BRXII Battle talk
- Thread starter Poly
- Start date
- Status
Ecumenicist
New member
That's teh befuddling thing here, we actually have an argument supported by Scripture,
but it involves a different way of reading the same words. This is actually the power of
scripture, and the power of the Holy Spirit working through Scripture. I'll read the same
Psalm every week for several years and suddenly a new, exciting, very pertinent
interpretation reveals itself.
but it involves a different way of reading the same words. This is actually the power of
scripture, and the power of the Holy Spirit working through Scripture. I'll read the same
Psalm every week for several years and suddenly a new, exciting, very pertinent
interpretation reveals itself.
logos_x
New member
PastorKevin said:
Oh...I'm not saying they are dishonest or not good scholars...just not perfect. Who is after all.
Eon, Age....how long are they?
The temptation would be to TRANSLATE this undetermined time as eternal when you know, or think, it would last forever. But this is not necessary. If the Greek language uses words ....aion, aionios...that are undetermined time, why shouldn't it be the SAME in English? Is it important that we have eternal in English when in the Greek it's aionion...and does it change the meaning of the scripture if we translate it eternal rather than "of the ages"? If it DOES change the meaning, then are YOU changing the meaning, or has tradition and what we belive given us a meaning that isn't right?
To me, it would be more true to the Word of God to use words that mean an undetermined time just like the Greek does...wouldn't you think that would be the most acurate way to translate scripture and ensure YOU weren't forcing a meaning upon the text?
But...we don't get that in the most popular tranlations, do we? We get around 12 different translations for aion in the KJV...most of which are NOT eternal...and we get eternal as related to punishment every time.
What is REALLY going on here?
Ecumenicist
New member
PastorKevin said:
IF THE LAKE OF FIRE IS GOD'S REDEEMING PRESENCE, THEY NEVER
NEED TO GET OUT!
Zephaniah 3:8-10
8 Therefore wait for me," declares the LORD,
"for the day I will stand up to testify. [a]
I have decided to assemble the nations,
to gather the kingdoms
and to pour out my wrath on them—
all my fierce anger.
The whole world will be consumed
by the fire of my jealous anger.
9 "Then will I purify the lips of the peoples,
that all of them may call on the name of the LORD
and serve him shoulder to shoulder.
10 From beyond the rivers of Cush
my worshipers, my scattered people,
will bring me offerings.
Ezek 36:
25 I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you will be clean; I will cleanse you from all your impurities and from all your idols. 26 I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. 27 And I will put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws. 28 You will live in the land I gave your forefathers; you will be my people, and I will be your God. 29 I will save you from all your uncleanness.
DTR 5:
23 When you heard the voice out of the darkness, while the mountain was ablaze with fire, all the leading men of your tribes and your elders came to me. 24 And you said, "The LORD our God has shown us his glory and his majesty, and we have heard his voice from the fire. Today we have seen that a man can live even if God speaks with him. 25 But now, why should we die? This great fire will consume us, and we will die if we hear the voice of the LORD our God any longer. 26 For what mortal man has ever heard the voice of the living God speaking out of fire, as we have, and survived? 27 Go near and listen to all that the LORD our God says. Then tell us whatever the LORD our God tells you. We will listen and obey."
Is 42-43 25 So he poured out on them his burning anger,
the violence of war.
It enveloped them in flames, yet they did not understand;
it consumed them, but they did not take it to heart.
1 But now, this is what the LORD says—
he who created you, O Jacob,
he who formed you, O Israel:
"Fear not, for I have redeemed you;
I have summoned you by name; you are mine.
2 When you pass through the waters,
I will be with you;
and when you pass through the rivers,
they will not sweep over you.
When you walk through the fire,
you will not be burned;
the flames will not set you ablaze.
The list could go on...
logos_x
New member
the following is part of this
So...which is a better way to translate aion or it's adjectives? By taking a word that means age and making that age eternal? or by leaving it alone and letting it mean age?
Let us look at how the word aion is used in a number of passages. About 37 times in the New Testament it is rendered "world," twice as "worlds," twice as "ages," and once as "course." Every place where the word "eternal" appears, with but one exception, it is a translation of this word AION or its adjective form AIONIOS. Twice it is rendered "evermore." Every place where the word "everlasting" appears, but one, it is this same word or its adjective form. With but thirteen exceptions, every place where the word "ever" appears it is the same word or its adjective form. And aside from all this confusion, the word also appears in the plural, and in a number of confusing combinations, such as "the aion of the aion," "the aion of the aions," and "the aions of the aions," etc.
Some of the passages where AION is found will give us added information concerning it.
In Eph. 2:7 we find, "in the ages (aions) to come."
In Col. 1:26 we find, "the mystery which has been hid from ages (aions). "
In Eph. 2:2 we find "you walked, according to the course aion of this world."
In Heb. 1:2 we find, "by whom also He made the worlds (aions)."
In Heb. 11:3 we find, "the worlds (aions) were formed by the Word of God."
In about fifteen instances, such as Mat. 12:32, 1 Cor. 1:20, etc., we find it rendered "this world (aion). " Twice we find "this present world (aion). "
In Gal. 1:4 we find, "deliver us from this present evil world (aion)."
In Eph. 6:12 we find, "the rulers of the darkness of this world (aion)."
In 11 Cor. 4:4 we find, "the god of this world (aion)."
In I Cor. 2:6 we find, "the wisdom of this world (aion)."
In Lk. 16:8 we find, "the children of this world (aion)."
In Mk. 4:19 we find, "the cares of this world (aion)."
How much more understandable it would be if the translators had used the word age instead of world!
In Mk. 10:30 we find that there is not only this present aion, which is evil, but also "the world (aion) to come."
In Lk. 20:35 we find, "but they that shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world (aion), and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage."
In Heb. 6:5 we find, "and have tasted the powers of the world (aion) to come."
And in Lk. 1:70, Jn. 9:32, etc., we find that the aion had a beginning: "since the world (aion) began."
And now in reviewing the Scriptures we have just quoted, we note that this aion is something which has a king; it has princes; it is in darkness; it had a beginning; it has an ending; it is evil; it has wisdom; it has children who marry; it has cares. The aions we find were made by Christ, simply through His spoken Word, and we also find in Col. 1:26 that the mystery of Christ in us, the hope of glory, has been hidden from these aions.
Now, if aion means eternal, consider how ridiculous the Word of God would be! The Holy Spirit would be found saying, "the mystery which has been hid from eternities;" "the mystery of Christ which in other eternities was not made known;" "in the eternities to come;" "You walked according to the eternity of this world;" "by whom also He made the eternities;" "the rulers of the darkness of this eternity;" "now once in the end of the eternities has He appeared;" "the harvest is the end of the eternity;" "since eternity began;" "in the eternities to come," etc. etc. Let the scholars whose business it is delve into the many intricacies of expression, and worry over the many grammatical combinations. Suffice it to say here that there have been "aions" in the past, there is this present "aion," and there are "aions" to come. And these all combined make up TIME, encompassing the whole of the progressive plan and program of God for the development of His creation.
Any thinking person should clearly see that if you translate the word aion--which means an age--by the word eternal, which has nothing to do with time, you immediately get the wrong idea. The same thing applies when the word aion is translated by the word world. It is incorrect and brings nothing but confusion. That is why so many Christians have been worrying about "the end of the world" when they should have been understanding God's special dealing here at "the end of the age."
There is a great deal of difference between the expression, "He shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever," and the expression, "He shall be tormented day and night unto the ages of the ages." For ever and ever has no end. The ages of the ages do have an end, and their end will see every knee bowing and every tongue confessing that Jesus Christ is the Lord to the glory of God the Father. (Phil. 2:10; Rom. 14:10-11). The first expression forbodes complete hopelessness for billions and makes the faith of God of none effect. The second expression, which is completely correct, not only offers hope but expresses the ultimate fulfillment of the purpose which was purposed in Christ Jesus before the world began or before the ages were framed.
Some of the passages where AION is found will give us added information concerning it.
In Eph. 2:7 we find, "in the ages (aions) to come."
In Col. 1:26 we find, "the mystery which has been hid from ages (aions). "
In Eph. 2:2 we find "you walked, according to the course aion of this world."
In Heb. 1:2 we find, "by whom also He made the worlds (aions)."
In Heb. 11:3 we find, "the worlds (aions) were formed by the Word of God."
In about fifteen instances, such as Mat. 12:32, 1 Cor. 1:20, etc., we find it rendered "this world (aion). " Twice we find "this present world (aion). "
In Gal. 1:4 we find, "deliver us from this present evil world (aion)."
In Eph. 6:12 we find, "the rulers of the darkness of this world (aion)."
In 11 Cor. 4:4 we find, "the god of this world (aion)."
In I Cor. 2:6 we find, "the wisdom of this world (aion)."
In Lk. 16:8 we find, "the children of this world (aion)."
In Mk. 4:19 we find, "the cares of this world (aion)."
How much more understandable it would be if the translators had used the word age instead of world!
In Mk. 10:30 we find that there is not only this present aion, which is evil, but also "the world (aion) to come."
In Lk. 20:35 we find, "but they that shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world (aion), and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage."
In Heb. 6:5 we find, "and have tasted the powers of the world (aion) to come."
And in Lk. 1:70, Jn. 9:32, etc., we find that the aion had a beginning: "since the world (aion) began."
And now in reviewing the Scriptures we have just quoted, we note that this aion is something which has a king; it has princes; it is in darkness; it had a beginning; it has an ending; it is evil; it has wisdom; it has children who marry; it has cares. The aions we find were made by Christ, simply through His spoken Word, and we also find in Col. 1:26 that the mystery of Christ in us, the hope of glory, has been hidden from these aions.
Now, if aion means eternal, consider how ridiculous the Word of God would be! The Holy Spirit would be found saying, "the mystery which has been hid from eternities;" "the mystery of Christ which in other eternities was not made known;" "in the eternities to come;" "You walked according to the eternity of this world;" "by whom also He made the eternities;" "the rulers of the darkness of this eternity;" "now once in the end of the eternities has He appeared;" "the harvest is the end of the eternity;" "since eternity began;" "in the eternities to come," etc. etc. Let the scholars whose business it is delve into the many intricacies of expression, and worry over the many grammatical combinations. Suffice it to say here that there have been "aions" in the past, there is this present "aion," and there are "aions" to come. And these all combined make up TIME, encompassing the whole of the progressive plan and program of God for the development of His creation.
Any thinking person should clearly see that if you translate the word aion--which means an age--by the word eternal, which has nothing to do with time, you immediately get the wrong idea. The same thing applies when the word aion is translated by the word world. It is incorrect and brings nothing but confusion. That is why so many Christians have been worrying about "the end of the world" when they should have been understanding God's special dealing here at "the end of the age."
There is a great deal of difference between the expression, "He shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever," and the expression, "He shall be tormented day and night unto the ages of the ages." For ever and ever has no end. The ages of the ages do have an end, and their end will see every knee bowing and every tongue confessing that Jesus Christ is the Lord to the glory of God the Father. (Phil. 2:10; Rom. 14:10-11). The first expression forbodes complete hopelessness for billions and makes the faith of God of none effect. The second expression, which is completely correct, not only offers hope but expresses the ultimate fulfillment of the purpose which was purposed in Christ Jesus before the world began or before the ages were framed.
So...which is a better way to translate aion or it's adjectives? By taking a word that means age and making that age eternal? or by leaving it alone and letting it mean age?
Ecumenicist
New member
Hi Logos,
THis is true, but in defense of the translators, double and triple meanings of words
isn't that uncommon. Pneuma, or Ruach in Hebrew, is Spirit, breath, or breeze,
depending on the context.
But this is the very problem, isn't it? Context of translators does not necessarily match
the context of the original authors, especially in the ambiguous cases you describe,
world vs ages vs eternal. Roman translators, given the tradition and context imposed
on them through culturation, would naturally choose Roman context for the translation.
I would probably trust the earlier, Eastern interpretations myself, in understanding the
context which most closely represents the authors'.
Dave M.
THis is true, but in defense of the translators, double and triple meanings of words
isn't that uncommon. Pneuma, or Ruach in Hebrew, is Spirit, breath, or breeze,
depending on the context.
But this is the very problem, isn't it? Context of translators does not necessarily match
the context of the original authors, especially in the ambiguous cases you describe,
world vs ages vs eternal. Roman translators, given the tradition and context imposed
on them through culturation, would naturally choose Roman context for the translation.
I would probably trust the earlier, Eastern interpretations myself, in understanding the
context which most closely represents the authors'.
Dave M.
Nineveh
Merely Christian
Dave Miller said:
"Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice and come forth—those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation."
How many resurrections are there? It does not go on to say, "...and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation ....until they are purified and hear the voice call them forth again, this time to the resurrection of life."
I wanted you to focus on the part of the information that has bearing on this convo, dave. Stick with me here. "Then He will also say to those on the left hand, ‘Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels" Once again, there isn't a qualifier added saying, "until you are purified".
Who uses "age during" in conversation? No one. Anyway, even young's must include, "who shall suffer justice... from the face of the Lord, and from the glory of his strength..."
Only if they's the way you need to read it, dave. Careful chosing that one version to make your claim from. You start sounding like a KJV-only proponent. I'm also going to toss in there the point Jesus made about, "cast him into outer darkness; there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth."
Rather, there is no conflict except the one you try to make using young's.
If you are willing to honestly look at the text instead of trying to draw some "conflict" from young's obscure translation we might get somewhere.
Dave Miller said:
That's the same thing RCCers do to keep Mary "ever virgin".
No, that's the power of man made docrtine to offer the slightest hope of a "conflict" so that men can cling to their doctrines.
After every place in Scripture that desribes the lake of fire as a most unpleasent place apart from God, how on earth can you arrive at the belief it's in God's presence?
"Depart from Me, all you workers of iniquity."
The second death is forever being away from God. Dead in sin means one is apart from God because of sin that keeps us seperated from Him.
The Redeemer has come and offers us His salvation now. We are all without excuse. On the Day of Judgement, those who have rejected Christ will be judged by their own merit apart from the redeeming salvation of Christ.
Christ paid a heavy price to keep us out of the lake of fire. If all that was really needed was a bit of time in it to purify everyone, Christ died in vain.
Ecumenicist
New member
First of all, thankyou so much for the civil response.
It also doesn't say "they will not be purified." The nature of the resurrection of
condemnation is left ambiguous in this text.
I already acknowledge that "depart from me" in this text makes a valid point.
Congratuations.
Who speaks Greek in conversation? And my point was that "from" could mean
"eminating from" rather than "cast from."
KJV is a translation of a translation. Youg's is the closest I've found to the
original authors' words. Please give chapter and verse if you want me to
address additional texts.
Except for the texts saying God will reconcile all things, sinners included.
unto God's self.
After every place in Scripture that desribes the lake of fire as a most unpleasent place apart from God, how on earth can you arrive at the belief it's in God's presence?
And God doesn't want us to be seperated from Him...
Christ didn't think so. He said "Father forgive them" as they nailed Him to
the cross.
Such Grace cannot be reconciled with ET theology.
Nineveh said:
It also doesn't say "they will not be purified." The nature of the resurrection of
condemnation is left ambiguous in this text.
I already acknowledge that "depart from me" in this text makes a valid point.
Congratuations.
Who speaks Greek in conversation? And my point was that "from" could mean
"eminating from" rather than "cast from."
KJV is a translation of a translation. Youg's is the closest I've found to the
original authors' words. Please give chapter and verse if you want me to
address additional texts.
Except for the texts saying God will reconcile all things, sinners included.
unto God's self.
After every place in Scripture that desribes the lake of fire as a most unpleasent place apart from God, how on earth can you arrive at the belief it's in God's presence?
And God doesn't want us to be seperated from Him...
Christ didn't think so. He said "Father forgive them" as they nailed Him to
the cross.
Such Grace cannot be reconciled with ET theology.
Nineveh
Merely Christian
Dave Miller said:
Not if you don't ignore all the other warnings about being condemned. Adding to this passage doesn't make your case in light of the rest of Scripture.
Then take it to heart! Don't try to gloss it over later.
RCCers use the same tactic to keep Mary a virgin. "age-during" isn't Greek by the way, it's young's attempt to translate Greek but avoid the word "forever".
Then you need to put in a bit more investigation. Try an NASB, it's the most literal word for word out there.
Shame on you dave, you should know where to find this stuff. You claim position of authority in a church.
Let's look at that bit of out-of-context you have there:
For it pleased the Father that in Him all the fullness should dwell, and by Him to reconcile all things to Himself, by Him, whether things on earth or things in heaven, having made peace through the blood of His cross. And you, who once were alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now He has reconciled in the body of His flesh through death, to present you holy, and blameless, and above reproach in His sight— if indeed you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was preached to every creature under heaven, of which I, Paul, became a minister.
Once again, dave, you try to hand over things spoken to believers to the unrepentant.
The one example I recall logos offering was the pillar of fire. What should God have been by night to light the way of His people? A maglight? C'mon. And it was hardly "purifying". Did he mention the burning bush? If so, that wasn't a "purifying" fire either. I see through a quick search God used fire as a punishment sometimes. But I really don't see the connection of God using fire to prove God is the lake of fire. It seems a really long reach.
Another thought on this point. God is also symbolized as a "door", a "lamb", a "narrow gate", etc. But that doesn't mean He literally is those things.
Your reasoning on this issue seems extremely weak.
I'm glad you brought this up. It appears to me what you are trying to do is find "middle ground" between "conflicts" you perceive. The God of the Bible is not the author of confusion, even though you perceive His Word as such on a regualr basis. Have you considered you may not be familliar with what is being said? Could this be the reason you find so many?
That's why He sent Christ. But that does not mean we all have the same desire as God.
That's out of context dave. Jesus was speaking about that one sin of those few people. To try to extend that to mean all sin of all people sort of negates Him having to be nailed doesn't it? If it was so easy to reconcile the whole world merely by saying "forgive them", once agian, He died in vain.
I'm not even sure what that means, dave.
Condemnation is the other half of the Gospel. If an unsaved person doesn't know they are a sinner on their way to eternal seperation from God, they don't have a need to repent. Especially if they have an "age-during" after their body dies to "be purified". There again, you are negating the reason for Christ dying on the cross.
Have a pleasant weekend
I'll be back to reply after the weekend
logos_x
New member
PastorKevin said:
Why?
If it was Christ's death that brings salvation at all....and only Christ's death...then why is the conclusion necessarily that it can't do anything beyond our physical death?
If God prevented our living forever for the express reason of our redemption happening...BECAUSE OF CHRIST...before death is overcome completely and put away and man can then...after redemption...put on immortalty, then it should be viewed as Christ's complete victory over sin and death when there is no more "hell" and everyone is saved.
To say that Christ died in vain if He gets everyone out of the Hell that sin and death creates for man, from my perspective, is ludicrous. It doesn't make Christ's death unecessary at all, doesn't make it a vain thing at all...it is just as much needed within the universal salvation model as in the eternal torment model, because the whole mechanism for our salvation is not changed...simply the nature of Hell...and changes the general focus from saving us from "eternal" misery to saving us from sin and death themselves.
Having said that, I'm not quite clear on what Dave is trying to say. God's presence might certainly be active to redeem in Hell as much as here on Earth, but saying that the punishment translates simply to God's presence seems to be an attempt to characterize Hell as not punishment or chastisement at all. And that is not what I'm saying. There is torment...but maybe we should look at what the Greek word is for "torment".
Torment is:
βασανίζω basanizō
Thayer Definition:
1) to test (metals) by the touchstone, which is a black siliceous stone used to test the purity of gold or silver by the colour of the streak produced on it by rubbing it with either metal
2) to question by applying torture
3) to torture
4) to vex with grievous pains (of body or mind), to torment
5) to be harassed, distressed
5a) of those who at sea are struggling with a head wind.
The closest analogy today would perhaps be "acid test"...the chemical testing for purity of precious metals. We simply CANNOT pass that test. Jesus, however, HAS ALREADY PASSED. On this we depend completely, and the fire is there to make us turn for healing to Christ and His Grace, not as though the fire itself does the healing without that Grace fully recieved and the heart fully repentant. Our purity can come only from Christ's finished work.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding what Dave is trying to say...in fact I hope I am misunderstanding what he means. It is quite abstract and difficult to follow.
Aimiel
Well-known member
It isn't Christ's death that brought the victory. It is His Life. He gave It, willingly, without being subject to doing so, and that miscarriage of justice is what allows Him to give His Life to those who accept that exchange. They give their death (we are all dead) and take His Life (the life is in the blood). He died my death upon The Cross. I died upon the cross, and Jesus lives within me. It isn't death which we are to be concerned with or focused upon, but life. He died my death, and the death of everyone who believes upon Him, and yet it is His Life that we have (those of us who are born-again). He is alive forevermore, Who created every living thing, and designed the Master Plan for purchasing those who love Him from His enemy: Satan. Those who reject Him will not be converted or redeemed from their punishment, but will suffer for eternity, as He has said. To live is Christ, to die is gain, but only for believers. All un-believers will have their place in hell.
PKevman
New member
Aimiel said:
It is a pity that those who do not fully understand the sacrifice of the Son of God will twist that sacrifice to meet their own desires. The pain that my Lord went through on that cross is truly unfathomable when you consider that He was the perfect and Holy God who had existed for all eternity past. To THINK that a person who utterly rejects that sacrifice of love could then have hope that God the Father would forgive them anyway is ultimately rooted in the pride of man.
Aimiel
Well-known member
Amen, Pastor.
For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries. He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses: of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace? For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.
For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries. He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses: of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace? For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.
Redfin
New member
It seems to me that many of the issues here are simply resolved.
Crankiness has clouded my judgment in posting here at times, so I want to apologize to any whom I’ve offended here up to this point, and state my resolve to participate from hereon in a spirit of civility and a desire for the well-being of all involved.
At this point I would like to mention some things from recent posts that could be areas of agreement for us.
He actually said “eternal,” not “for eternity.” “Eternal” can mean in eternity or of eternity, just as easily as for eternity.
Secondly, if hell is remedial, that is, if it is a means of persuading the extremely obstinate to discontinue their rejection of Christ, then we have no disagreement.
Your 2nd statement above is true in a purely logical sense, but there is no possible reality to which it can correspond, which makes it, in essence, meaningless.
If we acknowledge the fairly obvious fact that after the Judgment there will be no unbelievers left, then we have no disagreement. There may still be rejecters, for a while, but there will be no unbelievers.
But if we acknowledge the possibility that hell could be the means of grace whereby one is ultimately persuaded not to utterly reject that sacrifice of love, then we have no disagreement.
Peace.
:think:
Crankiness has clouded my judgment in posting here at times, so I want to apologize to any whom I’ve offended here up to this point, and state my resolve to participate from hereon in a spirit of civility and a desire for the well-being of all involved.
At this point I would like to mention some things from recent posts that could be areas of agreement for us.
Aimiel said:
He actually said “eternal,” not “for eternity.” “Eternal” can mean in eternity or of eternity, just as easily as for eternity.
Secondly, if hell is remedial, that is, if it is a means of persuading the extremely obstinate to discontinue their rejection of Christ, then we have no disagreement.
Aimiel said:
Your 2nd statement above is true in a purely logical sense, but there is no possible reality to which it can correspond, which makes it, in essence, meaningless.
If we acknowledge the fairly obvious fact that after the Judgment there will be no unbelievers left, then we have no disagreement. There may still be rejecters, for a while, but there will be no unbelievers.
PastorKevin said:
But if we acknowledge the possibility that hell could be the means of grace whereby one is ultimately persuaded not to utterly reject that sacrifice of love, then we have no disagreement.
Peace.
:think:
PastorKevin said:
To THINK that God being 100% successful in reconciling the whole world is hardly pride, to declare that God cant achieve this because of fallible men - and that if God redeemed every last soul would mean his sacrifice was somehow in vain - smacks of pride from those who believe they've found that 'narrow path' - and that all those who didnt deserve their fate............ :rain:
- Status