Universalism, Is it True?

[Mathetes the kerux]

so way is there a greek word for eternal used 2 times in the New Test. and has nothing to do with Hell?" I guess God should listen to you about greek because it seems to me that you think he is dumb on the matter.

I am aware of aidios . . . but it is a synonym for aion in ancient usage . . . and the term is used three times.

The rest of your point is philosophical absurdity . . .

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

I think you have them burning in hell! God is LOVE boy does He not understand what Love is.

If there was no acceptance of Christ or God's covenant . . . then yes, that is where they are.

Actually YOU do not understand "God is Love" . . . because you fail to incorporate God's holiness and justice.

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

Why Heb. 8-11,12 tells me that you have no understanding of the new coventant. And you are calling God a liar.

I am tiring of you . . . your ad hominem posits are quite shallow. Deborah is coming with some thought out and articulate posits . . . you are slinging mud and generally making no sense. Until you can ES, I will give you no more note.

Pax

MTK

 

[ShammahBenJudah]

The concept of salvation by grace through faith demands of us that we exercise the faith given us to accept Christ.

Perhaps another perspective will help this make sense. I used to live less than a mile from Pimlico in Baltimore, so I'm no stranger to the stir over the Preakness. I've heard lots of people give lots of tips on the horses and I've seen people win and lose big betting on them.

If an owner were to guarantee that his horse would win the Preakness and tell me to bet everything I own on his horse, I would have to take his word at it and, by faith place my bet. I could place my bet any time I wanted to...to a point. But it would be a waste of time to try betting on the winning horse after the race is over.

The wager placed before the race is done "in faith"...after the race it is impossible to have that faith.

While the ramifications of winning or losing the Preakness don't compare to the ramifications of eternal damnation, the principle is the same. After the race is over, its too late to place your bet.

Scripture is clear that we are saved by grace through faith. When this race is over, it will be impossible to have faith for the outcome you've already seen. And once it becomes impossible to have faith...the thing through which we are saved...how is salvation possible?

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

The thing that I am finding appalling is that this doctrine smears the atonement and mocks the cross.

People actually come to heaven by payment of their sins in hell? The punishment that Christ is supposed to have bore for the Christian is not bore for these who go to Hell for remedial purposes . . . they PAY FOR THEIR OWN SIN . . . they suffer the punishment for their own sin, instead of the glorious ilasterion of Christ. At least this is the logical conclusion that I come to.

 

[ShammahBenJudah]

The thing that I am finding appalling is that this doctrine smears the atonement and mocks the cross.

People actually come to heaven by payment of their sins in hell? The punishment that Christ is supposed to have bore for the Christian is not bore for these who go to Hell for remedial purposes . . . they PAY FOR THEIR OWN SIN . . . they suffer the punishment for their own sin, instead of the glorious ilasterion of Christ. At least this is the logical conclusion that I come to.

While I'n sure some would argue that payment for sin isn't exactly what they had in mind, when you strip away the lollipops and butterflies and look at the hard reality of it...I can't see any other conclusion either.

I had a question of a curious nature. I've seen a few writings on this doctrine existing in the early church, but nothing definitive. I was wondering if there were a specific, definitive list naming the early churches that believed in universal salvation.

 

[Miykael777]

Originally Posted by Mathetes the kerux
The thing that I am finding appalling is that this doctrine smears the atonement and mocks the cross.

People actually come to heaven by payment of their sins in hell? The punishment that Christ is supposed to have bore for the Christian is not bore for these who go to Hell for remedial purposes . . . they PAY FOR THEIR OWN SIN . . . they suffer the punishment for their own sin, instead of the glorious ilasterion of Christ. At least this is the logical conclusion that I come to.

While I'n sure some would argue that payment for sin isn't exactly what they had in mind, when you strip away the lollipops and butterflies and look at the hard reality of it...I can't see any other conclusion either.

Hi I am new here and I am both a pentecostal and a Christian universalist. I hope I can help here. Jesus Christ didnt die to save us from hell. The wages of sin is death. Jesus Christ died and rose from the dead to save us from sin and death. Technically none will be saved from the fire. All must go through the refining fire of God, if you wish to be a part of the first resurrection then you must be tried by fire and come forth as gold in this life/age. If you do not recieve salvation in this life/age then you will be cast into the lake of fire 1. to be brought into submission to Christ 2. Have your stubborn rebelious self will "burned away" 3. willingly recieve Christ 4. be purified and cleansed and given immortal life. The "lake of fire" is a process. It is a baptism by fire which only Jesus Christ can perform and all must undergo it either in this life or the next. Christian Universalism glorifys the cross in the fact that the atonement is for all and Jesus Christ will save all from sin and death.

Now on the Contrary the dontrine of eternal damnation is an insult to our God.
Gary Amirault puts it this way "When we teach or believe that our Maker will ultimately torment forever, or annihilate one single soul, we have judged our Maker as imperfect. We say that His intentions were good and that He purposed for us to be in His likeness. He declared, "let us make man in Our Image," but, somehow, things got short circuited. He then had to either eternally separate this imperfect image from His personal self, or He had to just disintegrate it. This makes Him become the builder mentioned in one of Jesus' parables of the man who started to build but couldn't finish or the one who went to battle without the resources to win. This doctrine says that ,somehow, the Creator of the Universe didn't have everything all figured out, and as a result, ends up short of His goal. The truest definition of sin is to "fall short" or "miss the mark." Our great Creator said, "Let us make man in Our Image" and fell short of His gigantic undertaking.

A Religious man will never admit it, but when we say someone is going to hell or will be annihilated, we are judging the Creator. That person we condemn is His workmanship. When we created rules, creeds, articles of faith, which declared the "unrighteous" are consigned to eternal punishment or annihilation, we have just created an eternal garbage heap, a place where God can dump those vessels He couldn't perfect. It is one thing for a man to attempt something and fail, but it is an entirely different thing for blind religious men to say that God will fail, yet the doctrine of eternal punishment and annihilation does just that. Our God becomes a failure, which is just another word for sinner."
God is not a failure! God is the Savior and He will not fail to save everyone! God is infinitly wise. He did not make what He could not keep, and He did not start what He cant complete.

Not many think of God being in Hell, forever supervising the torment as He exacts His vengeance. This would not even occur to most people, but they should be asked to think it through. Most are carelessly thinking of Hell as such a separation from God, that God is not experiencing the torments of 90% of the human race. However, they fail to notice that would imply that God someday ceases to be omniscient. That is surely further from orthodoxy than a temporary Hell, thus they must reject it. It is a disturbing idea to think of God for all eternity experiencing the bliss of less than 10% of his human beings, while experiencing the torments of the rest of them. How could a God who loves goodness and joy so much more than sin and pain get Himself into this situation? It would seem, in that case, that Satan did achieve a certain victory of hate by subjecting God to such a final eternal state.

But the truth is much better than some imagine..

In the end, God wins (1 Cor. 15:24-28; Phil. 2:9-10; Col. 1:20.).
The doctrine of "eternal punishment" makes hell an eternal monument to the devil’s works of sin and death. Did Jesus fail at destroying the works of the devil (1Jn.3:8)? Did the first Adam’s offense unto condemnation and death for all accomplish "much more" than the last Adam’s free gift of grace unto justification for all (Ro.5:15)? Did Jesus tell a lie when He said, "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth will draw all men unto me."? Is the last enemy, death, not destroyed? Are those to whom God becomes "All in all" (1Cor.15:28) only those who managed to escape the devil’s clutches? Does every knee bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord (Phil.2:11) because God is really like Nebechadnezzer (Dan.3), forcing all into submission without respect to the desire of their heart? If "eternal punishment" is true, then all of the above are true and the devil is exalted.

I had a question of a curious nature. I've seen a few writings on this doctrine existing in the early church, but nothing definitive. I was wondering if there were a specific, definitive list naming the early churches that believed in universal salvation.

I have a page with two links to two different web pages with quotes and church history/timeline of universalism on my website. Please visit my website. You all may find the answers your looking for.

http://godsunfailinglove777.googlepages.com

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

While I'n sure some would argue that payment for sin isn't exactly what they had in mind, when you strip away the lollipops and butterflies and look at the hard reality of it...I can't see any other conclusion either.

I had a question of a curious nature. I've seen a few writings on this doctrine existing in the early church, but nothing definitive. I was wondering if there were a specific, definitive list naming the early churches that believed in universal salvation.

Try theopedia and wikipedia . . . they seem to have a list of some with sources.

But this doesn't matter much . . . many of the Ante-Nicean Patriarchs had highly heretical views of the Godhead . . . so non-orthodox views on universal salvation don't prove much.

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

Hi I am new here and I am both a pentecostal and a Christian universalist. I hope I can help here. Jesus Christ didnt die to save us from hell. The wages of sin is death. Jesus Christ died and rose from the dead to save us from sin and death. Technically none will be saved from the fire. All must go through the refining fire of God, if you wish to be a part of the first resurrection then you must be tried by fire and come forth as gold in this life/age. If you do not recieve salvation in this life/age then you will be cast into the lake of fire 1. to be brought into submission to Christ 2. Have your stubborn rebelious self will "burned away" 3. willingly recieve Christ 4. be purified and cleansed and given immortal life. The "lake of fire" is a process. It is a baptism by fire which only Jesus Christ can perform and all must undergo it either in this life or the next. Christian Universalism glorifys the cross in the fact that the atonement is for all and Jesus Christ will save all from sin and death.

Now on the Contrary the dontrine of eternal damnation is an insult to our God.
Gary Amirault puts it this way "When we teach or believe that our Maker will ultimately torment forever, or annihilate one single soul, we have judged our Maker as imperfect. We say that His intentions were good and that He purposed for us to be in His likeness. He declared, "let us make man in Our Image," but, somehow, things got short circuited. He then had to either eternally separate this imperfect image from His personal self, or He had to just disintegrate it. This makes Him become the builder mentioned in one of Jesus' parables of the man who started to build but couldn't finish or the one who went to battle without the resources to win. This doctrine says that ,somehow, the Creator of the Universe didn't have everything all figured out, and as a result, ends up short of His goal. The truest definition of sin is to "fall short" or "miss the mark." Our great Creator said, "Let us make man in Our Image" and fell short of His gigantic undertaking.

A Religious man will never admit it, but when we say someone is going to hell or will be annihilated, we are judging the Creator. That person we condemn is His workmanship. When we created rules, creeds, articles of faith, which declared the "unrighteous" are consigned to eternal punishment or annihilation, we have just created an eternal garbage heap, a place where God can dump those vessels He couldn't perfect. It is one thing for a man to attempt something and fail, but it is an entirely different thing for blind religious men to say that God will fail, yet the doctrine of eternal punishment and annihilation does just that. Our God becomes a failure, which is just another word for sinner."
God is not a failure! God is the Savior and He will not fail to save everyone! God is infinitly wise. He did not make what He could not keep, and He did not start what He cant complete.

Not many think of God being in Hell, forever supervising the torment as He exacts His vengeance. This would not even occur to most people, but they should be asked to think it through. Most are carelessly thinking of Hell as such a separation from God, that God is not experiencing the torments of 90% of the human race. However, they fail to notice that would imply that God someday ceases to be omniscient. That is surely further from orthodoxy than a temporary Hell, thus they must reject it. It is a disturbing idea to think of God for all eternity experiencing the bliss of less than 10% of his human beings, while experiencing the torments of the rest of them. How could a God who loves goodness and joy so much more than sin and pain get Himself into this situation? It would seem, in that case, that Satan did achieve a certain victory of hate by subjecting God to such a final eternal state.

But the truth is much better than some imagine..

In the end, God wins (1 Cor. 15:24-28; Phil. 2:9-10; Col. 1:20.).
The doctrine of "eternal punishment" makes hell an eternal monument to the devil’s works of sin and death. Did Jesus fail at destroying the works of the devil (1Jn.3:8)? Did the first Adam’s offense unto condemnation and death for all accomplish "much more" than the last Adam’s free gift of grace unto justification for all (Ro.5:15)? Did Jesus tell a lie when He said, "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth will draw all men unto me."? Is the last enemy, death, not destroyed? Are those to whom God becomes "All in all" (1Cor.15:28) only those who managed to escape the devil’s clutches? Does every knee bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord (Phil.2:11) because God is really like Nebechadnezzer (Dan.3), forcing all into submission without respect to the desire of their heart? If "eternal punishment" is true, then all of the above are true and the devil is exalted.



I have a page with two links to two different web pages with quotes and church history/timeline of universalism on my website. Please visit my website. You all may find the answers your looking for.

http://godsunfailinglove777.googlepages.com

I find the posits badly framed and heavily a priori positioned. Like a bad assumption about God in His plan. As if the Fall took Him by surprise. Your arguement from the guy you are citing is a false dichotomy and sets up faulty premises . . . much like the slippery word trick "how long has it been since you stopped beating your wife?" which presumes much in the statement and places the answer, if not detected rightly, at automatic odds. Same here.

we have judged our Maker as imperfect.

Perfect example . . . it assumes a premise as true in the assertion . . . namely that the relegation to hell points to God's failure . . . but it does not. The key is in reconciling with the sovereignty of God. Not to mention that exegesis of the Scripture is taking a back seat to human philosophy rather than letting Scripture dictate philosophy.

This doctrine says that ,somehow, the Creator of the Universe didn't have everything all figured out, and as a result, ends up short of His goal.

This again sets up a faulty premise . . . it assumes a goal that is not informed by God's sovereignty . . . that the "good" of creation didn't include the good of God's glory . . . for whether one likes it or not . . . even those in hell will be glorifying God for all eternity in their judgement . . . mainly by glorifying God's justice, righteousness and holiness. . . while the redeemed will be glorifying God's mercy, grace and love. The statement is very uninformed.

The doctrine of "eternal punishment" makes hell an eternal monument to the devil’s works of sin and death.

That is a strawman . . . rather, eternal punishment exalts God's primary attributes in glory . . .

Jesus didn't die to save us from sin and death brother . . . He died PRIMARILY to save us from the WRATH OF GOD HIMSELF . . . that is the Greek ilasterion. "Hell" is the philosophical construct of the form of the wrath of God post death (physical).

 

[irenemcg]

Why would a universalist have a passion for evangelism, after all under their interpretation of scripture they need not have a real concern for the souls of others?

Mat 7:13 "Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it.

Mar 9:45 And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life lame, rather than having two feet, to be cast into hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched--


Someone wants to stop believers from really fulfilling the commission, he is the father of lies and he will do his utmost stopping us from seeing that those who stay in unbelief are destined for an eternity in hell. If we don't believe that our passion for the lost will waver somewhat.

Joh 10:10 The thief does not come except to steal, and to kill, and to destroy. I have come that they may have life, and that they may have it more abundantly.

 

[Miykael777]

my passion for evangelism is stronger than ever before. Like Romans says - How shall they know unless there is a preacher. I am in love with Jesus and I wants others to know Him. I want others to be free from the bondage of sin and death.

 

[Miykael777]

This again sets up a faulty premise . . . it assumes a goal that is not informed by God's sovereignty . . . that the "good" of creation didn't include the good of God's glory . . . for whether one likes it or not . . . even those in hell will be glorifying God for all eternity in their judgement . . . mainly by glorifying God's justice, righteousness and holiness. . . while the redeemed will be glorifying God's mercy, grace and love. The statement is very uninformed.

rather, eternal punishment exalts God's primary attributes in glory

I am sorry but that is sick sadistic and insane.

Have you forgotten that God is love - 1 John 4:8
It is God's will for all to be saved
1 Timothy 2:3-6 - ...God our Savior; Who WILL have ALL MEN to be saved, and come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; Who gave himself a ransom for ALL, to be testified in due time.

God is not willing that any perish 2 Peter 3:9
2 Peter 3:9 - The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

God's will cannot be thwarted
Job 23:13 - But he is in one mind, and who can turn him? and what his soul desireth, even that he doeth.
God desires for all to be saved and He will save all.
Matthew 19:26 - with God all things are possible. [This verse is speaking about salvation]

Isaiah 46:9 - I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me, [10] Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure: [11] Calling a ravenous bird from the east, the man that executeth my counsel from a far country: yea, I have spoken it, I will also bring it to pass; I have purposed it, I will also do it.

God is almighty and all loving if He desires all to be saved then they will all be saved. God knows exactly what its going to take to where even the hardest sinner will surrender all to Him.

 

[StudentoftheWord]

Now, reading some responses, I express concern over some conclusions. Perhaps it is because this is originally just a poll but I observe strange trails and slippery slopes and strawman arguments abounding.

I am a Holy Spirit-filled, Water Baptised, Tongue-speaking, Bible-believing, Charasmatic Faith seeking individual who by no choice of my own, had been exposed to God at a very young age. I cannot be persuaded that Jesus is not real; nor can I be told God is a figment of our imagination; nor can I say the gifts of God are dead; nor can I say that the truth of Scripture is not clear and today I come to you with a most somber and clear mind, with conviction and anchored by hope, that Christian Universalism (the belief that Jesus Christ saved all mankind) is a complete truth without fault.

Some here have asked, "I have never heard of this before" and you may have gone to your pastor to find clarity on this issue. A neutral position of Christian Universalism (also known as Universal Reconciliation) can be found on Wikipedia.org: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Reconciliation

Investigate these claims without bias, and just like most Christians who hold doctrines, not every individual who believes in the doctrine of Universal Reconciliation (Universalism) represents everyone who believes it. In otherwords, just as there are many sects and denominations of Christians who believe in a perpetual hell for sinners; there are many sects and denominations of Christians who believe in a temporary hell, or purgatory, or restoration for all sinners.

 

[ShammahBenJudah]

I had a question of a curious nature. I've seen a few writings on this doctrine existing in the early church, but nothing definitive. I was wondering if there were a specific, definitive list naming the early churches that believed in universal salvation.

Try theopedia and wikipedia . . . they seem to have a list of some with sources.

But this doesn't matter much . . . many of the Ante-Nicean Patriarchs had highly heretical views of the Godhead . . . so non-orthodox views on universal salvation don't prove much.

Actually it was a notion of interest to me because as I read Christ's messages to the 7 churches in Revelation 2 & 3, I noticed that only two of the seven got a "clean bill of doctrinal health" from Jesus. These two churches are nowhere near the "seats of enlightenment" that most of Universalism proudly points to supposedly strengthening their position.

I'm sorry, but it isn't so important what someone else believed about a matter. What is important is the truth of the matter.

To be perfectly honest, even if I did believe this doctrine, I wouldn't teach it. There are just too many variables to claim a solid place to stand in accountability.

None of us has all the answers.

For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known. 1 Corinthians 13:12

If I'm wrong, one day I'll stand before Jesus and give account for that. If I'm teaching the wrong thing, people will still go to heaven or at least have that opportunity. I don't mind answering to Him for that. And I can preceptually and contextually demonstrate what I feel is solid ground to stand on. I'm perfectly comfortable with my accountability.

But on the other side of the coin, what if this notion of reconciliation is wrong? How could I stand before the Living God and answer to Him for teaching people something that may cause them to make decisions that would cost them their eternal life?

You couldn't pay me enough money to take on that accountability...there's no way. It sounds exactly like Genesis 3:4 to me.

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

I am sorry but that is sick sadistic and insane.

Have you forgotten that God is love - 1 John 4:8
It is God's will for all to be saved
1 Timothy 2:3-6 - ...God our Savior; Who WILL have ALL MEN to be saved, and come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; Who gave himself a ransom for ALL, to be testified in due time.

God is not willing that any perish 2 Peter 3:9
2 Peter 3:9 - The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

God's will cannot be thwarted
Job 23:13 - But he is in one mind, and who can turn him? and what his soul desireth, even that he doeth.
God desires for all to be saved and He will save all.
Matthew 19:26 - with God all things are possible. [This verse is speaking about salvation]

Isaiah 46:9 - I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me, [10] Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure: [11] Calling a ravenous bird from the east, the man that executeth my counsel from a far country: yea, I have spoken it, I will also bring it to pass; I have purposed it, I will also do it.

God is almighty and all loving if He desires all to be saved then they will all be saved. God knows exactly what its going to take to where even the hardest sinner will surrender all to Him.

I am sorry but that is sick sadistic and insane.

The I guess you are with the Brits that see the Cross as "divine child abuse" (?) . . .

You are erring in the manner that many do concerning the Love of God . . . does it say that God is ONLY love? If this were the case, and all of His attributes were ONLY lovING (IE mercy grace compassion etc) then you would be right . . . but He is not JUST love . . . He is love AND righteousness and holiness and justice. You create a false dichotomy when you say "God is love . . . so He therefore won't relegate people to eternal punishment."

You have a bad translation dude . . . He DESIRES that all be saved . . . doesn't say that they will. Haven't you read that we can grieve the Holy Spirit? SO then HE CAN BE RESISTED . . . doesn't the Scripture call the Israelites stiff necked and obstinate RESISTING THE LORD ALL DAY LONG? Yep. Your philosophical contentions don't hold with a proper biblical heremeneutic.

Post all the passages you want . . . they must still be reconciled with the several other passages that directly contradict your position.

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

Lam 3:31 "For men are not cast off by the Lord forever, 32 though he brings grief, he will show compassion, so great is his unfailing love."

Isa 57:16 "I will not accuse forever, nor will I always be angry, for then the spirit of man would grow faint before me-the breath of man that I have created."

John 12:32 "I will drag all peoples to myself"

I Tim 4:9 "This is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance 10 (and for this we labor and strive), that we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, and especially of those who believe."

These are a few of many.

Also, the great Greek scholar, Marvin R. Vincent has this to say: "Zoe aionious eternal life, which occurs 42 times in N.T but not once in LXX, is not endless life, but life pertaining to a certain age or aeon, or continuing during the 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 (Matthew 25:46), is the punishment peculiar to an aeon other that that in which Christ is speaking." He goes on the make an excellent point " ... while aionios carries the idea of time, but not endlessness, there belongs to it also, more or less, a sense of quality. It character is ethical rather than mathmatical." This reminds me of what Jesus said in the gospel of John that eternal life is knowing God the father and Jesus Christ whom he has sent.

The practice of applying our concept of the word eternal to aion/aionios began about the 5th c ad. In Jewish thoughtform there is no expression of endlessness. The Jews, including our Lord, thought in terms of ages, each framed by the word of God.

n Jewish thoughtform there is no expression of endlessness. The Jews, including our Lord, thought in terms of ages, each framed by the word of God.

I don't think so. The "I AM" statement of Ex 3 is a clear reference to the concept of eternality . . . likewise Gen 1:1 clearly conveys the same . . . before the ages . . . God existed.

Jesus Himself carries over the eternally existent OUTSIDE OF TIME concept in John 8:58 . . . one of the clearest references to His diety in the NT.

So your assertion doesn't hold . . . and I am seeming to remember that the DSS also had some allusions to eternity also (if my mem serves me correctly).

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

For Mathetas the kerux. Are you saying that the sheep and goats of Matt 25:46 do not both reference human beings? My example is a good correlation. The employees represent the humans.

To revisit kolasis, my commentary states that the word always represents beneficial punishment in the secular greek. So, it agrees with Barclay. I also checked the root meaning of kolasis, which is to maim or prune. Pruning is done to benefit the tree. Jacob was maimed to benefit him. Didn't Aristotle distinguish the difference between kolasis, as punishment designed to benefit the one receiving it, as opposed to timoria which is punitive in nature? The Holy Spirit, if he meant the latter, would have used timoria. If he meant eternal, he would have used an unambiguous greek word or expression.

You also felt that my reference to Isa 26:9 was a covenant promise and did not apply to non believers. I did use it loosely from memory as "when God's judgements are on the earth people learn righteousness" So, I looked it up. The phrase is "When your judgments come upon the earth, the people of the world learn righteousness" After checking, out the hebrew words, it is clear that this applies to people in general and is not restricted to the Israelites.

You also dismiss my references to God's mercy and type of judgment as probably out of context. There is an entire OT book that testifies to his mercy toward his enemies (again, non Israelites). It is the book of Jonah. Jonah ran from God because he hated the Ninevites, a cruel, wicked people. He tells God: " I knew you were a gracious and compassionate God, slow to anger and abounding in love, a God who relents from sending calamity." God responds: "...Ninevah has more than a hundred and twenty thousand people, who cannot tell their right hand from their left, and many cattle as well. Should I not be concerned about that great city?"

Lastly, in regard to my references to the lake of fire and death, I was also using material from Paul, 1 Cor 15, which even my NIV study bible notes refers to the passage in Revelation.

The Holy Spirit, if he meant the latter, would have used timoria. If he meant eternal, he would have used an unambiguous greek word or expression.

The point is that the terms used are NOT ambiguous at all . . . and the connotations that you espouse to them are NOT required . . . and the assertions that you have made about what the words CANNOT mean are just plain wrong.

The aidios (eternal), I am assuming you are refering to about a "clear" term, is used synonomously with aion in certain places.

Timoreo is a term used synonomously with kolazo/sin . . . just because Arist. distinguished between the terms does not mean that they ALWAYS hold the dichotomy. In truth, many terms may be used synonomously just for flare.

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

In regard to aionious it is a relative term that varies with its subject. Since scripture teaches that God's punishment is of a temporary nature, aionious can never mean eternal in reference to it.

As to the argument that in Matt 25:46 the state of the righteous is eternal therefore the state of those punished must also be eternal, it does not hold. Life and punishment are two different subjects. It doesn't matter that aionious is used for both. Look at Ro 16:25,26 where there is an aionian mystery revealed at a certain point in time (therefore not an eternal mystery) manifested by the aionian God, who is an eternal being. The subject drives the meaning, not proximity or an event.

This "proximity argument" is like saying a judge must sentence a guilty plaintiff to life imprisionment, because he has just freed an innocent one and both cases are on the morning's docket! A just judge is guided by the sentencing guidelines.

Since scripture teaches that God's punishment is of a temporary nature, aionious can never mean eternal in reference to it.

That is an a priori rejection . . . IOW you are rejecting based on a presuppostion that you hold . . .

As to the argument that in Matt 25:46 the state of the righteous is eternal therefore the state of those punished must also be eternal, it does not hold. Life and punishment are two different subjects. It doesn't matter that aionious is used for both. Look at Ro 16:25,26 where there is an aionian mystery revealed at a certain point in time (therefore not an eternal mystery) manifested by the aionian God, who is an eternal being. The subject drives the meaning, not proximity or an event.

Actually it is a very valid arguement because the entire context of ALL the illustrations leading to this are ALL contrast of opposites. EVERY ONE. The parallel thought is the reward of the righteous with the reward of the unrighteous . . . not a ontological parallel of life and punishment . . . but a parallel of reward . . .

as for Rom. you are right the linguisitc apparatus applied to Matt 25 does not apply here . . . but this is not because the apparatus is wrong in Matt . . . it is because of context. Context determines the usage of the apparatus in Matt and the context determines the non-use in Romans . . . why? BECAUSE THE PHILOSOPHICAL construct is different. Firstly the clauses are not dependent clauses . . . they are separated by several different words and thought structures (not so in Matt) AND the clear understanding is a difference in usage and application of the terms.

I do commend you for trying though . . . but it doesn't work in aiding you to denounce the parallel structure of the Matthean passage.

 

[Miykael777]

The I guess you are with the Brits that see the Cross as "divine child abuse" (?) . . .

No I do not agree with that and you know it. Thats not cool for you to even say that. Jesus Christ is God's greatest gift of love to His fallen creation.

You are erring in the manner that many do concerning the Love of God . . . does it say that God is ONLY love? If this were the case, and all of His attributes were ONLY lovING (IE mercy grace compassion etc) then you would be right . . . but He is not JUST love . . . He is love AND righteousness and holiness and justice. You create a false dichotomy when you say "God is love . . . so He therefore won't relegate people to eternal punishment."

You have a bad translation dude . . . He DESIRES that all be saved . . . doesn't say that they will. Haven't you read that we can grieve the Holy Spirit? SO then HE CAN BE RESISTED . . . doesn't the Scripture call the Israelites stiff necked and obstinate RESISTING THE LORD ALL DAY LONG? Yep. Your philosophical contentions don't hold with a proper biblical heremeneutic.

Post all the passages you want . . . they must still be reconciled with the several other passages that directly contradict your position.

God does not have multiple personality disorder. God's unfailing love is not separate from His just judgment. God does not change. God does not vary.

Psalms 116:5 - Gracious is the LORD, and righteous; yea, our God is merciful.

Isaiah 30:18 - And therefore will the LORD wait, that he may be gracious unto you, and therefore will he be exalted, that he may have mercy upon you: for the LORD is a God of judgment: blessed are all they that wait for him.

Hmm... Judgment and Grace together. Those two couldnt possibly go together could they? The answer is yes! Judgment is good; harsh, but good. It is God's gace that He deals with us according to our sins so that He can reprove us.

Habakkuk 1:12 - Art thou not from everlasting, O LORD my God, mine Holy One? we shall not die. O LORD, thou hast ordained them for judgment; and, O mighty God, thou hast established them for correction.

Judgment is for correction. Correction means to set right. When a parent punishes a child they do it in hope that the child will learn not to disobey and make the same mistake again. God is the Almighty Father who chastises to correct not to torture for all eternity.

God is righteous. He will not infinitly punish a finite being who make finite choices. The bible said that our life is like a vapor - is that really worthy of eternal torment? NO! The bible says that God's mercy endures FOREVER 42 times, and that Gods anger is for a moment. How can that be true is Eternal torment is true?

Psalms 30:5 - For his anger endureth but a moment; in his favour is life: weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning.

Lamentations 3:31 - For the Lord will not cast off for ever: [32] But though he cause grief, yet will he have compassion according to the multitude of his mercies.

Job 34:10 - ...far be it from God, that he should do wickedness; and from the Almighty, that he should commit iniquity. [11] For the work of a man shall he render unto him, and cause every man to find according to his ways. [12] Yea, surely God will not do wickedly, neither will the Almighty pervert judgment.

Job 4:17 - Shall mortal man be more just than God? shall a man be more pure than his maker?

Job 34:23 - For he will not lay upon man more than right; that he should enter into judgment with God.

God will not chastise man more than he deserves and Eternal torment is more than any man deserves for a lifetime that is like a vapour in the wind. No one would ever send their worst enemy into a fiery hell FOREVER. No one would ever want someone to experience unimaginable pain without any hope of it ever ending. Neither does God. God told us to love our enemies shouldnt He do the same. It is true the wicked will reap what they sow in the "Lake of fire," but their chastisement will not last forever.

I plead with you. Please at least read the first article on my website. http://godsunfailinglove777.googlepages.com/home

 

[ShammahBenJudah]

I am sorry but that is sick sadistic and insane.

Have you forgotten that God is love - 1 John 4:8
It is God's will for all to be saved
1 Timothy 2:3-6 - ...God our Savior; Who WILL have ALL MEN to be saved, and come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; Who gave himself a ransom for ALL, to be testified in due time.

God is not willing that any perish 2 Peter 3:9
2 Peter 3:9 - The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

God's will cannot be thwarted
Job 23:13 - But he is in one mind, and who can turn him? and what his soul desireth, even that he doeth.
God desires for all to be saved and He will save all.
Matthew 19:26 - with God all things are possible. [This verse is speaking about salvation]

Isaiah 46:9 - I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me, [10] Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure: [11] Calling a ravenous bird from the east, the man that executeth my counsel from a far country: yea, I have spoken it, I will also bring it to pass; I have purposed it, I will also do it.

God is almighty and all loving if He desires all to be saved then they will all be saved. God knows exactly what its going to take to where even the hardest sinner will surrender all to Him.

There's a pretty big hole in your bucket here.

You're not discerning God's will very well...

It is not God's will that any should perish, it is not God's will that any should sin, it is not God's will for people's cars to crash, it is not God's will for people to get sick, it is not God's will for children to be abused and this could go on all day...point is that regardless of God's will these things can, do and will happen every day.

Why? Because you are not discerning the aspect of God's will the scripture is talking about...DESIRE.

When we violate God's desires, we force Him to make judgements that are intended to correct us and bring about His purpose in our lives.

The scriptures do make this clear...but these are clearly precepts for life and to construe them in equivalence with afterlife precepts is very thin ice.

God's purpose is to transform us back into His image. But if we are not born again, we aren't living and remain fashioned in the image of our father, the devil...the one who's image we were born with.

In the end, it is the image that makes the call...who's image are you in? Hell was created for the devil and those who did what? Took on his image...fell with him?

On judgement day those who's image is life will live. Those who's image is death will join it. The fire of Gehenna will not transform that image of death to the image of life...it is the abode of death.

Scripture does not define ANYTHING that happens following the Great White Throne Judgement. The most distant future word of prophecy recorded says that at the second death, whoever was not found written in the Lamb's Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire.

Scripture doesn't clearly speak to any activity after this. Teaching that it does is based on deduction, which is perfectly fallible.