Saved through Fire

Kimberlyann said:

LJSGM,

I'm not here to convince you of anything. I am here to learn and fellowship. It doesn't bother me if you don't agree with what I believe.

If your in the mood for a debate I suggest you ask someone else.

Click to expand...

Well, you can't really learn much if you insist on keeping company with only those that flatter you.

But you are right, this thread is not a debate on universalism. In fact, I didn't know that this was a universalist only disscussion, so, I will leave you to yourself now.

Actually the bias translators have translated at times correctly, but other times mis-translated thirteen ways: eternal age, ages of ages, course, world, , since the world began, from the beginning of the world, ever, forever, forever and ever, for evermore, while the world standeth, world without end, and, never. Sometimes the Greek Word was aion other times it was aionios; did not matter to them.

I understand what Strong’s Concordance is saying but I just gave you some examples of how religious translator’s have mis-translated the word age (Hebrew Olan) in the Hebrew and there are plenty example with the Greek words aion or aionios being mistranslated; just by looking at what the Bible is saying.

"Now, I knew enough traditional teaching on this word (aeonios), which is from another Greek word, aion, meaning "age." ; aeon and aeonios are not two completely different words. They are the noun and adjective form of the same word, just as hour is a noun and hourly is an adjective. One cannot rationally say that the meaning of a word is changed to mean its opposite simply by changing its usage from noun to adjective without violating all the rules of English and translation. Aeon means "age. But the word aeonios does not mean the opposite of its noun origin. As hourly means, "pertaining to the hour," so aeonios means "pertaining to the age."

"This word aeon occurs in the New Testament in so many peculiar and varying forms as to make it certain that it expresses some deep and important meaning well worth searching out. First we have the simple word many times repeated, both in the singular and plural. Then we have the word in combination with several prepositions: from the age, Luke 1:70; from the ages, Eph. 3:9; out of the ages, John 9:32; before the ages, 1 Cor. 2:7; before times of ages or before age-times, Tim. 1;2, the purpose of the ages, Eph. 3:11 (N.V. margin); the age to come, Heb. 6:5; the ages to come, Eph. 2:7; the end of the age; Matt. 24:3; the end of the ages, Heb. 9:26; the ends of the ages, 1 Cor. 10:11.


Furthermore in connection with the preposition unto we find the following remarkable changes:

1. Unto the age. Mark 3:29.
2. Unto the ages. Luke 1:33.
3. Unto all the ages. Jude 25.
4. Unto the age of the age. Heb. 1:8.
5. Unto all the generations of the age of the ages. Eph. 3:21.
6. Unto the ages of the ages. Rev. 1:6.
7. Unto the day of an age. 2 Pet. 3:18.


"Can anyone suppose that these peculiar forms have no special meaning? Is all this a mere play upon words? Simply purposeless repetition?

Remember, God by His Spirit is the real author of the inspired Word. "Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit." Is it not certain, then, as I have said, that these varying forms, so peculiar and striking, hide some spiritual mystery? And would it have not been more respectful to the Word if the translators of the common version (KJV) had rendered these expressions literally, even though they did not know what they meant, rather than to obscure the sense altogether with capricious renderings? These translators (of my precious KJV) have handled this word (aeon) apparently without any respect whatever to its real meaning. They have rendered its various combinations in thirteen ways, These are not translations but paraphrases, and look to me like 'handling the Word of God deceitfully,' albeit it may have been unintentional."


I like to use the King James Version, because for the study of Greek words it's simply easier to cross-reference the KJV with Strong's Concordance. "Anyway, in a matter of minutes I was stunned to discover that in Matthew 25:46, the words "everlasting" and "eternal" were the same Greek word, aionios, (Strong's #166), which means, "eternal, forever, everlasting, world."

First of all, I would have thought it very strange indeed if you had come to any other conclusion while using the very books that have been so instrumental in propagating the error of "eternal" torment.

Secondly, Matthew 25:46 is not speaking of the judgment of individuals. It is speaking of the judgment of the nations. (See verse 32) Nowhere does the Lord allude to individuals, but always to nations. But even if it did refer to individuals, it doesn't stand up to the light of truth.


The Greek words for "everlasting punishment" are "chastening aeonian." "aeonios," which means "pertaining to the age". Our English word, "punishment," has been translated from the Greek word, "kolasis" which comes from the root word, "kolazo." "Kalazo" means, "to chastise, to punish." It is closely associated with the Greek word, "kalaphizo," which means, "to rap with the fist."

As to the possibility of the "everlasting punishment" of the wicked and the "eternal life" of the righteous being the same, it doesn't exist. The Greek word, "aeonian" simply means, "pertaining to the age". "Aeonian," being the adjective form of "aeon," is descriptive of both the kind of life of the righteous and the kind of punishment of the wicked. In the strictest sense, it really has no reference to time at all but to the quality of that life or punishment. Does that do away with eternal life for the redeemed? Not at all, for it is clearly taught by many other scriptures throughout the Bible, but "aeon/aeonios" does not describe the duration of that life.

The word, "eternal," means, "without beginning or end," as we seem to use it. I'm not sure anyone really understands the term, and it is nowhere defined or alluded to in an unending sense in the entirety of the Bible. God is eternal, without beginning or end, even though He is also the God of the ages, for He is the Creator of time and of all the ages time consists of. The life for the age that the redeemed know is that quality of life of peace and joy that we now enjoy but in no way precludes or prevents our eventual entrance in to that life which is without beginning or end, which is God's. "To know Him is eternal life."

The statement, "Now, on this horizontal line within the two vertical lines is an aeon of time which can certainly be described as "eternal," eternal or perpetual (and complete) within its own context," makes no logical sense. There can be no perpetual (eternal) period of time. That would be like saying "The goodness of evil, the dryness of wet, the sweetness of bitter." They are contradictory and conflicting terms. To say that they mean the same is to destroy the meaning of both.

What about the God sending a baby goat going everlasting fire:

Matt 25: 32And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats (Greek) kid or baby goat):
Vs.41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

How about the word punishment which means to prune or chastise; or the multiple verses that declares God‘s salvation to all people. I believe God will punish the wicked; I just do not believe it is eternal; it has limited duration; that is what an age or ages is. God will annahlate the sinner; but not the people.

My problem with this whole issue is WE cannot ignore two important factors; one is dead wrong; or one is grace overflowed.

1. You believe God is going to burn up sinners (95-98% of all men, women and children including my brother who died when he was 26 years old; 24 years a go. All the non believers for eternity in hell; with no hope. There are plenty of verses to back it up. I know these verses and have debated plenty of people just like you on this very subject.

Example of a hell verse:

Matthew 5:22
But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell (Gehenna) fire.

2. I believe Jesus blood is greater then the sin of Adam. I believe in the multiple scriptures that declare the salvation for all man kind. .

Example of a salvation for all verse:

Romans 5:18-20 (Weymouth’s)​

It follows then just as the result of a single transgression is a condemnation which to the whole race, so also is the result of a single degree of righteousness is a life giving acquittal which extends to the whole race. (19) for as thought the disobedience of one individual the mass of mankind were constituted as sinners, so also though the obedience of one, the mass of mankind will be constituted righteous. Now law was brought in later on so that the transgression might increase, but sin increased, grace is overflowed.

It cannot be both ways; either the Bible is a fake or some one has mistranslated the Bible.

Now let me add a comment about your hell verse; notice it is not speaking to a sinner, a heathen, or a pagan worshiper; but a brother. Be it Christian or Jewish the brother is going to eternal Gehenna hell fire. Something has to give; eternal hell or grace overflowing?

Benoni said:

How about the word punishment which means to prune or chastise; or the multiple verses that declares God‘s salvation to all people. I believe God will punish the wicked; I just do not believe it is eternal; it has limited duration; that is what an age or ages is. God will annahlate the sinner; but not the people.

My problem with this whole issue is WE cannot ignore two important factors; one is dead wrong; or one is grace overflowed.

1. You believe God is going to burn up sinners (95-98% of all men, women and children including my brother who died when he was 26 years old; 24 years a go. All the non believers for eternity in hell; with no hope. There are plenty of verses to back it up. I know these verses and have debated plenty of people just like you on this very subject.

Example of a hell verse:

Matthew 5:22
But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell (Gehenna) fire.

2. I believe Jesus blood is greater then the sin of Adam. I believe in the multiple scriptures that declare the salvation for all man kind. .

Example of a salvation for all verse:

Romans 5:18-20 (Weymouth’s)​

It follows then just as the result of a single transgression is a condemnation which to the whole race, so also is the result of a single degree of righteousness is a life giving acquittal which extends to the whole race. (19) for as thought the disobedience of one individual the mass of mankind were constituted as sinners, so also though the obedience of one, the mass of mankind will be constituted righteous. Now law was brought in later on so that the transgression might increase, but sin increased, grace is overflowed.

It cannot be both ways; either the Bible is a fake or some one has mistranslated the Bible.

Now let me add a comment about your hell verse; notice it is not speaking to a sinner, a heathen, or a pagan worshiper; but a brother. Be it Christian or Jewish the brother is going to eternal Gehenna hell fire. Something has to give; eternal hell or grace overflowing?

Click to expand...

I meant annahlate the sin; not sinner

LJSGM said:

Well, you can't really learn much if you insist on keeping company with only those that flatter you.

But you are right, this thread is not a debate on universalism. In fact, I didn't know that this was a universalist only disscussion, so, I will leave you to yourself now.

Click to expand...

Actually this thread is open to others, it isnt just a universalist only discussion either, would you be willing to be open to learning here yourself......?

2ducklow said:

of course some people go deeper into sin than others, but all of us are evil and only made righteous by faith in Jesus Christ.

Click to expand...

Is it faith in Jesus that makes us righteous or does faith in Jesus convince us to do as he said to do and that doing so makes us righteous.. To be righteous means [to me] to do right, to live right, act right, think right.. Belief in and of itself is of no value at all.

2ducklow said:

1 Corinthians 3:15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

it doesn't say he will be saved by or through fire but will be saved so as by fire. it's an analogy not literal. also his works will not literally be burned up. its figurative. no one is saved by fire. we are saved by faith in Jesus.

Click to expand...

As is the lake of fire, in all likely hood these two scriptures are talking about the same thing, judgment, fire, and ultimately salvation.

LJSGM said:

Well, you can't really learn much if you insist on keeping company with only those that flatter you.

But you are right, this thread is not a debate on universalism. In fact, I didn't know that this was a universalist only disscussion, so, I will leave you to yourself now.

Click to expand...

saved through fire is a universalist doctrine. they say the lake of fire where those who are tormented for ages of ages whose names are not in the book of life are only there to be purified so they can be with God. well as far as I can tell from what they've said, that appears to b e the case. hence the title of the thread saved through fire. the ground rules for debating here aren't as strickt as in a formal debate. going off on tangents as long as they relate to the subject is ok.

Benoni said:

So often what matters to believers is not the truth but what they already believe.

Click to expand...

Actually, my view of hell and destruction has recently changed, but only based on scripture, not on other people's opinion.

I mean Christianity has turned into a social club; the idea that truth must fit with in the walls of your fellow brothers and sisters you have been fellowshipping with for all your life.

Click to expand...

I currently do not attend a church, or have a denomination. Sad isn't it? Even if I did meet people in my church that did not agree with me, I would still call them my brother. You are still my brother

To agree with they are saying is more important then the reality of truth; now that is religion today.

Click to expand...

To agree with scripture, and the Holy spirit is more important to me. Unfortunately, The Holy Spirit quite often speaks through other believers.

The difference between us and many religious types is we have tore down our walls of understanding and we are reaching out to God for what He has to say.

Click to expand...

Many, but not most, and I wouldn't call that a defining point between a universalist and "them."

My main reason I do not believe in hell it is so contrary to who and what Jesus is; God is love and there in absolutely no love or justice in eternal hell and torment.

Click to expand...

It is not contrary, there is a balance between the two, justice and love. For those that chose to love Him and obey him, there is abounding love, but for those that are his enemy, there is wrath. I know that God calls everyone to his grace, but not everyone accepts him. I know that God does everything possible, apart from force to show others this grace of the gospel. He really does not wish anyone to perish, but his spiritual law still stands in place. Half the bible speaks of God's love, but half speaks of his wrath. Are we just going to ignore half of God's charater because we stand in judgement of Almight God and say to him, that's not right or that's not who you are even though this is how God revealed himself to us? Because the truth can sometimes be harsh, does that mean that God is evil? NO, of course not. God is always righteous and just.

Have you done a study on destruction yet?

2ducklow said:

those in the lake of fire are unbelievers who have no faith to be tested by fire. so this verse refers to believers not those who have no faith. God sends adversity to test our faith. he sends torment in the lake of fire to all those not in the lamb's book of life at the day of judgement. two different kinds of fires. selbsverstandlich.

Click to expand...

Just curious here... How many do you think will be nonbelievers at this point? Think about it for a second, They have died and been resurected and now stand before God in his glory. Would not most if not all of them fall to thier knees and believe.

In fact the bible tells us that God has sworn an oath by himself that every knee shall bend and every tounge shall swear.

Now this has been pointed out many times as well as the verses from Paul about trial by fire and the tried being saved as by fire. What has not been pointed out (or at least not that I have saw) is what happens after the lake of fire.

Rev 21:5 And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.

LJSGM said:

It is not contrary, there is a balance between the two, justice and love.

Click to expand...

But the teaching of eternal torment has nothing to do with justice, In fact it is so far removed from justuce that it can not be seen at all. Justice demands that all be treated fairly, Love demands that the treatment be tempered with kindness.

For those that chose to love Him and obey him, there is abounding love, but for those that are his enemy, there is wrath.

Click to expand...

Yet Jesus commands us to love our enemies, are we to believe that he does not do as he commands? Do you realize that such a thing would make him a hypocrite and a false prophet?

No I believe that Jesus loves his enemies much more than a normal man is capable of.

Soul Searcher said:

But the teaching of eternal torment has nothing to do with justice, In fact it is so far removed from justuce that it can not be seen at all.

Click to expand...

Well, as I mentioned before, eternal torment is not what I believe, I believe there to be an everlasting destruction (Bad end).

Justice demands that all be treated fairly

Click to expand...

Yes, this is true

Love demands that the treatment be tempered with kindness.

Click to expand...

Wrath doesn't

Yet Jesus commands us to love our enemies, are we to believe that he does not do as he commands? Do you realize that such a thing would make him a hypocrite and a false prophet?

Click to expand...

Jesus was an example to us on how to live while in this tainted world so that as many as possible could be saved. He did do as he commanded in this world. But in the spiritual realm he will be the judge of all nations.

Romans 12:19 (New International Version)


19Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: "It is mine to avenge; I will repay,"[a]says the Lord.

LJSGM said:

Well, as I mentioned before, eternal torment is not what I believe, I believe there to be an everlasting destruction (Bad end).

Click to expand...

My bad.. after I submitted the post I seemed to recall that you had said you believed in destruction rather than torment.

Yes, this is true

Click to expand...

Wrath doesn't

Click to expand...

Correct wrath does not but God is love and love demands that mercy be present so even in wrath there is mercy where love exists.

Jesus was an example to us on how to live while in this tainted world so that as many as possible could be saved. He did do as he commanded in this world. But in the spiritual realm he will be the judge of all nations.

Click to expand...

No disagreement here

As for the general concept of eternal destruction I can definitely see where a case can be made for this from the bible text. I can also see the case for the salvation of all. There are a few confusing verses related to both. What I can not see is the eternal unending torment.. there really is no case to be made for that doctorine without ignoring many many passages of scripture.

In the case of destruction here is one major sticking point in my mind.. If God knows in advance who will be destroyed and who will not, what exactly would be the point of raising them for judgment? I mean they are already dead and the intent is to kill them why not just let them stay dead. This seems very much like a waste of time.

Then of course we do have numerous passages about the salvation of all, could it be possible that upon resurection those deemed unfit are given a chance to repent and those who do are saved, those who do not are destroyed? This would seem to be the only logical way that resurection of these souls would make any sense .

Soul Searcher said:

My bad.. after I submitted the post I seemed to recall that you had said you believed in destruction rather than torment.



Correct wrath does not but God is love and love demands that mercy be present so even in wrath there is mercy where love exists.

No disagreement here

As for the general concept of eternal destruction I can definitely see where a case can be made for this from the bible text. I can also see the case for the salvation of all. There are a few confusing verses related to both. What I can not see is the eternal unending torment.. there really is no case to be made for that doctorine without ignoring many many passages of scripture.

In the case of destruction here is one major sticking point in my mind.. If God knows in advance who will be destroyed and who will not, what exactly would be the point of raising them for judgment? I mean they are already dead and the intent is to kill them why not just let them stay dead. This seems very much like a waste of time.

Then of course we do have numerous passages about the salvation of all, could it be possible that upon resurection those deemed unfit are given a chance to repent and those who do are saved, those who do not are destroyed? This would seem to be the only logical way that resurection of these souls would make any sense .

Click to expand...

Revelation 20
11Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. Earth and sky fled from his presence, and there was no place for them. 12And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. 13The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what he had done. 14Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. 15If anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.

Do you want to hear what I think the meaning of life is? Why God created us? Right before the beginning of creation, God foreknew everything that would happen. He didn't make life and allow suffering just to read a good book, there was great value and meaning behind it, just a similar reason why we still chose to have children in this world. He choose to create life, even though he knew the suffering and the sin, even the pain that it would cause Him in order to create a freewilled creature that was capable of loving Him, and whom he would be in a love relationship back with through all of eternity. It was a heavy cost, but basically, what do you think the creator of the world would do to those that would not love Him or have any purpose to Him? Humanly put them out of their misery is a vile use of words I suppose.

But who can know the motives and reasoning of God almighty???

LJSGM said:

Do you want to hear what I think the meaning of life is? Why God created us? Right before the beginning of creation, God foreknew everything that would happen. He didn't make life and allow suffering just to read a good book, there was great value and meaning behind it, just a similar reason why we still chose to have children in this world. He choose to create life, even though he knew the suffering and the sin, even the pain that it would cause Him in order to create a freewilled creature that was capable of loving Him, and whom he would be in a love relationship back with through all of eternity. It was a heavy cost, but basically, what do you think the creator of the world would do to those that would not love Him or have any purpose to Him? Humanly put them out of their misery is a vile use of words I suppose.

Click to expand...

I understand where you are coming from but must point out that there is a major difference between a human bringing a child into the world and God. Sure we as humans know that the child will die at some point hopefully peacefully after a long healthy and happy life. We also can hope that the child will go to heaven and such. We do not know if the child will live 5 minutes or 100 years, we do not know if the child will be healthy or spend his/her life suffering, we do not know if the child will be a saint or a mass murderer, all we know is that it will be our child.

That being said even if our child is a major dissapointment to us most of us would continue to love the child and would do everything in our power to save this child even if it means stepping on the will of the child to do so. Very few of us could ever consider destroying our child if there was any other option. Then we have God who is capable of anything including saving each and everyone of us and our children. Should we really believe that he will just turn his back on those that don't quite get it?

Soul Searcher said:

I understand where you are coming from but must point out that there is a major difference between a human bringing a child into the world and God. Sure we as humans know that the child will die at some point hopefully peacefully after a long healthy and happy life. We also can hope that the child will go to heaven and such. We do not know if the child will live 5 minutes or 100 years, we do not know if the child will be healthy or spend his/her life suffering, we do not know if the child will be a saint or a mass murderer, all we know is that it will be our child.

That being said even if our child is a major dissapointment to us most of us would continue to love the child and would do everything in our power to save this child even if it means stepping on the will of the child to do so. Very few of us could ever consider destroying our child if there was any other option. Then we have God who is capable of anything including saving each and everyone of us and our children. Should we really believe that he will just turn his back on those that don't quite get it?

Click to expand...

Good points.

The same way that Thomas had to see, touch and know before he would believe.....there are others like that as well. Thomas had the benefit of living at the time that Jesus was still alive in the flesh so that the proof could be offered to him right at that moment.

But the "Doubting Thomas's" who have lived since then don't have that luxury. Jesus doesn't come to them in the flesh and put out His hands for them to feel...and so they continue to doubt....just as Thomas would have done if Jesus didn't come to him the way He did.

But after death, those "Doubting Thomas's" of today are finally confronted with the same proof that Thomas was shown 2000 years ago. They face the real Jesus, see Him as He is....and just as the Thomas of 2000 years ago, upon being given proof, proclaimed "My Lord and my God".....they will as well...bank on it.