 Cor.15:27 For “He has put in subjection all under His feet.” But when it may be said that all has been put in subjection, it is evident that the One having put in subjection all to Him is excepted.

So there is only one exception to "all" to be "put...under his feet". Then God will be "in" "all", hence universal salvation:

1 Cor.15:28 And when all shall be subjected unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all under him, that God may be all in all.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

<Jas>So I am just going to accept what you say in the Greek? No thanks. I can read my English Bible just fine (that was translated from the Greek). I also made some great points that you are not really addressing, either. You are just posting a bunch of Greek. I don't know Biblical Greek, and I am pretty sure you don't, either. For you did not grow up in Bible times. Moving on from this conversation.
May God bless you.<end>
Nice copout! You make a post lecturing me and others what Greek words supposedly mean but when proven wrong you bug out. I didn't ask you to accept what I said. Unlike you I identified my source for Greek, i.e. BDAG, and Hebrew, i.e. BDB and even provided a link and information so those sources could be verified.
.....About me knowing Biblical Greek. I started learning to speak Greek in Germany the year of Sputnik 1 and studied both Biblical languages at the graduate level about 2 decades after that. Funny how some folks that could not parse or conjugate a Greek verb if their life depended on it pretend they know something about Greek.
.....There happens to be a nation whose language has been Greek since before 225 BC. Do you assume that the nation of Greece does not know anything about the history of the Greek language? And since the Greeks know the history of their own language the rest of the world has access to that knowledge.
.....As I said in my previous post αἰών/aiōn and αἰώνιος/aiōnios are used to refer to things that are not eternal but are never defined as in the 23 verses I listed above.

Sorry, I just do not believe your approach to the Scriptures is bibliical. While I don't have a problem with doing occasional word studies in the original languages (like the Bible even sometimes gives us certain words in the original language), we never see in the Bible men of God acting in the way that you are doing by saying we have to look to some ancient language that people did not know in order to understand God's Word. I prefer to be more biblical and speak, and act by what I see Jesus and His followers saying and doing. Your approach is not in line with what they are doing. They just spoke plainly the Word of God.

Speaking of cop outs:

Did you ever explain the problem I gave you?
The one about how the second death would naturally relate to the first death?
Again, it seems contradictory to God's Word to make a parallel or comparison with something that is not related.

 

[Lazarus Short]

Im not saying any of the UUA followers are selfish. Im saying that it completely opens the door for it being acceptable. Why would anyone need God in their life if they can just wait for death? God requires many sacrifices from us and most of which, if not all, are very difficult. The flesh is very burdensome fellow and does not go down easy. Why bother with the struggle of sanctification at all if I can get it all after death at no cost? So I can have a bigger house than my neighbor in heaven?

This is what is so wrong with what you say: If you complete Sanctification properly (actually, God does that in you) you get to skip the Lake of Fire and the Second Death. It's a worthy goal. Do you really think Universalists are unmindful of that? Yet, God does it in a way to prevent anyone from boasting, as if they did it themselves. You know, I was a confident atheist when God made Himself real to me by various means. I was dragged, not quite kicking & screaming, into the Kingdom. That's my personal experience, that God DOES IT ALL. In like manner, He restores His entire Cosmos.

 

[Der Alte]

начать

<CA>...In the Greek Old Testament (LXX, Septuagint) of Isaiah 54:4 the word aionios appears and is used of finite duration:
4 You should not fear that you were disgraced, nor should you feel ashamed that you were berated. For shame everlasting(aionios) you shall forget; and the scorn of your widowhood in no way shall you remember any longer (Apostolic Bible Polygot, LXX)
The same phrase, and Greek words, for "shame everlasting"(aionios) in Isa.54:4 occur again at Dan.12:2 LXX, which i have higlighted within the brackets:
Dan.12:2 καὶ πολλοὶ τῶν καθευδόντων ἐν γῆς χώματι ἐξεγερθήσονται οὗτοι εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον καὶ οὗτοι εἰς ὀνειδισμὸν καὶ εἰς [αἰσχύνην αἰώνιον]
Isa.54:4 μὴ φοβοῦ ὅτι κατῃσχύνθης μηδὲ ἐντραπῇς ὅτι ὠνειδίσθης ὅτι [αἰσχύνην αἰώνιον] ἐπιλήσῃ καὶ ὄνειδος τῆς χηρείας σου οὐ μὴ μνησθήσῃπῇς ὅτι ὠνειδίσθης ὅτι [αἰσχύνην αἰώνιον] ἐπιλήσῃ καὶ ὄνειδος τῆς χηρείας σου οὐ μὴ μνησθήσῃ....<end>

конец

…..Thirty eight [38] OT verses where the words “olam/ad” corresponds to or is contrasted with adjectives and adjectival phrases which describe/define the word “olam/ad” as eternal, everlasting etc.

Exodus 3:15
(15) And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, The LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever,[עולם/olam] and this is my memorial unto all generations. ​

In this vs. “name olam” corresponds to “unto all generations.” “Age(s),”a finite period, does not correspond to “unto all generations,”“for ever” does.

Psalms 21:4
(4) He asked life of thee, and thou gavest it him, even length of days for ever [עולם/olam] and ever.[עד/ad] ​

In this vs. “olam” and “ad” corresponds to “length of days”. “Age(s),” a finite period, does not correspond to length of days, “for ever and ever” does.

Psalms 45:17
(17) I will make thy name to be remembered in all generations: therefore shall the people praise thee for ever [עולם/olam] and ever:[עד/ad] ​

In this vs. “olam” and “ad” corresponds to “in all generations,” “Age(s),” a finite period, does not correspond to “in all generations,” “for ever and ever” does.

Psa 33:11
(11) The counsel of the LORD standeth for ever, [ עולם] the thoughts of his heart to all generations. ​

In this vs. “standeth olam” corresponds to “to all generations,”“age(s),” a finite period, does not correspond to “to all generations,” “for ever” does.

Psa 146:10 The LORD will reign for ever, [עולם/olam] Thy God, O Zion, unto all generations. Hallelujah.[“ all generations” also Ps 100:5, 106:31] ​

In this vs. “reign olam” corresponds to “unto all generations,”“age(s),” a finite period, does not correspond to “to all generations,” “for ever” does.

Psa 37:28
(28) For the LORD loveth judgment, and forsaketh not his saints; they are preserved for ever: [ עולם/olam] but the seed of the wicked shall be cut off. ​

In this vs. “preserved olam” is contrasted to “the wicked shall be cut off,””age(s),”a finite period, is not opposite of “the wicked shall be cut off,” “for ever” is.

Ecc 3:14
(14) I know that, whatsoever God doeth, it shall be for ever:[ עולם] nothing can be put to it, nor any thing taken from it: and God doeth it, that men should fear before him. ​

In this vs. עולם/olam corresponds to. “nothing can be added or taken away” from God's acts. “Age(s),“a finite period, does not correspond to “nothing can be added or taken away” from God's acts, “for ever” does.

Isa 51:6
(6) Lift up your eyes to the heavens, and look upon the earth beneath: for the heavens shall vanish away like smoke, and the earth shall wax old like a garment, and they that dwell therein shall die in like manner: but my salvation shall be for ever, [ עולם] and my righteousness shall not be abolished. ​

In this vs. “salvation olam” corresponds to “shall not be abolished”, “age(s),” a finite period, does not correspond to “shall not be abolished,” “forever” is.

Isa 51:8
(8) For the moth shall eat them up like a garment, and the worm shall eat them like wool: but my righteousness shall be for ever, [ עולם] and my salvation from generation to generation. ​

In this vs. “righteousness olam” corresponds to “from generation to generation” “age(s),”a finite period, does not correspond to “from generation to generation.” “for ever” does.

Dan 7:14
(14) He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all nations and peoples of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting [ עולם] dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed. ​

In this vs. “olam dominion” corresponds to “will not pass away” and “never be destroyed.” “Age(s),” a finite period, does not correspond to “will not pass away,””never be destroyed,” but “everlasting dominion” does.

Jer 23:40
(40) I will bring on you everlasting disgrace [ עולם]—everlasting shame [ עולם] that will not be forgotten." ​

In this vs. “olam disgrace and shame” corresponds to “will not be forgotten.” “age(s) a finite period, does not correspond to “will not be forgotten,””everlasting” does.

Jer 50:5
(5) They will ask the way to Zion and turn their faces toward it. They will come and bind themselves to the LORD in an everlasting [ עולם] covenant that will not be forgotten. ​

In this vs. “olam covenant” corresponds to “will not be forgotten,””age(s),” a finite period, does not correspond to “will not be forgotten,” ”everlasting” does.

Exo 27:21
(21) In the tabernacle of the congregation without the vail, which is before the testimony, Aaron and his sons shall order it from evening to morning before the LORD: it shall be a statute for ever [עולם/olam] unto their generations on the behalf of the children of Israel. ​

In this verse עולם/olam corresponds to “unto their generations.” “Age(s)” does not correspond to “unto their generations,” “for ever” does.

Exo 30:21
(21) So they shall wash their hands and their feet, that they die not: and it shall be a statute for ever [עולם/olam] to them, even to him and to his seed throughout their generations. ​

[“throughout their generations “ also Lev 10:9, 17:7, 23:14, 23:21, 23:41, Num 10:8, 15:15, 18:23, Psa 145;13, Ex 40:15, Lev 7:36][/indent]
In this verse “statute עולם/olam” corresponds to “die not” and “throughout their generations.” “Age(s)” does not correspond to “die not” and “throughout their. Generations,” “forever” does.

Psa 45:17
(17) I will make thy name to be remembered in all generations: therefore shall the people praise thee for ever [עולם/olam] and ever.[ עד/ad][“in all generations” also Ps 100:5, 106:31] ​

In this verse עולם/olam and . עד/ad are corresponds with “in all generations.” “Age(s)” does not correspond to “in all generations,” “for ever and ever” does.

Psa 148:6
(6) He hath also stablished them for ever [עולם/olam] and ever:[ עד/ad] he hath made a decree which shall not pass. ​

In this verse עולם/olam and עד/ad are corresponds to “shall not pass.” “Age(s)” does not correspond to “shall not pass.” “forever and ever” does.

Isa 55:13
(13) Instead of the thorn shall come up the fir tree, and instead of the brier shall come up the myrtle tree: and it shall be to the LORD for a name, for an everlasting [ עולם/olam] sign that shall not be cut off.” ​

In this verse “ עולם/olam sign” corresponds with ”shall not be cut off.” “Age(s)” does not correspond to “shall not be cut off.” “everlasting does.

[26]Isa 56:5
(5) Even unto them will I give in mine house and within my walls a place and a name better than of sons and of daughters: I will give them an everlasting [ עולם/olam] name, that shall not be cut off.​

In this verse “ עולם/olam name” corresponds to ”shall not be cut off.” “Age(s)” does not correspond to “shall not be cut off.” “everlasting” does.

Jer 32:40
(40) And I will make an everlasting “[עולם/olam] covenant with them, that I will not turn away from them, to do them good; but I will put my fear in their hearts, that they shall not depart from me. ​

In this verse “עולם/olam covenant” corresponds to “I will not turn away” and ”they shall not depart from me.” “Age(s)” does not correspond to “I will not turn away” and “they shall not depart from me.” “everlasting” does.

Jer 50:5
(5) They shall ask the way to Zion with their faces thitherward, saying, Come, and let us join ourselves to the LORD in a perpetual [עולם/olam] covenant that shall not be forgotten. ​

In this verse “עולם/olam covenant” corresponds to ”shall not be forgotten” “Age(s)” does not correspond to “shall not be forgotten.” “perpetual covenant” does.

Lam 5:19
(19) Thou, O LORD, remainest for ever; “[עולם/olam] thy throne from generation to generation. ​

In this verse “עולם/olam” corresponds to “from generation to generation.” “Age(s) does not correspond to “from generation to generation”, “for ever” does.

Dan 4:3
(3) How great are His signs! and how mighty are His wonders! His kingdom is an everlasting [עלם/alam] kingdom, and His dominion is from generation to generation.[עם־דר ודר/am-dor w’dor] ​

In this verse [עלם/alam] corresponds to “from generation to generation.” “Age(s) does not correspond to “from generation to generation”, “for ever” does.

Dan 4:34
(34) And at the end of the days I Nebuchadnezzar lifted up mine eyes unto heaven, and mine understanding returned unto me, and I blessed the most High, and I praised and honoured him that liveth for ever, [עלם/alam] whose dominion is an everlasting [עלם/alam] dominion, and his kingdom is from generation to generation: ​

In this verse [עלם/alam] corresponds to “from generation to generation.” “Age(s) does not correspond to “from generation to generation”, “for ever” does.

Jer 10:10-11
(10) But the LORD is the true God; he is the living God, the eternal [עלם/alam] King. When he is angry, the earth trembles; the nations cannot endure his wrath.
(11) "Tell them this: 'These gods, who did not make the heavens and the earth, will perish from the earth and from under the heavens.'" ​

In this passage the living God, the eternal [עלם/alam] King has been contrasted with false gods which perish “the Living God the age(s)” is not the opposite of false gods that perish, the living God, the eternal is.

Isa 9:6-7
(6) For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting [עו/ ad] Father, The Prince of Peace.
(7) Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. [עולם/olam] The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.​

In this passage עולם/olam and עו/ad are paired with “shall be no end.” By definition עולם/olam and עו/ad mean “everlasting/shall be no end.”

 

[FineLinen]

Olethron Aionion
eternal destruction
-Dr.Marvin Vincent-

'Aion, transliterated aeon, is a period of longer or shorter duration, having a beginning and an end, and complete in itself. Aristotle (peri ouravou, i. 9,15) says: "The period which includes the whole time of one's life is called the aeon of each one." Hence it often means the life of a man, as in Homer, where one's life (aion) is said to leave him or to consume away (Iliad v. 685; Odyssey v. 160).

It is not, however, limited to human life; it signifies any period in the course of events, as the period or age before Christ; the period of the millenium; the mythological period before the beginnings of history. The word has not "a stationary and mechanical value" (De Quincey). It does not mean a period of a fixed length for all cases. There are as many aeons as entities, the respective durations of which are fixed by the normal conditions of the several entities. There is one aeon of a human life, another of the life of a nation, another of a crow's life, another of an oak's life.

The length of the aeon depends on the subject to which it is attached.

It is sometimes translated world; world represents a period or a series of periods of time. See Matt 12:32; 13:40,49; Luke 1:70; 1 Cor 1:20; 2:6; Eph 1:21.

Similarly oi aiones, the worlds, the universe, the aggregate of the ages or periods, and their contents which are included in the duration of the world. 1 Cor 2:7; 10:11; Heb 1:2; 9:26; 11:3.

The word always carries the notion of time, and not of eternity. It always means a period of time.

Otherwise it would be impossible to account for the plural, or for such qualifying expressions as this age, or the age to come.

It does not mean something endless or everlasting.

To deduce that meaning from its relation to aei is absurd; for, apart from the fact that the meaning of a word is not definitely fixed by its derivation, aei does not signify endless duration. When the writer of the Pastoral Epistles quotes the saying that the Cretans are always (aei) liars (Tit. 1:12), he surely does not mean that the Cretans will go on lying to all eternity. See also Acts 7:51; 2 Cor. 4:11; 6:10; Heb 3:10; 1 Pet. 3:15. Aei means habitually or continually within the limit of the subject's life. In our colloquial dialect everlastingly is used in the same way. "The boy is everlastingly tormenting me to buy him a drum."

In the New Testament the history of the world is conceived as developed through a succession of aeons.

A series of such aeons precedes the introduction of a new series inaugurated by the Christian dispensation, and the end of the world and the second coming of Christ are to mark the beginning of another series. Eph. 1:21; 2:7; 3:9,21; 1 Cor 10:11; compare Heb. 9:26. He includes the series of aeons in one great aeon, 'o aion ton aionon, the aeon of the aeons (Eph. 3:21); and the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews describe the throne of God as enduring unto the aeon of the aeons (Heb 1:8).

The plural is also used, aeons of the aeons, signifying all the successive periods which make up the sum total of the ages collectively. Rom. 16:27; Gal. 1:5; Philip. 4:20, etc. This plural phrase is applied by Paul to God only.

The adjective aionios in like manner carries the idea of time.

Neither the noun nor the adjective, in themselves, carry the sense of endless or everlasting.

They may acquire that sense by their connotation, as, on the other hand, aidios, which means everlasting, has its meaning limited to a given point of time in Jude 6. Aionios means enduring through or pertaining to a period of time. Both the noun and the adjective are applied to limited periods. Thus the phrase eis ton aiona, habitually rendered forever, is often used of duration which is limited in the very nature of the case. See, for a few out of many instances, LXX, Exod 21:6; 29:9; 32:13; Josh. 14:9 1 Sam 8:13; Lev. 25:46; Deut. 15:17; 1 Chron. 28:4;. See also Matt. 21:19; John 13:8 1 Cor. 8:13. The same is true of aionios.

Out of 150 instances in LXX, four-fifths imply limited duration. For a few instances see Gen. 48:4; Num. 10:8; 15:15; Prov. 22:28; Jonah 2:6; Hab. 3:6; Isa. 61:17.

Words which are habitually applied to things temporal or material cannot carry in themselves the sense of endlessness. Even when applied to God, we are not forced to render aionios everlasting.

Of course the life of God is endless; but the question is whether, in describing God as aionios, it was intended to describe the duration of his being, or whether some different and larger idea was not contemplated. That God lives longer then men, and lives on everlastingly, and has lived everlastingly, are, no doubt, great and significant facts; yet they are not the dominant or the most impressive facts in God's relations to time.

God's eternity does not stand merely or chiefly for a scale of length. It is not primarily a mathematical but a moral fact.

The relations of God to time include and imply far more than the bare fact of endless continuance. They carry with them the fact that God transcends time; works on different principles and on a vaster scale than the wisdom of time provides; oversteps the conditions and the motives of time; marshals the successive aeons from a point outside of time, on lines which run out into his own measureless cycles, and for sublime moral ends which the creature of threescore and ten years cannot grasp and does not even suspect.

There is a word for everlasting if that idea is demanded.

That aiodios occurs rarely in the New Testament and in LXX does not prove that its place was taken by aionios. It rather goes to show that less importance was attached to the bare idea of everlastingness than later theological thought has given it.

Paul uses the word once, in Rom. 1:20, where he speaks of "the everlasting power and divinity of God." In Rom. 16:26 he speaks of the eternal God (tou aioniou theou); but that he does not mean the everlasting God is perfectly clear from the context.

He has said that "the mystery" has been kept in silence in times eternal (chronois aioniois), by which he does not mean everlasting times, but the successive aeons which elapsed before Christ was proclaimed. God therefore is described as the God of the aeons, the God who pervaded and controlled those periods before the incarnation.

To the same effect is the title 'o basileus ton aionon, the King of the aeons, applied to God in 1 Tim. 1:17; Rev. 15:3; compare Tob. 13:6, 10.

The phrase pro chronon aionion, before eternal times (2 Tim. 1:9; Tit. 1:2), cannot mean before everlasting times. To say that God bestowed grace on men, or promised them eternal life before endless times, would be absurd. The meaning is of old, as Luke 1:70. The grace and the promise were given in time, but far back in the ages, before the times of reckoning the aeons.

Zoe aionios eternal life, which occurs 42 times in N. T., but not in LXX, is not endless life, but life pertaining to a certain age or aeon, or continuing during that aeon.

I repeat, life may be endless. The life in union with Christ is endless, but the fact is not expressed by aionios. Kolasis aionios, rendered everlasting punishment (Matt. 25:46), is the punishment peculiar to an aeon other then that in which Christ is speaking.

In some cases zoe aionios does not refer specifically to the life beyond time, but rather to the aeon or dispensation of Messiah which succeeds the legal dispensation. See Matt. 19:16; John 5:39. John says that zoe aionios is the present possession of those who believe on the Son of God, John 3:36; 5:24; 6:47,54. The Father's commandment is zoe aionios, John 1250; to know the only true God and Jesus Christ is zoe aionios. John 17:3.

Bishop Westcott very justly says, commenting upon the terms used by John to describe life under different aspects: "In considering these phrases it is necessary to premise that in spiritual things we must guard against all conclusions which rest upon the notions of succession and duration.

'Eternal life' is that which St. Paul speaks of as'e outos Zoe the life which is life indeed, and 'e zoe tou theou, the life of God. It is not an endless duration of being in time, but being of which time is not a measure. We have indeed no powers to grasp the idea except through forms and images of sense. These must be used, but we must not transfer them as realities to another order."

Thus, while aionios carries the idea of time, though not of endlessness, there belongs to it also, more or less, a sense of quality.

Its character is ethical rather than mathematical. The deepest significance of the life beyond time lies, not in endlessness, but in the moral quality of the aeon into which the life passes. It is comparatively unimportant whether or not the rich fool, when his soul was required of him (Luke 12:20), entered upon a state that was endless. The principal, the tremendous fact, as Christ unmistakably puts it, was that, in the new aeon, the motives, the aims, the conditions, the successes and awards of time counted for nothing.

In time, his barns and their contents were everything; the soul was nothing. In the new life the soul was first and everything, and the barns and storehouses nothing. The bliss of the sanctified does not consist primarily in its endlessness, but in the nobler moral conditions of the new aeon, the years of the holy and eternal God. '

Duration is a secondary idea. When it enters it enters as an accompaniment and outgrowth of moral conditions.

In the present passage it is urged that olethron destruction points to an unchangeable, irremediable, and endless condition.

If this be true, if olethros is extinction, then the passage teaches the annihilation of the wicked, in which case the adjective aionios is superfluous, since extinction is final, and excludes the idea of duration. But olethros does not always mean destruction or extinction. Take the kindred verb apollumi to destroy, put an end to, or in the middle voice, to be lost, to perish.

Peter says "the world being deluged with water, perished (apoleto, 2 Pet. 3:6); but the world did not become extinct, it was renewed. In Heb. 1:11,12, quoted from Ps. 102, we read concerning the heavens and the earth as compared with the eternity of God, "they shall perish" (apolountai). But the perishing is only preparatory to change and renewal.

"They shall be changed" (allagesontai). Compare Isa. 51:6,16; 65:22; 2 Pet. 3:13; Rev. 21:1. Similarly, "the Son of man came to save that which was lost" (apololos), Luke 19:10. Jesus charged his apostles to go to the lost (apololota) sheep of the house of Israel, Matt. 10:6, compare 15:24, "He that shall lose (apolese) his life for my sake shall find it," Matt. 16:25. Compare Luke 15:6,9,32.

In this passage, the word destruction is qualified.

It is "destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his power," at his second coming, in the new aeon.

In other words, it is the severance, at a given point of time, of those who obey not the gospel from the presence and the glory of Christ.

Aionios may therefore describe this severance as continuing during the millenial aeon between Christ's coming and the final judgment; as being for the wicked prolonged throughout that aeon and characteristic of it, or it may describe the severance as characterising or enduring through a period or aeon succeeding the final judgment, the extent of which period is not defined.

In neither case is aionios, to be interpreted as everlasting or endless.

 

[Der Alte]

Sorry, I just do not believe your approach to the Scriptures is bibliical.

What you "believe" about my "approach" to Bible study is irrelevant.

While I don't have a problem with doing occasional word studies in the original languages (like the Bible even sometimes gives us certain words in the original language), we never see in the Bible men of God acting in the way that you are doing by saying we have to look to some ancient language that people did not know in order to understand God's Word.

.....Do you not realize how ridiculous this argument is? Of course you don't see the OT writers looking to some ancient language because they were not reading old scrolls in another language they were writing what God inspired them to in their native language Hebrew and Greek. And I am certain you are not fluent in either.
.....Remember in post #331 you were trying, with nothing but your opinion, to reinterpret Rev 10:10 to read "tormented day and night for [the purpose of] the ages of ages." When it says "tormented day and night for ever and ever." But when I correct you from the Greek, you claim what I said is not Biblical.
.....Why not just accept one of the many version? Because errors have been found in many of them. Some groups have their own translation which just happens to support their teaching such as the JW- NWT and the LDS- JST. So which version do we blindly accept?

I prefer to be more biblical and speak, and act by what I see Jesus and His followers saying and doing. Your approach is not in line with what they are doing. They just spoke plainly the Word of God.

Which group of Jesus followers do we follow? JW, LDS, WWCG, UU, OP, UPCI, INC etc?

Speaking of cop outs:
Did you ever explain the problem I gave you?
The one about how the second death would naturally relate to the first death?
Again, it seems contradictory to God's Word to make a parallel or comparison with something that is not related

I addressed your ridiculous question twice? Read my post where I addressed every verse in Rev which refers to the second death. I prefer scripture vs. someone's unsupported opinion. Can you show me one verse where anyone or anything is thrown into the lake of fire then they die?

 

[Faith Unites]

Huh? Just how bad of a preacher do you think Jesus is? back in the day 8 souls out of all humanity, God screwed up again and can only save a few souls after his appearing

I just read what it says in context. I don’t try to force my theology into the words.

 

[Faith Unites]

In Biblical Universalism there is a "hell" to avoid. If you "wait for death" & die in your sins, you'll go to "hell".

Don't you think the demon possessed people Jesus set free needed Him? Or the sick, maimed, lepers, etc, He healed? How about the woman caught in adultery? Or those under the legalistic burdens of the Pharisees (who BTW believed in eternal torments)?

Why do you need God in your life? Just as a selfish fire insurance policy? Not because you truly hate sin & what your sins do to others?



Actually after death in "hell" it will cost you a lot more. Jesus considers such to be fools.

This contradicts everything that has been said in this thread from the universalists.