Universalists: How do you explain the "problem passages"?

[Der Alte]

I`m not equipped to deal with translation issues which is what the root of Universalism is about. That is why I can`t explore this issue the way I would like to. Hell is trouble I intend to avoid so I`m not motivated to go learn Hebrew and Greek just so I can speculate about God`s intentions.
Having said that, I don`t think the Talmud is a irrefutable source anymore then hinduism, buddhism, Islam etc. The Jewish Enc only goes back to 1906, the Judaica Ecy is 1971, both can be considered to be based on the Talmud I would think.
The article below was sourced from multiple places including some that are pretty old.
The Gehenna Of Fire | Concordant Publishing Concern

I gave links to the Jewish Encyclopedia, Talmud and Encyclopedia Judaica which I quoted.. I would suggest you read the complete articles especially the bibliographies at the bottom of the pages citing all the sources they referred to.
Without other credible, verifiable, historical the sources I cited are the most reliable documenting the faith and practice of the Jews before, during and after the time of Jesus.
I will check your link but I think I can say without any concern for contradiction nothing in that source disproves anything I quoted. Someone expressing a different view does not disprove what I posted.
ETA: I just did a quick scan of the article you referred to it is a piece of biased rubbish which does NOT cite any historical evidence at all. It is full of misinformation which has been debunked. I will address it in more detail tomorrow.

 

[RickReads]

Someone expressing a different view does not disprove what I posted.

I didn`t say it did. I just disagree with your opinion that the Talmud is irrefutable.

 

[martymonster]

There's a lot of people on this thread, who can't see the forest for the trees. Here... let me draw you a diagram.

Mat 5:43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.
Mat 5:44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
Mat 5:45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.
Mat 5:46 For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same?
Mat 5:47 And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?
Mat 5:48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

I really don't see how it could be any more clear.
So, if God's imperfect little creations fail to measure up to his standards of perfection, will he become imperfect to punish them for it?

Seriously people! Don't let all the words confuse you... it's perfectly simple!

 

[Der Alte]

I did search the KJV. I stay well clear of the NIV.

May I recommend the Eastern Greek Orthodox translation which is available in several places free online. For 2000+ years Greek has been the language of the Eastern Greek Orthodox. Who better than the native Greek speaking scholars who translated the EOB.
https://azbyka.ru/otechnik/books/or...tament-(The-Eastern-Greek-Orthodox-Bible).pdf
The Eastern/Greek Orthodox Bible EOB—New Testament 96 can be viewed/D/L at the above link. For any doubts/questions about the EOB version please refer to the 200 page preface which documents the extensive Greek scholarship supporting this translation.

 

[Der Alte]

I didn`t say it did. I just disagree with your opinion that the Talmud is irrefutable.

Your unsupported opinion certainly does not refute anything in my post. In the absence of any other credible, verifiable, historical evidence the Talmud remains the only credible evidence we have of the faith and practice of the ancient Jews.
A little hint about my next post. Archaeological studies in Jerusalem have revealed that there is no evidence that Gehinnom was ever used as a trash dump. No burning trash, bodies etc. The archaeological studies revealed that the 100s of meters high and wide trash dump was in the Kidron valley.

 

[RickReads]

Your unsupported opinion certainly does not refute anything in my post. In the absence of any other credible, verifiable, historical evidence the Talmud remains the only credible evidence we have of the faith and practice of the ancient Jews.
A little hint about my next post. Archaeological studies in Jerusalem have revealed that there is no evidence that Gehinnom was ever used as a trash dump. No burning trash, bodies etc. The archaeological studies revealed that the 100s of meters high and wide trash dump was in the Kidron valley.

The Talmud is based on Jewish stories and myths. It`s not a historical document so no point in trying to sell that Kool aid to me. The idea of the thread was to discuss the views of Universalism you seem like you want to suppress it. You want to refute it? Go ahead but I hope you can find something better then Talmud to back yourself with.

 

[hedrick]

I`m not equipped to deal with translation issues which is what the root of Universalism is about. That is why I can`t explore this issue the way I would like to. Hell is trouble I intend to avoid so I`m not motivated to go learn Hebrew and Greek just so I can speculate about God`s intentions.

Having said that, I don`t think the Talmud is a irrefutable source anymore then hinduism, buddhism, Islam etc. The Jewish Enc only goes back to 1906, the Judaica Ecy is 1971, both can be considered to be based on the Talmud I would think.

The article below was sourced from multiple places including some that are pretty old.

The Gehenna Of Fire | Concordant Publishing Concern

Probably the best sources are lexicons. The Theological Dictionary of the NT is a 6-volume work that documents how a word (and the concept it represents) were treated by Greek culture, the OT, various later Jewish sources, and the NT. That's what I use. However the difficultyI in this discussion is that 1st Cent Jews disagreed, just as modern Christians did. The lexicons are certainly useful. They can help protect against unintentionally reading your own assumptions into the text. But they don't produce or support a simple answer in this case.

There are other problems.

Many participants in this discussion believe in inerrancy. Among other things, this requires that everything in the NT agrees. So people use Matthew to interpret Paul, overriding the obvious meaning of his words.

Finally, there may just be no simple answer. While I think Paul is a universalist, almost all Pauline scholars disagree. They think all the key passages are about Christians only. If so, that leaves the author of the biggest part of the NT with no specific view of what judgement of non-Christians will be. Almost all passages in Synoptics about judgement are in Matthew. In Mark and Luke there are few, and several of them are obvious hyperbole. Matthew clearly sees Christ as a judge. But it's not so clear that this represents the view of Mark and Luke. And in Matthew, judgement is on the basis of actions. A major part of this is how people treat Christians. There is a surprising agreement among scholars that "little ones" in several judgement texts refers to Christians. Thus before the 18th Cent, Mat 25:31 ff was understood as saying that people would be judged based on how they treat Christians, a view the author of the Hermeneia commentary thinks was probably the original intention of Matthew. Anyone who would derive doctrine from the Revelation is treading on very shaky ground.

I believe we can safely say that we will all be held accountable for how we live our lives, and that Jesus' followers will have eternal life. I have low confidence in statements about judgement beyond that. I doubt eternal torment. I think most claims to support it from the NT are based on misunderstandings of OT images, and I think it is inconsistent with Jesus' teachings about God. (It is barely possible that Matthew actually does intend it.) But that leaves lots of room for discussion.

 

[Albion]

So you're saying the bible contradicts itself?

I don't think that the Bible contradicts itself. However, there are apparent contradictions, verses that seem to us to be the opposite of what some other verses are saying. Understanding them is our challenge.

In examining the evidence from Scripture for universal salvation, what we have to work with is slim. It's not nothing, but it's slim.

Meanwhile, the verses that indicate an eternity of being outcast for some of us are many and powerful. So if we compare the two sets, it's hard to make a case based on the first group of verses.

 

[RickReads]

I don't think that the Bible contradicts itself. However, there are apparent contradictions, verses that seem to us to be the opposite of what some other verses are saying. Understanding them is our challenge.

In examining the evidence from Scripture for universal salvation, what we have to work with is slim. It's not nothing, but it's slim.

Meanwhile, the verses that indicate an eternity of being outcast for some of us are many and powerful. So if we compare the two sets, it's hard to make a case based on the first group of verses.

I agree with you but I also think there is more to it then is revealed to us. I`m one of those who needs all scriptures to agree and I don`t buy the I win because I have more verses argument. I think God leaves Himself room to judge however He chooses.

 

[hedrick]

I agree with you but I also think there is more to it then is revealed to us. I`m one of those who needs all scriptures to agree and I don`t buy the I win because I have more verses argument. I think God leaves Himself room to judge however He chooses.

The problem is that Biblical authors may not feel the same way we do. We see in the prophets, Paul, and even the end of the Revelation, that everything comes out right in the end, with everyone worshipping in Jerusalem. In Jeremiah, even Sodom and Gomorrah are rehabilitated. But we also see talk about judgement and remnants. They may simply not have seen the need to fit all of these together into a single, consistent explanation of how it all works.

 

[Saint Steven]

I don't think we can.

There are a handful of verses that might be interpreted as supporting Universalism--a handful--but they are far outnumbered by the Bible verses that are quite emphatic in saying the opposite (as you observed yourself).

I think the opposite is true.
If we ignore the Damnationist texts, the whole Bible is about Universal Restoration.

In reality, the Damnationist claims are slander against God. The only reason they are even in the bible is because the Damnationist translators put their bias into it.

 

[Saint Steven]

I find your post really interesting and honest but and here's the big but, do you want to follow GOD as he intends for you to follow HIM or with how you intend, want to follow HIM. This is something seen throughout Christendom at the present time, people making GOD in their image and how they wish HIM to be. This could be called Idolatry and with justification in my opinion. Making a god to suit one's self.

I hope you seek GOD and let yourself be lead by the Holy Spirit into all truth.

Peace be with you



Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him

We no longer look to be served. We look to serve and give our lives for others. No longer fight for privilege, influence and status. We esteem others better than ourselves and put their interests above our own.

What if the "idol" is the angry volcano god we have been brainwashed to believe in?
What does God require of us as godly behavior toward our enemies? (to love them) If you burned your enemies for all eternity with no hope of escape, would that be love?

 

[Albion]

I agree with you but I also think there is more to it then is revealed to us. I`m one of those who needs all scriptures to agree and I don`t buy the I win because I have more verses argument. I think God leaves Himself room to judge however He chooses.

That isn't exactly my argument--or my point.

There are plenty of issues on which the Bible seems to contradict itself. Faith vs. Works is a good example. But only one of the possibilities can be right, so it's a matter of understanding what each of the Bible 'proofs' is actually saying.

What about this one, then? It's not a matter of how many verses are on each side. That's not what decides the matter. However, the material that the universalists have to work with is very limited and not very clear-cut. Those are more like verses that seem to hint at a conclusion. It is fair, though, to admit that there ARE a few of them.

The verses that seem to support the opposite conclusion check both of those boxes.

As a result, the people who reject universalism have a lot more support in God's word, and it's not just in the number of verses that are on their side.

 

[Albion]

I think the opposite is true.
If we ignore the Damnationist texts, the whole Bible is about Universal Restoration.

It's quite a stretch, however, to say that the general restoration of things includes an eternity of blessedness for evil-doers and non-believers. Those verses ordinarily are thought to refer to the universe, the relationship of God to Men, and so on.

 

[Saint Steven]

I take Christ at his word. When he states that punishment is eternal I believe him.

Matthew 25:46

There are serious questions about the translation of the word "eternal" (aionios)

The doctrine of eternal hell is so chocking that it deserves a careful examination. In this video we discuss the meaning of the word "aionios" by its other appearances in the Bible, not relying on dictionary definitions.

 

[Albion]

The most obvious conclusion, if that line of thought about the meaning of "eternal" is pursued, is not that there will be universal salvation but that the damned will be annihilated rather than tortured forever and ever.

 

[Saint Steven]

It's quite a stretch, however, to say that the general restoration of things includes an eternity of blessedness for evil-doers and non-believers. Those verses ordinarily are thought to refer to the universe, the relationship of God to Men, and so on.

But then you have to accept the idea that it was God's plan to predestine countless billions to eternal conscious torment with no hope of escape. Most of whom had never so much as heard the name of Jesus.

 

[Saint Steven]

The most obvious conclusion, if that line of thought about the meaning of "eternal" is pursued, is not that there will be universal salvation but that the damned will be annihilated rather than tortured forever and ever.

That would be an Annihilationist conclusion.

 

[RickReads]

That isn't exactly my argument--or my point.

There are plenty of issues on which the Bible seems to contradict itself. Faith vs. Works is a good example. But only one of the possibilities can be right, so it's a matter of understanding what each of the Bible 'proofs' is actually saying.

What about this one, then? It's not a matter of how many verses are on each side. That's not what decides the matter. However, the material that the universalists have to work with is very limited and not very clear-cut. Those are more like verses that seem to hint at a conclusion. It is fair, though, to admit that there ARE a few of them.

The verses that seem to support the opposite conclusion check both of those boxes.

As a result, the people who reject universalism have a lot more support in God's word, and it's not just in the number of verses that are on their side.

It`s a translation issue otherwise universalism loses. I concede that.

Faith vs Works is a good example because they do not disagree with each other

I don`t have an answer for universalism because the Holy Spirit hasn`t revealed it to me yet.

 

[Albion]

But then you have to accept the idea that it was God's plan to predestine countless billions to eternal conscious torment with no how of escape. Most of whom had never so much as heard the name of Jesus.

I wouldn't call every human situation a matter of divine predestination.

If some people never hear the name of Jesus and so do not acclaim him as Lord and Savior, it doesn't necessarily mean that God decided from all eternity that it should be that way for each of those people.