The Logical Fallacy of Christian Universalism

[Homer]

Hi Steve,

Before I reply concerning Gehenna I would like clarification regarding what your position is; I do not want to respond again to something that is not your position.

A few posts back you wrote:

You say Gehenna "is always used figuratively." I wonder how you support this contention. As near as I can tell, from the Old Testament passages where it appears, the Valley of Hinnom is always used literally by canonical writers. Of course, the imaginative rabbis had innovated a figurative application for Gehenna, but Jesus sternly warned His disciples to avoid the doctrines of those folks (Matt.16:12).

And:

If Gehenna refers to the hell that every lost sinner, Jew and Gentile, will enter, it is interesting that no one was ever warned about it in scripture except for Palestinian Jews. None of the epistles written to Gentiles ever mention it. If Gehenna is hell, and not the holocaust of AD 66-70, would not the Gentiles be in as much danger of it as the Jews to whom Jesus spoke? Should they not also have been warned?

As I understand you it is your contention that Gehenna never refers to hell, but was always used by Jesus of the literal valley of outside Jerusalem, where in fact the bodies of those slain in 70 AD were disposed of, and is never used figuratively. Is this correct?

Perhaps there should be another thread on this subject.

[steve]

As I understand you it is your contention that Gehenna never refers to hell, but was always used by Jesus of the literal valley of outside Jerusalem, where in fact the bodies of those slain in 70 AD were disposed of, and is never used figuratively. Is this correct?

I am not aware of any passage of scripture wherein Gehenna refers to a different place (hell or any other) than the Valley of Hinnom.

[jriccitelli]

Then it is the dying under the wrath of God that makes the big difference, right?
So I would think that Gehenna stands as an ‘indication’ that you have died under the wrath of God.
So then Matt 5 can be understood to say; ‘it is better to have one of the parts of your body perish than to be die under the wrath of God’

("If your right eye makes you stumble, tear it out and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30"If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell)

[steve]

Then it is the dying under the wrath of God that makes the big difference, right?
So I would think that Gehenna stands as an ‘indication’ that you have died under the wrath of God.
So then Matt 5 can be understood to say; ‘it is better to have one of the parts of your body perish than to be die under the wrath of God’

That's right.

[jriccitelli]

Hello Steve, do you would associate the judgment of Gehenna (dying under the wrath of God) with the following judgments from Matthew?

8:12; The sons of the Kingdom thrown into the outer darkness, 13:30; the tares gathered up, 13:40; "So just as the tares are gathered up and burned with fire, so shall it be at the end of the age. 41 "The Son of Man will send forth His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all stumbling blocks, and those who commit lawlessness, 42 and will throw them into the furnace of fire; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth’, 13:49; "So it will be at the end of the age; the angels will come forth and take out the wicked from among the righteous, 50 and will throw them into the furnace of fire; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’ 18:6; but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a heavy millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.’ 18:8; "If your eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out and throw it from you. It is better for you to enter life with one eye, than to have two eyes and be cast into the fiery hell. 10"See that you do not despise one of these …’ 22:13; "Then the king said to the servants, 'Bind him hand and foot, and throw him into the outer darkness; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.' 14"For many are called, but few [are] chosen."

Do you associate the judgment (or dying under the wrath of God) of Gehenna with the rest of (these above) Jesus’ warnings of Judgment?
It seems we differ on whether or not they will be repeated, or future, as they are connected to the phrase ‘the end of the age’.
I see these as have not ‘only’ happening in the past, but also ‘very’ descriptive of what will befall all the unrepentant in the future ‘again’. As I do not see God judgments as having been finished, we still have Israelites today, and we still have Gentiles, all are alike. And since 70ad (or the fall of Rome) everyone living since then have not had a Day of Judgment.

I believe AD70 fulfilled what God promised to Israel (and Rome?), but Judgment is still unfulfilled concerning the rest of mankind. I believe in dual, triple fulfillment, etc., these judgments are Gods signature judgments; “Then you will know that it is I who do all these things".
So it seems whether or not these judgments are relative and urgent warnings for 'us' are related to our understanding of 'the end of the age', ‘when will these things happen’, to whom, and whether they are descriptive of 'The' future Judgment;

Matt24:3; "Tell us, when will these things happen, and what [will be] the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?" 4 And Jesus answered and said to them, "See to it that no one misleads you... For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and in various places there will be famines and earthquakes. 8"But all these things are [merely] the beginning of birth pangs... 14 "This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all the nations, and then the end will come.

I see the destruction of Jerusalem as just the beginning...

[steve]

Do I equate the following references to AD 70 and "Gehenna"?

8:12; The sons of the Kingdom thrown into the outer darkness,

This definitely could be a reference to AD 70. I am open to the alternative that it speaks of the final judgment.

13:30; the tares gathered up, 13:40; "So just as the tares are gathered up and burned with fire, so shall it be at the end of the age. 41 "The Son of Man will send forth His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all stumbling blocks, and those who commit lawlessness, 42 and will throw them into the furnace of fire; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth’, 13:49; "So it will be at the end of the age; the angels will come forth and take out the wicked from among the righteous, 50 and will throw them into the furnace of fire; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’

I tend to take this passage to be about the final judgment, though some see it as AD 70. I am open to the latter, but incline toward the former.

18:6; but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a heavy millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.’ 18:8; "If your eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out and throw it from you. It is better for you to enter life with one eye, than to have two eyes and be cast into the fiery hell. 10"See that you do not despise one of these …’

In this passage, Jesus specifically mentions "Gehenna" ("hell" in v.8). Therefore, I would take it to be about Gehenna and AD 70.

22:13; "Then the king said to the servants, 'Bind him hand and foot, and throw him into the outer darkness; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.' 14"For many are called, but few [are] chosen."

This is the final judgment, it seems, because it is chronologically later than AD 70, which is mentioned in verse 7. After the destruction of Jerusalem, there is a period of time mentioned, during which Gentiles are being gathered in (vv.8-10). I take the king's visit (vv.11-13) to be the second coming of Christ and the final judgment.

[Breckmin]

The tragedy is that God did not get what He deserved from their life. That is a transcendent tragedy of cosmic proportions.

Is this then somehow a "tragedy" for God? I'm trying to understand such a point philosophically.

Can God have a tragedy? The reason I ask is because you say it is a "transcendent tragedy." To me this is almost like
saying God has a problem...that God is somehow the victim of a tragedy that God didn't get what He deserved, etc.

Clearly this is problematic...since God is Sovereign... God is omniscient...God makes no mistakes... etc. but this
perspective almost sounds like you are saying that God has the right to get what "He deserves" from their life and
if God "doesn't get something" well then it is a cosmic tragedy.

From my God-concept, however, God has no problems. God has no tragedies. Humans have tragedies but God
even turns those to His glory in the end. IF God had a tragedy it would display to me some sort of anthropomorphic
needy God, Who didn't get His needs met, perhaps, by not getting what He deserved. I'm not saying this is what
you are saying...I am asking. I don't know what you mean by "transcendent tragedy of cosmic proportions" because
to me...when you get to the transcendent...everything is perfectly what it was meant to be INCLUDING how God
glorifies Himself by judging sin or moral disobedience. The temporary creation may have tragedies from man's
perspective...but how could God have tragedies from His perspective? This makes no sense to me. My God has
no tragedies. He is Perfect and everything is part of His Perfect Plan.

[steve]

You may have a more Calvinistic idea of God than I have. I believe that God, like any parent, can be disappointed with HIs children's chosen course of life. I believe that God has a good plan for every person, and that every person who goes off course is a loss to God (like the lost sheep or the lost coin). That is why sinning is evil, not merely painful for us in the end.

[Breckmin]

You may have a more Calvinistic idea of God than I have.

My systematic understanding is that God is omniscient and sovereign so it would be impossible for anything to happen
in God's universe that was not part of His eternal Plan.

I believe that God, like any parent, can be disappointed with HIs children's chosen course of life.

Wouldn't you agree, though, that if you knew every detail of your children's life before they were born that the English term "disappointment" would lose its meaning? God is omniscient so nothing surprises Him. He allows everything that happens in
our lives, in fact, He together acts with it all for good to/for those who love Him....and are the called according to His
purpose.

I believe that God has a good plan for every person, and that every person who goes off course is a loss to God (like the lost sheep or the lost coin).

What do you mean by "loss to God?" If I look at the lost sheep parable I can see that the Shepherd found the lost sheep and
didn't lose it...if I look at the coin parable...I see angels rejoicing in heaven but the focus is on the believer and NOT on all
of the lost coins that were somehow never found. What does it mean for God to "have a loss?" Is this somehow hurtful to God?

That is why sinning is evil, not merely painful for us in the end.

Is our sin somehow "painful" to God?

[Homer]

The tragedy is that God did not get what He deserved from their life. That is a transcendent tragedy of cosmic proportions.

You may have a more Calvinistic idea of God than I have. I believe that God, like any parent, can be disappointed with HIs children's chosen course of life.

Quite a range there between a transcendent tragedy and mere disappointment? I'm disappointed our granddaughter hasn't finished college but overall most pleased with her.

With all the non-Christians in existence, each one a transcendent tragedy, God must be the most miserable being in existence, unless, that is, the transcendent tragedy is the future of the unbeliever. I think the analogy of God to a human father in our thinking is way overdone, something unthinkable in the ANE (ancient near east).