"Every knee shall bow and every tongue confess the Lord

[Guest]

Rae- i would respond that there is "sight" (i.e. being with jesus while he was here on earth) and then there is SIGHT-- i.e. realizing you are dead and seeing jesus in all his resurrected glory reigning as King in the throne room of the Father. AT this point, a person couldnt deny it any more. they will have no choice but to say "my lord and my God," and even be sincere about it. but the question again, is whether it is then too late. universalists say no.

TK

[Guest]

Were the disciples saved by faith or by sight? I believe the disciples had faith, but yet they also had sight. Why does belief have to be absent from sight?

This is also what I've been thinking all along. Faith in God doesn't require an absence of evidence.
The disciples saw Jesus after he was risen from the dead.
Paul was blasted to his knees when he saw the risen Jesus on the road to Damascus.
Would we think that they had faith?
Perhaps faith is more than just a belief that the historical Jesus rose from the dead, although that may be where we start.

The consensus on the thread seems to be that "Every tongue shall confess Jesus is Lord" will be on Judgment Day, right? (and as I mentioned earlier, we who believe have already done that). So. Those who were atheists and/or unbelievers will stand before God and confess, in both the 'orthodox' and the universalist view, if I'm not mistaken....
However, on Judgment Day no one will NEED faith. There He will be, and there we all will be: No faith required. So, in universalist belief is there an "exemption clause" for those who do not believe "He (God) is"? and rewards those who seek Him? (Btw, all of humanity won't have or need to seek Him on Judgment Day coz RIGHT THERE He will be)!

Universalism believes only some are saved by grace through faith? and others will be saved by grace 'after death' through.....what?

As I understand it, biblical faith in God is to "...believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him" - Hebrews 11:6. In my estimation, faith is trusting in God as the source of life.

Are any of us (even those that seek Him now) done seeking God after Jesus returns?
Or are we done with faith after Jesus returns?

It is my belief that we continue seeking God in faith after we are resurrected, but without the hindrances of this life.

If that is the case, there might be room for those who die in unbelief to be purged or purified of their "reasons" for unbelief that will allow them to begin a journey of seeking God in faith in the "next life."

God does it in this life, why not the next?


Dave

[Guest]

Rae, et al,

Regarding Jesus' response to Thomas, I would describe it as "a gentle rebuke". That's how it is described in Lange's commentary.

I can not believe that when confronted by Jesus there will be any delay in acknowledging Him as Lord.

Consider Revelations 1:9-18:

9. I, John, both your brother and companion in the tribulation and kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was on the island that is called Patmos for the word of God and for the testimony of Jesus Christ. 10. I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s Day, and I heard behind me a loud voice, as of a trumpet, 11. saying, “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last,” and, “What you see, write in a book and send it to the seven churches which are in Asia: to Ephesus, to Smyrna, to Pergamos, to Thyatira, to Sardis, to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea.”
12. Then I turned to see the voice that spoke with me. And having turned I saw seven golden lampstands, 13. and in the midst of the seven lampstands One like the Son of Man, clothed with a garment down to the feet and girded about the chest with a golden band. 14. His head and hair were white like wool, as white as snow, and His eyes like a flame of fire; 15. His feet were like fine brass, as if refined in a furnace, and His voice as the sound of many waters; 16. He had in His right hand seven stars, out of His mouth went a sharp two-edged sword, and His countenance was like the sun shining in its strength. 17. And when I saw Him, I fell at His feet as dead. But He laid His right hand on me, saying to me, “Do not be afraid; I am the First and the Last. 18. I am He who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore. Amen. And I have the keys of Hades and of Death.

I suspect that even the God hating atheist Ted Turner will react much the same as John did!

Paidion, beyond this point (when confronted by Jesus) I do not understand what you think "pruning" accomplishes. They will know for certain who Jesus is, but it will not be faith as scripture describes it (Hebrews 1:1), so it would seem all that's left is "works", and what is there for them to do?

John 9:4 (KJV)

4I. I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work.

Are they made holy somehow in hell, and why, in your view, does it take so long? Do you have anything in scripture that informs you of this process other than your interpretation of kolasis?

[Guest]

Hi Rick,

Good points. What the "unversalist" position implies, for God to punish sin "eternally" is somehow inconsistant (unjust) with their idea of Gods love, grace and mercy toward the sinner. The danger here as I understand the implications of their position, frankly imo, is a "different gospel" and therefore a dangerous position from which to preach the Gospel.

You said: "and also am fairly convinced of the annihilationist view".

Well, I don't think this view best represents all scripture on the matter. I will give you but one example that Final Judgement is a "living death" from Jesus' own words;


"and whomsoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a milstone be hung about his neck, and he were cast into the sea. andif thy hand offend thee, cut it off; it is better to enter life maimed than having two hands, TO GO INTO HELL INTO THE FIRE THAT NEVER SHALL BE QUENCHED, WHERE THEIR WORM DIETH NOT, AND THE FIRE IS NOT QUENCHED". Mark 9:42-44

Whatever else can be drawn from the words of Jesus here, it at least means imo, that "physical death" (milstone, cast into the sea..etc) is better preferred over this "unquenchable" living death he is describing.
Why else would he say one death was "better" over the other?

In Him
Bob

[mgarrett]

The assumption that "all" will ultimatetly be saved in Christ is based upon a kind of coerision rather than persuasion. One view forces the issue (universalism) of salvation upon the ungodly by actually subjecting the person to "torture" in the "fires of gehenna" in order to convince him against his desire, to submit to Christ.

Bob,

First let me say that this is NOT my view of Universalism. I have taken the position that God punishes no one after death - that all God's wrath is poured out on the living (as per Romans 1) as a result of their disobedience. Salvation then, is to escape the wrath of God in this life, and to enjoy the Spiritual blessings realized through the work of the Holy Spirit in the hearts of the faithful. My position is that ALL will eventually be raised (in the order set forth in 1 Cor 15). After the resurrection there is no judgment, no punishment, and Christ will be ALL in ALL. There may be some difference in status between the just and the unjust - I don't know about that, although the Bible does give us some hints on the matter. My position is that Judgment is going on now, and God's wrath is being poured out now (on the living). Hell is explained by Paul in Romans Chapter 1.

Todd

[Guest]

Good points. What the "unversalist" position implies, for God to punish sin "eternally" is somehow inconsistant (unjust) with their idea of Gods love, grace and mercy toward the sinner. The danger here as I understand the implications of their position, frankly imo, is a "different gospel" and therefore a dangerous position from which to preach the Gospel.

Really it's a different gospel? I think that of the first six Christian churches 4 were universalism churches one was annihalism and one was eternal torment and that one was the RCC.
And the RCC won the day and since almost everyone was illiterate they created a way to control the flock.



and whomsoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a milstone be hung about his neck, and he were cast into the sea. andif thy hand offend thee, cut it off; it is better to enter life maimed than having two hands, TO GO INTO HELL INTO THE FIRE THAT NEVER SHALL BE QUENCHED, WHERE THEIR WORM DIETH NOT, AND THE FIRE IS NOT QUENCHED". Mark 9:42-44

That fire is from Isaiah 66 and is "gehenna" and did the Pharisees who knew Isaiah 66 turn to Jesus and ask him about his new doctrine of hell? Did his disciples ask him about hell? Did Jesus's apostles ask him about hell? Did they speak about hell?



If Jesus introduced such a dramatic doctrinal change such as eternal torment in hell for most of humanity did one person ask him about it?
No not one single person had a need to question, yet we sitting here 2,000 years later have all the answers.

[Guest]

"and whomsoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a milstone be hung about his neck, and he were cast into the sea. andif thy hand offend thee, cut it off; it is better to enter life maimed than having two hands, TO GO INTO HELL INTO THE FIRE THAT NEVER SHALL BE QUENCHED, WHERE THEIR WORM DIETH NOT, AND THE FIRE IS NOT QUENCHED". Mark 9:42-44

Does "fire that is not quenched" imply that it burns eternally? There have been many fires throughout the centuries which could not be quenched. Firemen had to give up on them and let them burn. But where are those fires today? They were never quenched, but they did eventually burn out.

It seems that the apostle Paul was well acquainted with the teachings of our Lord Jesus. He brought the gospel to the Gentile world to a greater extent than any other apostle. In the 12 (or maybe 13) letters which he wrote, which constitute 26% (or 30% if you include Hebrews) of the entire New Testament, he often warned people about God's judgment, but he never mentioned Gehenna, or the Lake of Fire even once. Shouldn't that great apostle and evangelist, who suffered much for his faith and his evangelical work, have warned his listeners of their danger of ending up in etermal torment forever? I don't think this bold man of God neglected to do so out of fear of what his hearers would think of him.

Indeed, outside the first three gospels, the word "Gehenna" is found nowhere in the New Testament except in James 3:6, where James declares that the iniquitous use of the tongue is a fire which sets on fire the course of life, and is kindled by Gehenna itself.

Another word translated as "hell" in the King James is "hades" which refers to the grave, and Paul used it that way once in I Cor 15:5 when he asked, "O grave, where is your victory?" Of course, there was mythology about people being conscious in hades, and it was a view held among the Pharisees of the day. Jesus used this myth as a basis for his parable of Dives and Lazarus as recorded by Luke in chapter 16.

A third word translated as "hell" in the King James is "tartarus". The word is found only once in the New Testament. Peter used it in 2 Peter 2:4 with reference to it as a holding place for fallen angels until the judgment.

So if over 99% of people who have ever lived, die without trust in Christ, and go to eternal torment, why did none of the apostles warn those of their own day about this fate? And why did they not write about it in their epistles so that future generations as well as their readers, could be warned?

[Guest]

Are they made holy somehow in hell, and why, in your view, does it take so long? Do you have anything in scripture that informs you of this process other than your interpretation of kolasis?


Here is my guess. It could be that once we get beyond this age and God is known to us that could mean since more is given to us then more is expected of us.
Perhaps it will take more then faith to please God in the next age , perhaps it will take really making Christ your Lord and perhaps it will take really loving God. After all Jesus said that was the most important command and the next "loving your neighbor" was like it.
So perhaps in the next age the bar will be set a lot higher and sinners will have to prove everything, especially since many of them demand proof of God in this age. And demonstrating this proof may take a very long time for some.

[_Rick_C]

Hi Bob,

1. You said: "and also am fairly convinced of the annihilationist view".

Well, I don't think this view best represents all scripture on the matter. I will give you but one example that Final Judgement is a "living death" from Jesus' own words;

"and whomsoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a milstone be hung about his neck, and he were cast into the sea. and if thy hand offend thee, cut it off; it is better to enter life maimed than having two hands, TO GO INTO HELL INTO THE FIRE THAT NEVER SHALL BE QUENCHED, WHERE THEIR WORM DIETH NOT, AND THE FIRE IS NOT QUENCHED". Mark 9:42-44

2. Whatever else can be drawn from the words of Jesus here, it at least means imo, that "physical death" (milstone, cast into the sea..etc) is better preferred over this "unquenchable" living death he is describing.
Why else would he say one death was "better" over the other?

2. Jesus was saying it would be better to be thrown into the sea than to offend one of His 'little ones'.

1. Excerpted from: Understanding the Undying Worm, by Al Maxey

In speaking of Gehenna, Jesus describes it as a place "where their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched" {Mark 9:48}. Some versions repeat this phrase in verses 44 and 46, although there is little textual evidence for such. Most translations, based on a superior Greek text, include it only in verse 48. What is Jesus suggesting here? Is He really describing a place where maggots are immortal? Or is this merely an allusion to symbols and figures found in the OT writings? I believe the latter is clearly the case.

Jesus is referring to the prophecy of Isaiah. In the final statement of this book of prophecy we find a judgment scene, and we see the joy of God's people as they behold His righteous judgment on their behalf against His (and their) enemies.

Isaiah 66:15-16
For behold, the Lord will come in fire and
His chariots like the whirlwind, to render His
anger with fury, and His rebuke with flames
of fire. For the Lord will execute judgment
by fire and by His sword on all flesh, and
those slain by the Lord will be many[1] footnote, mine.

[1]2 Thess 1:7-9
7and to give relief to you who are afflicted and to us as well when the Lord Jesus will be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels in flaming fire,8dealing out retribution to those who do not know God and to those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus.
9These will pay the penalty of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power,

Please note here that the text says the Lord will SLAY these ungodly ones, it does not declare the Lord will TORTURE them. Notice also that the redeemed will be able to witness the RESULT of this destruction carried out by God against the wicked:

Isaiah 66:24
Then they shall go forth and look on the
corpses of men who have transgressed
against Me. For their worm shall not die,
and their fire shall not be quenched; and they
shall be an abhorrence to all mankind.

Please note once again that there is absolutely NO MENTION of the wicked being tortured alive forever and ever!! Indeed, just the opposite. The only thing the redeemed behold are CORPSES. The wicked are DEAD. They have been SLAIN by the fury of God's fire and sword. Thus, all that the redeemed see is visible evidence of death and destruction. It is one huge scene of abhorrence and shame. It is a giant garbage dump composed of the dead corpses of the wicked. They are not writhing in pain and screaming out in anguish. They are not being tortured in endless misery. They are dead!!

* "The figure is taken from heaps of the dead slain in battle; and the prophet says that the number would be so great that their worm --- the worm feeding on the dead --- would not die, would live long --- as long as there were carcasses to be devoured; and that the fire which was used to burn the bodies of the dead would continue long to burn, and would not be extinguished until they were consumed. The figure, therefore, denotes great misery, and certain and terrible destruction" (Albert Barnes, Barnes' Notes on the New Testament).

Barnes is quick to point out, however, that this is figurative language, even though it draws from literal historical practice. He writes, "It is not to be supposed that there will be any 'real' worm in hell." It merely represented the truth that the consumption would continue until the destruction was complete. Kittel writes, "The worm does not die until it has completed its work and the bones as well as the flesh of the dead are consumed, so that all hope of restoration to life is extinguished. The expression thus denotes total destruction."

Other than this, I recommend reading Maxey's entire article. Btw, I just googled this article and had never seen it. I have Maxey's site bookmarked as he has several really in-depth articles (click on "Al Maxey" to get to it). Did that help out any, Bob? Make my (probable) view clearer to you, anyway?

As for a lack of warning from Paul is concerned, simply because he never specifically mentioned Gehenna, or the LoF....

In 2 Thess Paul quoted from Isaiah 66; the same chapter Jesus quoted in Mark 9 (see, above). Though Paul didn't do a direct word-for-word quotation it seems clear he was referencing Isaiah 66 (as was Jesus).

There's a bit more on Gehenna that we haven't touched upon. Namely, that it may have had fulfillment -- or perhaps partially -- in 70AD. (This would be something of an aside in the thread).
Rick

[Guest]

Paidion,

Quote: "Does "fire that is not quenched" imply that it burns eternally? "

In this context, the metaphor as used implies a continuous duration.
Why else would Jesus draw a contrast between death from a milstone around the neck as "better"? I am not interested in the nature of natural fire. Jesus wasn't speaking about natural phenomena. The context is eternal judgement.

As for a lack of warning from Paul is concerned, simply because he never specifically mentioned Gehenna, or the LoF, why do you assume this equates or agrees with your view that God will not punish eternally when there is plenty of scripture to suggest otherwise? Hey, if I could choose my theology, I would choose a Christian Universalist view. I think its a great idea, just not the truth. Often truth is a bitter pill.

Quote: "So if over 99% of people who have ever lived, die without trust in Christ, and go to eternal torment, why did none of the apostles warn those of their own day about this fate?"

They did! But 99%? C'mon Paidion! A little hyperbole here? You gotta an inside track with the Lord as to who makes it and who don't?
Got any good lottery numbers? 8)

I am aware of the different terms used to describe the grave and or judgement; Gehenna, Tartarus, Sheol, Hades, Hell etc. Of course context will determine how we understand these terms right? So the KJV translates the word "hades" to hell in the verse I quoted. How does that change the content and implication of Jesus' words? Or how does the word Gehena being absent outside the 3 gospels that mention it change anything? Is truth determined by repitition or how many times a subject is referred to or repeated in scripture?