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

[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.

The most obvious conclusion is that you can't view a 21 minute video in three minutes. - lol

 

[Albion]

That would be an Annihilationist conclusion.

Yes. That was the point.

 

[Saint Steven]

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.

Not every human situation? What percentage of the countless billions do you propose?

Your second paragraph shows what happens when a thinking person, like yourself, tries to sort this out. (thank you) All of a sudden, things don't appear so black and white. We have to start making all sorts of allowances for "situations". The hard and fast rules about heaven and hell start to unravel. This is a good discussion.

 

[Saint Steven]

Yes. That was the point.

There are three basic doctrinal positions on the final judgment. All three have biblical support.
1) Damnationism
2) Annihilationism
3) Universal Restorationism

Furthermore, Universalism has its roots in the early church.

"The Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge"
by Schaff-Herzog, 1908, volume 12, page 96
German theologian- Philip Schaff writes :

"In the first five or six centuries of Christianity there were six theological schools, of which four (Alexandria, Antioch, Caesarea, and Edessa, or Nisibis) were Universalist, one (Ephesus) accepted conditional immortality; one (Carthage or Rome) taught endless punishment of the wicked. Other theological schools are mentioned as founded by Universalists, but their actual doctrine on this subject is not known."

 

[Albion]

Universalism was common in the early church, but that doesn't mean it was the norm. There's nothing that would suggest that it was.

 

[garee]

The problem with this topic is that we have to take something non-literally. It's a matter of judgement what. In 1 Cor 15:22 ff Paul says that just as all died in Adam all will be made alive. The comparison makes it clear that he means everyone, not just all nations. The passage ends with all being united with Christ and through him, God. There are, of course, standard way of dismissing the obvious reading. But I'd rather dismiss the literal reading of passages that use language that we know from the OT was often not used literally.

I would offer.

The word many helps to divide the all that die (the wage of death every person created in Adam ) And the ones that were given a new eternal spirit in Christ that will rise on the last day and then receive there new bodies. No man has received that promise (Hebrew11:39).

In that way any man that has not the Spirit of Christ does not belong to Him. Many not all .

Matthew 20:28 Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many

John 1:12But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

John 8:30 As he spake these words, many believed on him

Believing God is a work of God's labor of love actively giving us his unseen understanding.

Every temporal bodies in Adam returns to the dust and if the person has not experienced a new born again spirit. . their temporal spirit that is subject to the letter of the law (death) returns to that father who gave in under the letter of the law. Just as their temporal flesh returns to the dust from where it was formed.

Flesh and blood rudiments of this corrupted creation cannot enter the new order.

Ecclesiastes 12:7 Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.

 

[Saint Steven]

I am open about universalism, I just don't know how you guys get past some verses. If you have an explanation for them I will hear you out. For example, all of the verses that say the wicked will perish, everlasting destruction, the second death, etc.? How do you explain those verses about perishing and the wicked getting destroyed?

Here's the title and first paragraph from an article.


"Aion and Aionios"
From
CHRIST TRIUMPHANT
by Thomas Allin

Let us next consider the true meaning of the words "aion" and "aionios."*1 These are the originals of the terms rendered by our translators "everlasting," "for ever and ever:" and upon these misleading translations, a vast portion of the popular dogma of endless torment is built up. I say, without hesitation, misleading and incorrect; for aion means "an age," a limited period, whether long or short, though often of indefinite length; and the adjective aionios means "of the age," "age-long," "aeonian," and never "everlasting" (of its own proper force), it is true that it may be applied as an epithet to things that are endless, but the idea of endlessness in all such cases comes not from the epithet, but only because it is inherent in the object to which the epithet is applied, as in the case of God. Much has been written on the import of the aeonian (eternal) life. Altogether to exclude, (with MAURICE) the notion of time seems impracticable, and opposed to the general usage of the New Testament (and of the Septuagint). But while this is so, we may fully recognize that the phrase "eternal life" (aeonian life) does at times pass into a region above time, a region wholly moral and spiritual. Thus, in S. John, the aeonian life (eternal life), of which he speaks, is a life not measured by duration, but a life in the unseen, life in God. MORE AT LINK BELOW

Aion and Aionios: Excerpt from "Christ Triumphant"

 

[hedrick]

I would offer.

The word many helps to divide the all that die (the wage of death every person created in Adam ) And the ones that were given a new eternal spirit in Christ that will rise on the last day and then receive there new bodies. No man has received that promise (Hebrew11:39).

In that way any man that has not the Spirit of Christ does not belong to Him. Many not all .

Matthew 20:28 Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many

John 1:12But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

John 8:30 As he spake these words, many believed on him

Believing God is a work of God's labor of love actively giving us his unseen understanding.

Every temporal bodies in Adam returns to the dust and if the person has not experienced a new born again spirit. . their temporal spirit that is subject to the letter of the law (death) returns to that father who gave in under the letter of the law. Just as their temporal flesh returns to the dust from where it was formed.

Flesh and blood rudiments of this corrupted creation cannot enter the new order.

Ecclesiastes 12:7 Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.

Unfortunately "many" in NT Greek often means "all." In Rom 5:19, surely Paul means to say that all were made sinners, particularly when you look at 5:18. So you need to understand the context, and how you do often depends upon what you start out believing. The John quotations obviously do not mean all. Matthew, however, parallels texts in Paul where many clearly means all. I suspect it doesn't for Matthew, because I don't think Matthew is a universalist. With Paul, however, we need fancy exegetical footwork to avoid universalism.

 

[Gifts From Above]

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.

Jesus was clear that hell is eternal:

Mark 9:48
‘where their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched.’

 

[Saint Steven]

Universalism was common in the early church, but that doesn't mean it was the norm. There's nothing that would suggest that it was.

How do you determine "the norm"? (majority opinion)
Which of the three groups gave us our Bible?
1) Damnationists
2) Annihilationists
3) Universalists

 

[hedrick]

Jesus was clear that hell is eternal:

Mark 9:48
‘where their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched.’

We're starting to go around in circles. This is a quotation from Is 66, where the worms are eating dead bodies and the fire is burning them. The people involved are dead, and feel nothing. If taken literally, this would support annihilation. Also, those fires are no longer burning. The Bible often uses "eternal" and similar terms non-literally.

 

[Saint Steven]

Jesus was clear that hell is eternal:

Mark 9:48
‘where their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched.’

What about the inhabitants? How long will they be there?
And what sort of god would do such a thing to his children? (made in his image)

 

[Gifts From Above]

We're starting to go around in circles. This is a quotation from Is 66, where the worms are eating dead bodies and the fire is burning them. The people involved are dead, and feel nothing. If taken literally, this would support annihilation. Also, those fires are no longer burning. The Bible often uses "eternal" and similar terms non-literally.

What Does the Bible Say About Eternal Damnation In Hell?

 

[Der Alte]

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.

The Talmud is, in fact, a historical record. There may be some mythological entries in the Talmud but it is largely an interpretation of the Hebrew scriptures. But you seem to have forgotten that I also quoted the Jewish Encyclopedia and Encyclopedia Judaica and I asked to you review the bibliography at the end of each article
Anything you say about historical Jewish faith and practice is pretty much meaningless unless you can quote some Jewish history but I seem to be the only one doing that.

 

[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

As I said I am back. A quote from your link. something else for you to ignore.

"The meaning of Gehenna must be established from facts furnished by the Scripture, not by falsehoods foisted by human tradition. To the reader of the Hebrew Scriptures themselves, Gehenna can only mean a verdict which, besides condemning a man to death, also ordains that, after death, his body should be cast into the loathsome valley of Hinnom. This being the sense of Gehenna in the Hebrew Scriptures, we may be sure that this is the sense in which Christ used it."​

Anybody who claims that the valley of Hinnom, Gehenna in he NT, was constantly burning trash dump and that supposedly was what Jesus was referring to does not know what they are talking about.

The traditional explanation that a burning rubbish heap in the Valley of Hinnom south of Jerusalem gave rise to the idea of a fiery Gehenna of judgment is attributed to Rabbi David Kimhi's commentary on Psalm 27:13 (ca. A.D. 1200). He maintained that in this loathsome valley fires were kept burning perpetually to consume the filth and cadavers thrown into it. However, Strack and Billerbeck state that there is neither archaeological nor literary evidence in support of this claim, in either the earlier intertestamental or the later rabbinic sources (Hermann L. Strack and Paul Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud and Midrasch, 5 vols. [Munich: Beck, 1922-56], 4:2:1030). Also a more recent author holds a similar view (Lloyd R. Bailey, "Gehenna: The Topography of Hell," Biblical Archeologist 49 [1986]: 189.
Source, Bibliotheca Sacra / July–September 1992
Scharen: Gehenna in the Synoptics Pt. 1​

…..Note there is no “archaeological nor literary evidence in support of this claim, [that Gehenna was ever used as a garbage dump] in either the earlier intertestamental or the later rabbinic sources” If Gehenna was ever used as a garbage dump there should be broken pottery, tools, utensils, bones, etc. but there is no such evidence.

“Gehenna is presented as diametrically opposed to ‘life’: it is better to enter life than to go to Gehenna. . .It is common practice, both in scholarly and less technical works, to associate the description of Gehenna with the supposedly contemporary garbage dump in the valley of Hinnom. This association often leads scholars to emphasize the destructive aspects of the judgment here depicted: fire burns until the object is completely consumed. Two particular problems may be noted in connection with this approach. First, there is no convincing evidence in the primary sources for the existence of a fiery rubbish dump in this location (in any case, a thorough investigation would be appreciated). Secondly, the significant background to this passage more probably lies in Jesus’ allusion to Isaiah 66:24.”
(“The Duration of Divine Judgment in the New Testament” in The Reader Must Understand edited by K. Brower and M. W. Ellion, p. 223, emphasis mine)
G. R. Beasley-Murray in Jesus and the Kingdom of God:
“Ge-Hinnom (Aramaic Ge-hinnam, hence the Greek Geenna), ‘The Valley of Hinnom,’ lay south of Jerusalem, immediately outside its walls. The notion, still referred to by some commentators, that the city’s rubbish was burned in this valley, has no further basis than a statement by the Jewish scholar Kimchi (sic) made about A.D. 1200; it is not attested in any ancient source.” (p. 376n.92)
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/20113-the-burning-garbage-dump-of-gehenna-is-a-myth/ ...
Excavations near the Temple Mount and within the residential areas have already shown that no waste had accumulated there (Reich and Billig 2000), and thus waste must have been removed, most likely in an organized manner. Recently, the contemporaneous city-dump was identified on the eastern slope of the south-eastern hill of Jerusalem in the form of a thick mantle (up to 10 m, 200,000 m3 ) (Reich and Shukron 2003). The dump is located roughly 100 m outside and south-east of the Temple Mount on the eastern slope of the Kidron Valley (fig. 1), and extends at least 400 m and is 50–70 m wide. Large amounts of pottery and coins date the dump to the Early Roman period (the 1st century BCE and the 1st century CE up to the destruction of the city by the Romans in 70 CE). A preliminary study of the garbage (Bouchnik, Bar-Oz and Reich 2004; Bouchnik et al. 2005) showed the presence of animal bones.
https://www.researchgate.net/public...udy_of_the_City-Dump_of_Early_Roman_Jerusalem​

 

[martymonster]

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.

Contradictions only occur, when men try to make scripture fit to their Church doctrines. There are no contradictions.

 

[Der Alte]

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!

Unfortunately or fortunately as the case may be we "imperfect little creations" do not get to tell God what is proper, good, reasonable, etc for him.
For example because we have to do "this" or can't do "that" we cannot impose the same restrictions on God.

Isaiah 55:8-9
8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.
9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.
Isaiah 29:16
16 Surely your turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter's clay: for shall the work say of him that made it, He made me not? or shall the thing framed say of him that framed it, He had no understanding?​

 

[Albion]

Contradictions only occur, when men try to make scripture fit to their Church doctrines.

I wouldn't go overboard in placing blame on the denominations for that situation.

From what we can see here on CF and from what I've noticed in my own life, it's more a matter of unaffiliated believers, people who reject the idea of being part of any Christian congregation, who wind up convinced that the Bible contradicts itself.

 

[RickReads]

The Talmud is, in fact, a historical record. There may be some mythological entries in the Talmud but it is largely an interpretation of the Hebrew scriptures. But you seem to have forgotten that I also quoted the Jewish Encyclopedia and Encyclopedia Judaica and I asked to you review the bibliography at the end of each article
Anything you say about historical Jewish faith and practice is pretty much meaningless unless you can quote some Jewish history but I seem to be the only one doing that.

I think anything I went out and found would be automatic rejected by you just as you rejected the first link I posted faster then you could read it.

I already asked you not to try and sell me the Talmud kool aid. I already know some things about that. It is not accurate historically or otherwise. I`d rather be using some Geman mythology. It would be more interesting.

My interest in this thread was to work at understanding universalism better. I`m not here to debate mythology.

Afterlife in Judaism

'Heaven and Hell': New history of the afterlife shows origins of the idea

 

[martymonster]

I wouldn't go overboard in placing blame on the denominations for that situation.

From what we can see here on CF and from what I've noticed in my own life, it's more a matter of unaffiliated believers, people who reject the idea of being part of any Christian congregation, who wind up convinced that the Bible contradicts itself.

Oh I'm not blaming any particular denomination. I'm saying it's the mainstream Christian church, in it's entirety.