Resurrection and Judgment

[Guest]

Ages unto ages" does not place a limit on the term as far as I can tell. It is an undefined amount of time in and of itself. I don't see why one can't come to some determination of time by the context in which the word is used. Like Vines says:



I agree that ages upon ages is an undefined amount of time IMO. But the key is that it is an amount of time.
One more verse i want to mention is "This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptation. For therefore we both labor and suffer reproach because we trust in the living God , who is the SAVIOR OF ALL MEN , specially of those that believe. 1 Tim 4.10
Please note the contrast between believers which is "those that believe" and the rest which are "all men."
The greek word for "specially" is "malista" which means "in the greatest degree or particularly." When it's used elsewhere in the NT it includes everyone in the category described which here is "all men."
Yet in this life it is a narrow path and few will find it. But eventually will come the great white throne judgment where men will be judged in righteousness (white throne not black throne.)
"And in that day shall the deaf hear the words of the book and the eyes of the blind shall see out of obscurity and out of darkness." Isa 29.18
Did'nt Paul say now we see through a glass darkly but one day we will see him clearly.

[Guest]

I would not say that Satan is the big victor. The author of Hebrews says:

Heb 2:14-15
14 Inasmuch then as the children have partaken of flesh and blood, He Himself likewise shared in the same, that through death He might destroy him who had the power of death, that is, the devil, 15 and release those who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.
NKJV

There is no sting of death for the believer. Paul was a believer.

Christopher,

My point is that according to the traditional/annihilation views most of humanity does not attain to what Paul is describing in these verses. Therefore, for them, death has a big sting and Satan has a big victory. Wouldn't that be the case?

I think the verse you quoted from Hebrews strengthens my view that Satan is not the victor for anyone in the end - that Christ has defeated him completely, not just for a few.

Todd

[Guest]

Here is an interesting scripture. Steve Gregg referenced it in his post earlier in this thread.

2 Tim 4:1
I charge you therefore before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who will judge the living and the dead at His appearing and His kingdom:

The original topic of this thread was the idea that the judgment of Judgment Day happens before the resurrection. This scripture states that Christ will judge the living and the dead when He returns (at His appearing). If the resurrection had already occurred before the judgment of this verse, why are some still dead?

Todd

[Guest]

The original topic of this thread was the idea that the judgment of Judgment Day happens before the resurrection. This scripture states that Christ will judge the living and the dead when He returns (at His appearing). If the resurrection had already occurred before the judgment of this verse, why are some still dead?

Seems simple to me. The "living" are those who are alive when Christ returns, the "dead" are those who died prior to this time.

I have a question for the universalists who insist the literal meaning of aionios is not "eternal", "forever", or "without end", as we are informed by most lexicons. If the universalist is correct, then the literal meaning is a temporal one, an indefinate period of time, and it can not be proven to have a meaning even as long as a lifetime. In Philemon 15-16 the context clearly shows it used (figuratively, in my opinion) of a period of time less than a lifetime, perhaps only a few years, until Philemon died.

It might be argued context will determine meaning. There is nothing in the context of Matt. 25:46 to cause one to think the meaning is anything but eternal. In fact, for the universalist to be correct, not one, but two words must be assigned meanings contrary to most lexicons. aionios must be translated "age" rather than "eternal" as it is almost everywhere, and kolasis must be translated "correction" rather than "punishment".

Now, my question is this: how would you explain your concept of universal reconciliation to a sinner? Could you inform him that after death he will undergo "correction" for an indeterminate period of time, that may be only a few years? If aionios "never means eternal", it has only a temporal meaning. If you insist that the literal meaning of aionios is not eternal, please inform me how , apart from context, you can say that it means any particular length of time. You can not use the context of Matt. 25:46, for the context is an antithesis and will not support your view.

It has been insisted that the correction will go on for a very long time. Can you explain why a long time might be needed in any case? How long did it take Paul to make a u-turn when he was thumped on the road to Damascus? When judged by Christ and cast into hell (whatever you think it is), will this not be much, much more than it took Paul to turn around, who described himself as the sinner of sinners, violently opposed to Christ? Surely we recognize that those who are of a religion opposed to Christianity, as Paul was, are harder to convert than ordinary unbelievers.

You have rejected punishment, insist it is all for correction. If this is so, and justice plays no part in the matter, as you insist, then surely nothing will be held back that would impede the swiftest possible restoration, otherwise we would have punishment, would we not? Then how can it be said that correction will take any longer than it did for Paul. Surely they will immediately recognize when they are judged exactly who they are dealing with and not be asking as Paul did "Who are you, Lord?"

These are only my opinions; humbly awaiting your response. (Is that OK Mike?)

[Guest]

You have rejected punishment, insist it is all for correction. If this is so, and justice plays no part in the matter, as you insist, then surely nothing will be held back that would impede the swiftest possible restoration, otherwise we would have punishment, would we not? Then how can it be said that correction will take any longer than it did for Paul. Surely they will immediately recognize when they are judged exactly who they are dealing with and not be asking as Paul did "Who are you, Lord?"



IMO Homer the ultimate goal is correction but Christ made some serious warnings like,
"But who shall offend these little ones which believe in me it were better for him that a millstone were hanged around his neck and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea." Matt 18.6 Or
"Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee cut them off" Matt 18.8
So i think Paul was a unique case and whatever the mix of punishment/correction to use your expression, why don't we leave it up to God.
RE Matt 25.46 the righteous have already been resurrected and by nature already are immortal or deathless therefore IMO the description is directed toward the unjust who enter "aionios" life. And i think that there is a link here between the just and unjust in that the "just" or the "little flock" or "Bride" will have a role in leading the multitude of unjust that no man can number.

[Guest]

Homer,

My sense is that we have reached a point where we are not going to agree. Do you feel this way also? You have brought up the subject of Mt. 25:46 many times, and I know I have discussed previously alternate ways to interpret it. So my response here is given with no actual expectation of satisfying your "curiousity", but perhaps others might find it of interest.

It might be argued context will determine meaning. There is nothing in the context of Matt. 25:46 to cause one to think the meaning is anything but eternal. In fact, for the universalist to be correct, not one, but two words must be assigned meanings contrary to most lexicons. aionios must be translated "age" rather than "eternal" as it is almost everywhere, and kolasis must be translated "correction" rather than "punishment".

I disagree slightly with what you said. I do not think that kolasis needs to be translated correction instead of punishment. I think that the purpose of the punishment is corrective rather than retributive. That is, the term kolasis describes a type of punishment that leads to correction. That is what I believe.

If this definition is true, than I would disagree with another of your claims (assertions!). Ie: "There is nothing in the context of Matt. 25:46 to cause one to think the meaning is anything but eternal." If the purpose of the punishment is to correct, that would imply that it was not "eternal", since once one is "corrected", there would be no further purpose for the "correction", so it should stop. Having said that, I do believe the effects of the correction are eternal, as in that the one undergoing the correction has been perfectly corrected.

Feel free to do a little independent investigation of the word kolasis. There is a wealth of web-sites that contain both sides of the debate on the proper rendering of the word. If even one of the proper renderings of the word is correction, wouldn't you agree that we should take care to not ascribe to God behavior which we cannot conclusively demonstrate from scripture is true of Him?

Now, my question is this: how would you explain your concept of universal reconciliation to a sinner? Could you inform him that after death he will undergo "correction" for an indeterminate period of time, that may be only a few years? If aionios "never means eternal", it has only a temporal meaning. If you insist that the literal meaning of aionios is not eternal, please inform me how , apart from context, you can say that it means any particular length of time. You can not use the context of Matt. 25:46, for the context is an antithesis and will not support your view.

When you say "the context is an antithesis", are you referring to the contrast of "eternal life" and "everlasting punishment"? Or do you refer to the larger context of the parable, which is in an even larger context of Jesus response to the disciples questions regarding the destruction of the temple and the end of the age?

If you are asking the latter, regarding the larger context of the parable and Jesus response to the disciples questions, I would say that Jesus was telling us what would happen when the present age (Ie: the age that was present when Jesus was talking) was over. That there was going to be a period of time where the righteous would experience "aionios life", while the unrighteous would experience "aionios punishment". There are many ways to interpret this. The one which I currently favor is that the life of the age which is to come for the righteous would be to experience the peace and joy that comes with knowing God. The correction that comes during this time is what one would expect coming from a loving Father, whose judgements are just, and intentions are to remove all that would prevent one from experiencing life to the full. It may be extremely unpleasant (cf: Heb. 12:11), but it is for our benefit. I would also explain that God has promised that in the end, all would worship at the feet of Jesus and give glory to His Father. That God would be all in all.

I would also explain that this is just my view, and that there are other views of this passage. I might even try to explain your view

Regardless of which context you referred to, I hope this addresses your question.

It has been insisted that the correction will go on for a very long time. Can you explain why a long time might be needed in any case? How long did it take Paul to make a u-turn when he was thumped on the road to Damascus? When judged by Christ and cast into hell (whatever you think it is), will this not be much, much more than it took Paul to turn around, who described himself as the sinner of sinners, violently opposed to Christ? Surely we recognize that those who are of a religion opposed to Christianity, as Paul was, are harder to convert than ordinary unbelievers.

The process that led to Paul's conversion was very quick, as you say. Yet many years later Paul claimed to not yet having attained to perfection, that He was still fighting to attain that for which Christ had laid hold of him. The process of becoming Christ-like, even for those of us who place our faith in Christ in this life, takes a considerable amount of time.

You have rejected punishment, insist it is all for correction. If this is so, and justice plays no part in the matter, as you insist, then surely nothing will be held back that would impede the swiftest possible restoration, otherwise we would have punishment, would we not? Then how can it be said that correction will take any longer than it did for Paul. Surely they will immediately recognize when they are judged exactly who they are dealing with and not be asking as Paul did "Who are you, Lord?"

I do not agree that I rejected punishment. I just gave it a purpose that is more than retribution. I believe we reap what we sow. That our actions have consequences, both for this life and the next. I believe that God knows the correct mixture of punishment and reward for each person to bring him/her to the point of being the person God created him/her to be. He also knows how long that will take, and He is not in a hurry. When He is done, the person will be perfectly (may I say "eternally") corrected.

These are only my opinions; humbly awaiting your response. (Is that OK Mike?)

There is still room for improvement , but I'll give you an "A" for effort Thanks, Homer!

Mike

[_Paidion]

Derek wrote:
I am curious, how do you interpret "eternal destruction" in 2 Thes. 1:9? How is one "destroyed" for ages and ages without ever being...well...destroyed?

In the same vein it could be asked, how is one "destoyed" eternally, without ever being destroyed?

As promised, I will comment on I Thess 1:5-10 concerning “aeonion destruction” as well as exclusion from the presence of the Lord for those who afflict Christ’s disciples. Here the passage:

... God deems it just to repay with affliction those who afflict you, and to grant rest with us to you who are afflicted, when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels in flaming fire, inflicting judgment upon those who do not know God and upon those who are not persuaded by the gospel of our Lord Jesus. They shall suffer the punishment of aeonian destruction, and exclusion from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might, when he comes on that day to be glorified in his saints, and to be marvelled at in all who have believed, because our testimony to you was believed. Thess 1:6-10

Let’s first consider the exclusion from the presence of the Lord. The passage tells us the exclusion will take place “when He comes on that day to be glorified in His saints”. I am sure we all agree, with the possible exception of FOF, that the Lord Jesus, when He returns will not accept those who have rebelled against Him. The reason is the character of these rebels will not have changed at that time, and so He will “inflict judgment” upon them. It is not necessary to infer from the fact that they will be excluded from His presence “when He comes on that day” that this exclusion will be everlasting.

As to the “aeonian destruction”, I translated the Greek word “aiōnion” as “aeonian”, an English word defined in the dictionaries as “pertaining to an age”. It should never be translated as “eternal”, and especially here. “Eternal destruction” appears to be an oxymoron. If something is destroyed, the destructive process has come to an end; it doesn’t continue indefinitely.

I invite you to consider how “destroy” is sometimes used in the scriptures as shown in the following passage from I Peter 1:3-7

Praise be the God and Father of the Anointed Lord Jesus, who, in keeping with His great mercy has regenerated us for the purpose of a living hope, through the resurrection of the Anointed Jesus from the dead, into an incorruptible and undefiled inheritance reserved in heaven for you, who, by the power of God are guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed at the last time. In this you exult, yet for a little while, if necessary, grieving in various trials in order that the testing of you of the faith, very valuable, gold being destroyed through fire, yet being proved, may be found for praise and glory and honour at the revealing of Jesus the Anointed.

Peter compared either his readers to gold being destroyed by fire. Now we all know that pure gold cannot be destroyed by fire. It can be melted, but cannot be destroyed (in the usual sense of the word). What then, did Peter mean? Did he not mean that gold in its original form (gold ore) can be destroyed by fire so that the pure gold can come forth? Was he not referring to the refining process? When we undergo various trials, our character can be refined.

But who can endure the day of His coming? And who can stand when He appears? For He is like a refiner‘s fire and like fullers’ soap. Malachi 3:2 RSV

Both fire and soap can purify. That is what the Lord can do for a person, and sometimes He does it through trials.

Someone may object that some translations refer to gold as being “perishable” in I Peter 3:7, and again in verse 18, where Peter clearly speaks of gold being perishable.

1 Peter 1:18 knowing that you were not redeemed with corruptible things like silver or gold from your futile way of life inherited from your forefathers.

However,Peter used a different word from that which he used in verse 7. The word is better translated as “corruptible”. The Greek word is the adjective “phthartos” which is derived from the verb “phtheirō”. The Online Bible Lexicon gives the following note for the latter word:

In the opinion of the Jews, the temple was corrupted or "destroyed" when anyone defiled or in the slightest degree damaged anything in it, or if its guardians neglected their duties.

So gold can be corrupted in this sense, it can be scratched or dirtied, or altered in other ways. But pure gold cannot be “destroyed” in the usual sense of "destroy", at least not by fire.

Now to complete what I believe to be Paul’s meaning of aeonian destruction of the wicked. They will suffer a very severe refinement in the fires of Gehenna which will destroy their sinful, wicked natures, until the pure “gold” shines forth. Of course, they, themselves will have to repent and submit to Messiah Jesus in order for the refining process to be effective. And quite likely, the fully mature sons of God will have a part in bringing the truth to these people. Sometimes, the righteous suffer such a refining process in this life. The refining of the wicked in that day will be much, much, more severe. Perhaps less refining will be necessary for those who have never heard the gospel in this life (some of them have never heard of Jesus). Whatever the case, God will do what is best for every individual.

[Guest]

The one which I currently favor is that the life of the age which is to come for the righteous would be to experience the peace and joy that comes with knowing God. The correction that comes during this time is what one would expect coming from a loving Father, whose judgements are just, and intentions are to remove all that would prevent one from experiencing life to the full. It may be extremely unpleasant (cf: Heb. 12:11), but it is for our benefit. I would also explain that God has promised that in the end, all would worship at the feet of Jesus and give glory to His Father. That God would be all in all.

Mike,

This is a very good summary of what I have been trying to communicate. You have said that "eternal life" can be understood to mean "the life of the age to come," and that, for the righteous, is to experience the peace and joy that comes from knowing God. Amen! And the correction is from a loving Father who calls us to repentance. Amen!

This what I believe is taught in the story of the sheep and the goats. Those who truly know God will show the love of Christ by loving their neighbor as themself. Those who do not, will not, and will be corrected by God - in this life - as a call to repentance.

Homer,

If you believe that the story of the sheep and the goats is a description of what judgment will be like after the resurrection, please explain the criteria for being saved in this story. Those who do good works are saved. Those who may not have done anything evil, but neglected to do enough good, are damned. Is this the Gospel of Christ?

Todd

[_Derek]

Paidion,

In the same vein it could be asked, how is one "destoyed" eternally, without ever being destroyed?

I would refer you to the quote by Edward Fudge sited in an earlier post. I'll post a bit of it here, but you should probably check out the whole article (there's a link above) or at least the whole quote.

"..."eternal" refers to the results or outcome of the action and not the action itself. "Eternal judgment" does not mean that the judging will last forever, but that its outcome will. "Eternal redemption" does not mean that the process goes on without end- for the redemptive work was done once and for all- but that its issue will have no end forever. "Eternal salvation" is the result; we do not look for an eternal act of "saving". And the "eternal" sin is called that because its guilt will never be forgiven, not because the sinning continues throughout eternity."


Likewise, there is no act of eternally "destroying", but a result of eternal destruction. I would of course, apply this same line of thinking to the punishment in Matt 25.

...“Eternal destruction” appears to be an oxymoron. If something is destroyed, the destructive process has come to an end; it doesn’t continue indefinitely..."

It is the result of this destruction that is eternal. Though the destructive process has ended, the state of being destroyed never ceases. This seems to be more of a problem for your "ages long" destruction of someone that never gets destroyed! I find the reading given by annihilationists much more natural.

I invite you to consider how “destroy” is sometimes used in the scriptures as shown in the following passage from I Peter 1:3-7

This verse only seems to refer to the trial of our faith in this life, that will help us to become "partakers of His holiness" by refining our character. I would agree with your interpretation in this context, however, this is not about the fate of unbelievers.

Many verses are though, and it is from those that I derive the meaning of the word destroy in this context.

From the first sin onward the penalty for sin has been "death". It is said of those that die without Jesus that they "perish" (Jn. 3:16; Luke 13:3; 2 Pet. 3:9 etc..), that they will be "destroyed" (1 Thes. 5:3; 2Thes. 1:9; Phil 3:19), that they will be "consumed" (Heb. 10:27) and there final destination, not having their names in the "book of life", is the lake of fire. This imagry is more in line with the conditional immortality interpretation of 2 Thess. 1:9 in my opinion (as of now).

All this being said, I am not aware of any scripture that says a person can't repent after they die. I am sure that if one did repent God would forgive them. It seems though, that the scriptures that speak of the fate of the unsaved seem very final to me. But I have much more studying to do on the subject.


God bless!! Thanks for the post brother.

[_Paidion]

After quoting from various early "church fathers", Homer concluded with:

Many more similar statements can be cited, but this ought to be enough.

It seems the advocates of universalism would do well to leave the early church fathers out of the discussion.

I believe Homer's sentiments are without secure foundation.

I stand by my former claim. It was Augustine of the fourth century who first introduced the concept of eternal torment to the church in such a way that it was generally accepted (or however I first worded it).

Homer shared 15 quotes from the second and third centuries. In no way, did he show that those authors believed in eternal torment. The translations, of course, indicate eternal torment, since most modern translators insist on translating "aiōnios" as "eternal".

Unhappily, the Greek text of most of these authors is unavailable to me. Notwithstanding, I will share my findings from the texts that I was able to locate.

Here is Homer's first quote:

150 AD Second Clement "If we do the will of Christ, we shall obtain rest; but if not if we neglect his commandments, nothing will rescue us from eternal punishment" (Second Clement 5:5)

The reference is actually 2 Clement 6:7, but we won't hold that against him

The phrase translated as "eternal punishment" is none other than "aiōnios kolasis" ----- "correction which goes from age to age."

Another quote:

160 AD Mathetes "When you know what is the true life, that of heaven; when you despise the merely apparent death, WHICH IS TEMPORAL; when you fear the death which is real, and which is reserved for those who will be CONDEMNED TO THE EVERLASTING FIRE, the fire which will punish even to the end those who are delivered to it, then you will condemn the deceit and error of the world" (Letter to Diognetus 10:7).

Here again the word translated "everlasting" is "aiōnios". This unknown author, who called himself a disciple (mathātās) of the apostles, was writing about a fire which goes from age to age.

A third quote from the martyrdom of Polycarp:

155 AD The Martyrdom of Polycarp "Fixing their minds on the grace of Christ, [the martyrs] despised worldly tortures and purchased eternal life with but a single hour. To them, the fire of their cruel torturers was cold. They kept before their eyes their escape from the eternal and unquenchable fire" (Martyrdom of Polycarp 2:3).

Once again it is not "eternal" fire, but "fire which goes from age to age."
Certainly the fires of Gehenna are "unquenchable." No one who will be cast into Gehenna is ever going to be able to extinguish those flames. But that does not mean that the flames are eternal.

I'm sorry I am unable to find the Greek for the other quotes ---- but I have a strong hunch that the word translated as "eternal" or "everlasting" in each one of them is "aiōnios." My guess is that not one of those authors used the true Greek word for "eternal" in describing the future state of the lost.