"Every knee shall bow and every tongue confess the Lord

[Guest]

Todd,

Luke 12:5 (New King James Version)

5. But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear Him who, after He has killed, has power to cast into hell; yes, I say to you, fear Him!

So are you saying this is a metaphor? Please explain how this plain warning from Messiah fits into your belief that all suffering for sin occurs in this life.

Homer,

This is definitely one of many scriptures that are difficult to explain if one takes the position that all punishment for sin occurs in this life - especially if you take it literally. It could be saying, in a dramatic way, that sin only leads to devastation.

I have attempted to present one possible explanation of God's wrath and how it might be realized entirely in one's lifetime. Many scriptures seem to support this notion. I was encouraged to read Danny's quote from MacDonald in which he reached many of the same conclusions. However, MacDonald seems to also see a future, more severe judgment as well.

The bottom line though seems to be the End of the matter; What is the eternal destination of mankind? On this I agree with all those who favor Universal Reconciliation.

Todd

[Guest]

Hi Todd,

Quote: Paidion has stated it this way, "All God's punishments are remedial." I agree.


Please explain (or anyone else) your comment in the light of the Flood.

Thanks,
Bob

[Guest]

Quote: Paidion has stated it this way, "All God's punishments are remedial." I agree.


Please explain (or anyone else) your comment in the light of the Flood.


God destroyed evil numerous times but the place usually considered the most wicked was Sodom and Gemorrah which was also destroyed.

"And you Capernaum , which are exalted unto heaven, shall be brought down to hell (gehenna) for if the mighty works which have been done in you, had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day.

But i say unto you , that IT SHALL BE MORE TOLERABLE for the land of Sodom in the DAY OF JUDGEMENT , then for you." Matt 11.23-24

Consider the fact Sodom is raised on judgement day as everyone will and their plight is more tolerable then Capernaum. The point is that the word tolerable is directed toward the most wicked people the Sodomites to describe their plight on judgement day.
Whatever tolerable means exactly is not revealed but i think it's safe to say it does'nt mean eternal punishment.

[Guest]

Hi Homer,

Here's my 2 cents:

As a Preterist, I understand many of the scriptures you gave in defense of Hell in a recent post as actually having to do with the events of 70 A.D. (and 132 A.D.).

1. Matthew 13:36-42 - 70 A.D.

2. Matthew 18:23-35 - This parable isn't about Hell. It is about mercy and forgiveness. If it were about Hell though, verse 34 implies a limit to the punishment ("... until he should pay back all that he owed.").

3. Matthew 24:45-51 - 70 A.D.

4. Matthew 25:1-13 - 70 A.D.

5. Matthew 25:14-30 - 70 A.D.

6. Matthew 25: 31-46 - 70 A.D.

7. John 5:28-29 - Yes, the wicked will suffer krisis. Nowhere here is this krisis said to be without end.

8. Luke 6:49 - Not a teaching about Hell.

9. Luke 12:5 - God does have the ability to throw one into Gehenna. No one disputes that. The question is, what did Jesus mean by Gehenna?

10. Luke 14:61-24 - This is a parable. It is not a parable about Hell. It is a parable about the inclusion of the Gentiles into God's covenant people and the exclusion of many Jews. Hell is only there if you impose it onto the text.

11. Luke 16:19-31 - This one has been dealt with before. It is also a parable, using a story that was well known at that time. The point of the parable isn't Hell, it is taking care of the poor.

Where is your comparable list of passages where Jesus even hints of post mortem salvation?

A plethora of proof-texts have been offered on both sides of the argument. It begins to resemble a game of Battleship:

"Matthew 13:36-42"
"Miss."
"Revelation 5:13"
"Hit."
"Luke 12:5"
"Miss."
"1 Timothy 4:9-10"
"You sunk my battleship!"

Sorry, I couldn't resist!

I think everyone involved in this dialog is a thoughtful, intelligent, mature and devout Christian. All parties have considered both individual scriptures and the "big picture". I think what this shows, as I've said before, is that Christian Universalism is a very defensible position for a Christian to hold.

Rick,

I like your "now/not yet" graphic, but I would add another line ending at 70 A.D. with the destruction of the temple. That was certainly the end of an age for the Jews and a key component to Jesus' preaching.

Bob,

I don't take the Flood story as being a literal description of a historical event, but more of an epic myth. However, even as myth the point is that sin has dire consequences. I don't think anyone here would disagree with that. What is interesting about the Flood story (and for that matter, all other judgement/wrath stories in the Old Testament) is that there is no mention of everlasting torment.

This has been an outstanding discussion. Let's be careful to not let any uncivility slip in.

[_Rick_C]

Lonnnnng thread . . . uhm, what's the topic?

[_Rick_C]

Rick,

1. I like your "now/not yet" graphic, but I would add another line ending at 70 A.D. with the destruction of the temple. That was certainly the end of an age for the Jews and a key component to Jesus' preaching.

2. 70 AD

3. I think everyone involved in this dialog is a thoughtful, intelligent, mature and devout Christian. All parties have considered both individual scriptures and the "big picture". I think what this shows, as I've said before, is that Christian Universalism is a very defensible position for a Christian to hold.

4. This has been an outstanding discussion. Let's be careful to not let any uncivility slip in.

1. I posted it because aionion was brought up. Not to go into it now but I think some ['universalistic'] folks on this thread are confused about "the ages" and how they overlap...yet another sub-topic.

2. I could take a LOT of hours and go into those texts. For now, I'll suffice it to say that not every one you cited as 70 AD is, imo. If we need to go into each text...that would be time consuming....

3. Nothing personal but: Thus far a good defense of the universalist position hasn't been made other than it is what some posters believe. What I mean to say is: A "Big Picture" universalistic theology hasn't been presented, not to my satisfaction anyway. I need more than the universalistic interpretation of "so in Christ all will be made alive" and the other quoted verses. I need AN ESCHATOLOGY that has some substance to-it that I can see and understand, fully explaining---not explaining away!---the biblical passages that talk about God's Justice and the destruction of His enemies. Quoting a few verses just doesn't paint much of a picture, imo.

Anyway, so far....

Disputed texts haven't been examined much more than "I think it says 'this'"...and another person says, "No, it says 'that'." For example, I believe Paul was talking about the resurrection to immortal life for believers only in 1 Cor 15. But an exegesis of the passage is needed. What I offered earlier was pretty good, I felt. We need well reasoned out posts & replies: If we're going to go into a text, let's DO that till we're DONE with it, imo!

The "Big Picture" as seen by different posters isn't the same one!
Bob, Homer, and I are in general agreement in that we aren't universalists (though we may differ on other specifics). Todd, if I'm not mistaken, sees all people as "the children of God". That's one sub-topic in and of itself that I haven't gotten to yet. But if we were to pursue it: Does the Bible teach this? I know of 2 texts that could be used to 'support' this argument and the rest of the Bible to refute it! (ahem, sorry).....

Then there's:

… Once we see that God’s justice is more than mere retribution but is also restorative, and once we see that divine punishments are more than deserved but also corrective, then a way is open to see God’s final punishment as another manifestation of this very same justice and not something qualitatively different. It is retributive but also restorative. It is deserved but also corrective. Divine wrath can be seen as the severe side of divine mercy. It is just as much an act of God’s love as is his kindness. Granted, it is a side of God’s love it would be better not to experience but it is none the less loving for that."

I firmly disagree with MacDonald that God's Final Justice is restorative; that is, assuming that he means restorative for ALL people. He offers nothing to support this claim---other than stating it is his belief.

Second, divine wrath has been experienced by Christ on the cross on our behalf and in our place. In Him we [believers] have the forgiveness of sins. What I wonder about MacDonald's theology is: Does he believe sinners atone for their own sins after death? Does universalism have a doctrine of Limited Atonement that Christ died only for those who believe on Him while they were alive?

Btw, it wasn't till recently that I saw the significance of why Calvinists have historically opposed universalism so [VERY] much. It appears that a universalist doctrine of Limited Atonement is quite unlike theirs!!!

Arminians,
Universalists are considered "Arminian"......
(I don't consider myself one but that's another thread),

4. It's hard to be all that rude when there are fourhundredthousand sub-topics!
May I chime in here?
Rick

P.S. (I want to add this personal note).
Several of you have posted things like "I wish it was universalism" or "I don't like the idea of Hell", etc. My personal feelings on it is: Whatever is true is true and that's all I'm interested in. I don't have any axe to grind or an agenda.

In the midst of this debate/discussion I want to Praise God! for saving me!
(I can't emphasize that enuf)!

Someone posted earlier about Berkowitz and there was the story Homer told. Unlike some people, I understand how a guy like Berkowitz has been forgiven and saved: in the same way I have: by God's grace through faith in Jesus. I also understand how other people like Berkowitz---and myself---him are not saved and forgiven.
It's simple to me.

I heard Berkowitz's testimony on Focus on the Family's radio. I highly recommend it but just checked it out and it's not free, $9.00, (too bad)...............Rick (out)

[Guest]

Hi Danny,

Your answer to me: " Bob,

I don't take the Flood story as being a literal description of a historical event, but more of an epic myth. However, even as myth the point is that sin has dire consequences. I don't think anyone here would disagree with that. What is interesting about the Flood story (and for that matter, all other judgement/wrath stories in the Old Testament) is that there is no mention of everlasting torment".

Okay, so you don't take the story of the Flood as a historical event. Thats fine. But, you really have not answered the real issue, one that doesn't really require the story to be historical. What was remedial
about it? Was it merely a poetic charade to "scare" people into submitting to the Hebrew "Sky" God Yahweh? What was the purpose of this "epic myth" as you call it? What does it tell us about God? What does it tell us about ourselves as human beings? What is the story teaching us about the mercy of God? How about His love ? What does it tell us about evil and what we should do about it? Try to think about it from an ancient (pre- Christian) Hebrew's frame of mind before you answer. This should keep you pretty busy!

[Guest]

Hi Bob,

What the Flood story says to me, in this regard, is basically the same thing as Lamentations 3:22-23, 31-33, which was quoted earlier. That is that God's judgement/wrath is always tempered by His mercy. In the Flood story, the world (as they understood it) is deluged because of its wickedness, yet God provides a way through for the righteous. This is very much in line with the Passover story and the Exodus story and the Exile story, etc.

In the OT, God interacts with the Jews as a people, and through individuals like Abraham and Moses who represent the people. The remedial nature of God's punishments in the OT is very much geared towards disciplining His covenant people (because they have a job to do: be the imago dei to the nations).

The lesson of the Flood is that although God's punishments can be severe, in the end there is hope and a future.

[Guest]

Brothers,

Since we are all submitting our "phiosophical" views on whether or not God is just in punishing the unrepentant sinner for all eternity, I would like to submit something that has occured to me during this discussion.

We all love to preach and teach the Gospel and its promise of "eternal life" as it is in Jesus. But the same word " eternal" from the Greek that speaks of eternal life in Christ is the same word for eternal punishment.
(See Matt. 19:16 and Matt. 25:46)

If there is no "eternal punishment" as the Christian Universalist view believes, why should we think or have reason to think eternal life in Christ means "eternal"?

[_Rick_C]

Hi Bob & Danny too,

...What is interesting about the Flood story (and for that matter, all other judgement/wrath stories in the Old Testament) is that there is no mention of everlasting torment".

And there's no mention of them inheriting eternal life...in either Testament. That is, excepting those who believed, now believe, and will believe, before the Day of Judgment.

Since we are all submitting our "philosophical" views on whether or not God is just in punishing the unrepentant sinner for all eternity, I would like to submit something that has occured to me during this discussion.

We all love to preach and teach the Gospel and its promise of "eternal life" as it is in Jesus. But the same word " eternal" from the Greek that speaks of eternal life in Christ is the same word for eternal punishment.
(See Matt. 19:16 and Matt. 25:46)

If there is no "eternal punishment" as the Christian Universalist view believes, why should we think or have reason to think eternal life in Christ means "eternal"?

This was what I meant when I said I want to see a patent universalist ESCHATOLOGY presented. This is also why I posted the graph; to get us thinking in biblical terms about this stuff.

The 'universalistic' posters on this thread have different ideas about Greek words. "Eternal" (and its Greek derivatives) can be translated: to the age, to the ages, age-during. "Punishment" (or sometimes "torment") is translated as "correction" by Paidion. I've looked into this and disagree with him...but haven't had time to post about it.

But as you say, Bob. If it will be, as some are saying, that "eternal punishment" will really be a "to the age (ages?) correction" or "age-during correction" --- we have problems.

First, correction implies [free] will. If those sentenced to this so-called "correction" have free will to become righteous? Will they become righteous? or just do-their-time or sentence, atoning for their sins? Earlier in the thread I mentioned universalism touches on Christology. I see a Limited Atonement doctrine in universalist thinking; those under this "correction" are paying the cost of their sins themselves.

Re: those who will inherit "age-during (or to the age/ages) life." Again, for how long will this be? Will we have [free] will? I assume so! But with sin and evil being done away with, could we disobey and do a "turn" for the worse, just as the wicked will supposedly be doing a "turn" for the better? (Of course, I don't believe either to be true)....

Bob, I don't have the mysteries of the new heavens and earth down pat! (who does?). But what's been presented sounds like science fiction if not pure speculation to me. I'm not saying this to offend anyone. It's just that I can't find support from these ideas in the Bible. It reminds me of how dispensationalists "guess who the antichrist is" every few years.

Maybe this "correction" will be only for so long of an "to the age" and then, well, what's next???? Maybe we will have "age-enduring life" for a while and then God will pick someone to become the next Adam?????

Jesus spoke of TWO ages: this age and the age to come!
To my mind, that settles it (bold for, DON'T MISS THIS POINT)!!!!
Rick