The Narrow Path Ministries

We have been informed that eternal torment and folks who believe in it are certainly of lower moral character than the CU folk, and worship a God who is just horrible. The whole thing is a conspiracy foisted on the ignorant by the Roman Catholic Church to keep folks in line and the money rolling in.

All those bible transaltions at Bible Gateway and most of the lexicons are a product of scholars who, although not Catholic and in rebellion against the authority of the RC, still remain duped into their false translations of both aionios and kolasis.

And now we have learned that the Catholic Church goes all the way back to Polycarp, at least, who is said to be a student of the Apostle John:

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF CLEMENT TO THE CORINTHIANS
CHAP. XI.--NO THREATS HAVE ANY EFFECT ON POLYCARP.

"The proconsul then said to him, "I have wild beasts at hand ; to these will I cast thee, except thou repent." But he answered, "Call them then, for we are not accustomed to repent of what is good in order to adopt that which is evil;(9) and it is well for me to be changed from what is evil to what is righteous."(10) But again the proconsul said to him, "I will cause thee to be consumed by fire, seeing thou despisest the wild beasts, if thou wilt not repent." But Polycarp said, "Thou threatenest me with fire which burneth for an hour, and after a little is extinguished, but art ignorant of the fire of the coming judgment and of eternal punishment, reserved for the ungodly. But why tarriest thou? Bring forth what thou wilt.""

Proof positive! The doctrine began with the RC and here we see Polycarp espousing it. Even more convincing, Justin Martyr was in on it too!

Hi Homer,

The words of Polycarp that you quoted simply repeat scriptural terminology, without telling us what he believed it means, in terms of the present controversy. Both annihilationists and Christian Universalists believe in the scriptures that use the terms Polycarp used, so I am not sure how we can decide, from his use of those terms, which meaning he might have assigned to them.

I think it likely that he took them in the sense of eternal torment, because that was a common view among those of the western church. No one said that the RCC invented the eternal torment view. What I have read is that the Roman Church was the one of the six main Christian centers in the pre-RCC period which held the eternal torment view, while others held alternative views. That the eternal torment view served the church well in keeping frightened people loyal to a grotesque religion can hardly be considered controversial. It does not tell us whether the view is true or false.

We have been informed that eternal torment and folks who believe in it are certainly of lower moral character than the CU folk, and worship a God who is just horrible. The whole thing is a conspiracy foisted on the ignorant by the Roman Catholic Church to keep folks in line and the money rolling in.



I have said the eternal torment doctrine won the day because of the RCC and that they used it to sell forgiveness for a price, just as they sell annulment for a price.
I have no idea where you got the "lower moral character" comment from though.

Hello Steve (Gregg),

Steve,

Since the words of Polycarp are "eternal punishment (kolasin aiōnion)" I have no illusion that those who disbelieve eternal punishment will accept his statement even though he contrasts it with temporal punishments. However, Justin Martyr can not be explained away. We have record of some fifteen to twenty statements he made regarding his belief in eternal punishment and three of them should inform us in how to understand all of them:

150 AD Justin Martyr: "We have been taught that only they may aim at immortality who have lived a holy and virtuous life near to God. We believe that they who live wickedly and do not repent will be punished in everlasting fire" (First Apology, 21).


150 AD Justin Martyr: For among us the prince of the wicked spirits is called the serpent, and Satan, and the devil, as you can learn by looking into our writings. And that he would be sent into the fire with his host, and the men who follow him, and would be punished for an endless duration, Christ foretold. (The First Apology of Justin, Chap. XXVIII)

150 AD Justin Martyr: when some are sent to be punished unceasingly into judgment and condemnation of fire; but others shall exist in freedom from suffering, from corruption, and from grief, and in immortality." (Dialogue of Justin, Philosopher and Martyr with Trypho, A Jew, Chap. XLV)

And here Justin's rebuttal shows that the same argument by our universalist philosophers was being used in his day:

150 AD Justin Martyr: And that no one may say what is said by those who are deemed philosophers, that our assertions that the wicked are punished in eternal fire are big words and bugbears, and that we wish men to live virtuously through fear, and not because such a life is good and pleasant; I will briefly reply to this, that if this be not so, God does not exist; or, if He exists, He cares not for men, and neither virtue nor vice is anything, and as we said before, lawgivers unjustly punish those who transgress good commandments. (The Second Apology of Justin for the Christians Addressed to the Roman Senate, Chap. IX)

Nothing new under the sun!

Since the words of Polycarp are "eternal punishment (kolasin aiōnion)" I have no illusion that those who disbelieve eternal punishment will accept his statement even though he contrasts it with temporal punishments

Hi Homer,

I think that the term "eternal punishment" is consistent with Conditional Immortality. I think that the punishment not the punishing are what's eternal.

To quote Edward Fudge:

"Of the 70 occurences of the adjective "eternal" six times the word is used with nouns signifying acts or processes rather than persons or things.

The six eternal acts or events are salvation (Heb. 5:9), judgment (6:2), redemption (9:12), sin (Mark 3:29), punishment (Matt. 25:46) and destruction (2 Thess. 1:9).

In four of the six, "eternal" refer 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.

Given this regular usage of "eternal" to describe the results of an action or process, we suggest that it is perfectly proper to understand the two* disputed usages in the same ordinary way."

(*refering to 2Thess. 1:9; and Matt. 25:46) i.e. that the "punishment" and "destruction" do not go on forever, as in punishing or destroying, but that the outcome does.

God bless,

Derek,

The CIs have a hard time believing me when I say I have no dog in the conditional immortality fight. It does not matter to me, I've not studied CI that much and see nothing alarming in it. I realize Justin and Polycarp's comments could probably fit CI. However Fudge may have overlooked the use of words as metonyms.

Blessings, Homer

Homer wrote:Since the words of Polycarp are "eternal punishment (kolasin aiōnion)" I have no illusion that those who disbelieve eternal punishment will accept his statement even though he contrasts it with temporal punishments.

True. But you still seem to hold to the illusion that "aiōnion" means "eternal" in spite of the fact that its use in the vast majority of passages in the Septuagint cannot mean "eternal". Nor in most of these cases is the word used figuratively.

Because of your belief that "aiōnion" has to mean "eternal", you presume that Polycarp contrasts the word with "temporal punishments". What he actually contrasts is "fire which burneth for an hour, and after a little is extinguished" with the "fire of the coming judgment and of correction which goes from age to age". There is quite a difference between fire which lasts for an hour and fire which lasts for many ages, perhaps even millions of years. We who live 70, 80, or 90 years have no idea what it is to suffer for thousands or perhaps millions of years.

However, Justin Martyr can not be explained away. We have record of some fifteen to twenty statements he made regarding his belief in eternal punishment and three of them should inform us in how to understand all of them:

Well, I spent most of today searching the Internet to find the Greek Text of Justin's "Apology" --- to no avail. However, I do not consider it wasted time since I found a number of other early Greek texts which I value.

150 AD Justin Martyr: "We have been taught that only they may aim at immortality who have lived a holy and virtuous life near to God. We believe that they who live wickedly and do not repent will be punished in everlasting fire" (First Apology, 21).

I see nothing in this text which indicates everlasting punishment except what I am guessing is a mistranslation of "aiōnion"

150 AD Justin Martyr: For among us the prince of the wicked spirits is called the serpent, and Satan, and the devil, as you can learn by looking into our writings. And that he would be sent into the fire with his host, and the men who follow him, and would be punished for an endless duration, Christ foretold. (The First Apology of Justin, Chap. XXVIII)

"Endless duration" seems to be oxymoronic. "Duration" suggests a period of time. How can it be endless? However, I looked at another translation which reads "endless ages". That makes sense. So, if Satan and his hosts will be punished "for endless ages", that means they will be punished forever. I would really like to verify whether this is what Justin actually said. What was the Greek word translated as "endless"? I have not yet been able to determine that.

If Justin did use the word "endless" then he obviously believed in eternal punishment for Satan and his hosts. When he said, "you can learn [this] by looking into our writings", he may have had in mind the following passage:

Jude 1:6 And the angels that did not keep their own position but left their proper dwelling have been kept by him in eternal chains in the nether gloom until the judgment of the great day

Here the true word for "eternal" is used ("aidios"). But even here, the fallen angels are kept in these eternal chains until the judgment.
There seems to be a hint that they will not no longer be held by these chains afterward. We are not told what their lot will be afterward.
But then I wonder, why are the chains eternal?

If the Greek word used was indeed "endless", then perhaps Justin believed in eternal punishment for Satan and his hosts. Some reconciliationists exclued Satan and his angels from ultimate reconciliation.

150 AD Justin Martyr: when some are sent to be punished unceasingly into judgment and condemnation of fire; but others shall exist in freedom from suffering, from corruption, and from grief, and in immortality." (Dialogue of Justin, Philosopher and Martyr with Trypho, A Jew, Chap. XLV)

What is there here that suggests eternal punishment? The words that some will be "punished unceasingly"? We uses such phrases yet today. When we say that a person "suffers pain unceasingly" we simply mean "without letup". The pain is not necessarily permanent. The person may get over his pain condition in a day, or a week, or a month.

By the way, I was unable to find this passage in chapter 45.

And here Justin's rebuttal shows that the same argument by our universalist philosophers was being used in his day:

150 AD Justin Martyr: And that no one may say what is said by those who are deemed philosophers, that our assertions that the wicked are punished in eternal fire are big words and bugbears, and that we wish men to live virtuously through fear, and not because such a life is good and pleasant; I will briefly reply to this, that if this be not so, God does not exist; or, if He exists, He cares not for men, and neither virtue nor vice is anything, and as we said before, lawgivers unjustly punish those who transgress good commandments. (The Second Apology of Justin for the Christians Addressed to the Roman Senate, Chap. IX)

What these philosophers were asserting was that to say that the wicked will be punished at all, is to get people to live righteously through fear. That this is the case, seems obvious from the "rebuttal" of Justin (or whoever the author was) is that if God does not punish the wicked, then He does not care about people, nor is concerned with virtue or vice. Surely "Justin"'s argument would not apply if the wicked wre punished for ages and ages (as I believe they are).

The "Second Apology" is thought not to have been written by Justin, and is thought to have been written at a much later date.