The Book of Revelation (eis tous aiōnas tōn aiōnōn) contra Universalism

[leafchomper100]

Universalists I have come across commonly state that the lake of fire is not a place of eternal duration but of temporal duration. It may last an age and then those in it will get out as they have come to faith in Christ because the fire is not a punishment but a correction. John uses “forever and ever” or in the Greek “eis tous aiōnas tōn aiōnōn” to describe not something temporal in duration but of something that is eternal in duration something that’ll never come to an end. To say otherwise could actually be considered heretical. Keep reading to see what I mean :

Revelation 20:10 is our target passage as it does one of two things. It first establishes that when Jesus uses “aiōnios” in Matthew 25:41 to refer to the eternal fire that is prepared for the devil and his angels that the wicked will be thrown into aiōnion does mean eternal. Secondly, to show that those who go in the lake of fire never get out but will be tormented for eternity.

Revelation 20:10 reads :

“and the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.”

Now let’s see how John uses this phrase “eis tous aiōnas tōn aiōnōn” translated as "forever and ever" elsewhere in Revelation to see how he uses it and if it is translated correctly :

In Revelation 1:17- 18 : “When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. But he laid his right hand on me, saying, “Fear not, I am the first and the last, and the living one. I died, and behold I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys of Death and Hades.”

Jesus said that he died and is alive forever more. Is Jesus actually alive forevermore or will he die again? However long Jesus is alive for is how long those in the lake of fire will be tormented. We also know that the translators are correct in their rendering of this as “forever and ever” because this is further supported by Romans 6:9 which reads

“We know that Christ, being raised from the dead, will never die again; death no longer has dominion over him.” - Romans 6:9


Revelation 11:15 : “Then the seventh angel blew his trumpet, and there were loud voices in heaven, saying, “The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he shall reign forever and ever.”

Will God reign forever and ever or will his reign eventually end? However long God reigns for is how long those in the lake of fire will be tormented for.

Luke 1:33 says : “and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever (eis tous aiōnas) , and of his kingdom there will be no end.”

If Jesus’ kingdom will have no end that means it is eternal. Just like Revelation 11:15 says. This just adds further support that John is speaking of an eternal duration of something that has no end and not of something that does have an end. That is not how John in Revelation uses “eis tous aiōnas tōn aiōnōn”.


Revelation 10:6 : “ and swore by him who lives forever and ever, who created heaven and what is in it, the earth and what is in it, and the sea and what is in it, that there would be no more delay”

Either God lives forever and ever or he does not. However long God lives is how long those in the lake of fire will be tormented for.

John has used eis tous aiōnas tōn aiōnōn to describe how long God lives in Revelation 15:7 ; 7:12 ; and 4:9-10. Everyone knows that God lives forever and ever. In this same book we see God being called “the first and the last”, “the beginning and the end” , “The Alpha and The Omega”. These are all titles for an eternal being. Also we have many passages such as 1 Timothy 1:17 and 6:16 that refer to God as immortal which would mean that he can’t die and would live forever and ever like is translated correctly here in Revelation and in those passages.

Romans 1:23 : “and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.”

God is described as immortal which means that he will live forever and not die. Which is exactly what John is describing in the passages referenced in Revelation. To deny that God lives forever is heretical.


Revelation 22:5 : “And night will be no more. They will need no light of lamp or sun, for the Lord God will be their light, and they will reign forever and ever."

However long the reign of the righteous or the saved lasts in the Kingdom or New Jerusalem is how long those in the lake of fire will be tormented for. Are we really going to say that those in the New Jerusalem won’t reign for all times? I don’t think any Universalist would say that they would be kicked out of heaven?


With all of this aforementioned proof from the book of Revelation demonstrating that “eis tous aiōnas tōn aiōnōn” does indeed mean forever and ever and is correctly translated. We can see that those in the lake of fire will be there not for one age and then will be let out after some “correction” but they will be there for eternity like it is correctly translated in basically all translations into english. Those thrown into the lake of fire will never leave. This also proves that when Jesus used aiōnion in Matthew 25:41 to refer to the lake of fire that was prepared for the devil and his angels is indeed eternal which would also mean that Matthew 25:46 also means eternal in duration.

Matthew 25:41,46 : "Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”



Revelation 20:10 : " and the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

Revelation 14:9-11 : "And another angel, a third, followed them, saying with a loud voice, “If anyone worships the beast and its image and receives a mark on his forehead or on his hand, he also will drink the wine of God's wrath, poured full strength into the cup of his anger, and he will be tormented with fire and sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever, and they have no rest, day or night, these worshipers of the beast and its image, and whoever receives the mark of its name.”

 

[JulieB67]

Universalists I have come across commonly state that the lake of fire is not a place of eternal duration

I'm not a Universalist but since no one has responded I'll say that I believe once the Lake of Fire has done it's job it will pass away as it will be a "former thing" Those in it will suffer the second death. We can't just assume that death does not really mean death. If Christ himself states it's death I will believe that. If we start saying death doesn't really mean death than we can start stating that life doesn't mean life as well but we know that's not the case.

Revelation 20:14 "And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death."

This coincides with the rest of the bible which states the wages of sin is death period. It's either life or death/ perish. That's how it's stated in most passages. And if God himself states that he has no delight that the wicked should "perish" that tells us his nature. He doesn't even want anyone to perish so why would we assume he would want to burn someone for an eternity? That doesn't even make sense. That's why he's so long suffering -because he doesn't want anyone to perish -to die.

We can't just target a few verses and come up with a doctrine. The Bible must be taken as a whole and when we do that on this subject it's pretty clear and concise.

Matthew 10:28-Matthew 10:28 "And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell."

This is the second death. The soul will be destroyed. And again it coincides with what Christ tells us about the second death in Revelation. After that it's all destroyed -death and hell. Those are former things and as Christ states, the former things are passed away.

Revelation 21:1 "And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.

Revelation 21:4 "And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away."

Hell and the Lake of Fire will be passed away. The wicked will be turned to ashes. That's what a fire does, it consumes.

II Thessalonians 1:9 "Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;

We have to take things in context for example on the word forever/eternally we see that in this verse there is

Matthew 21:19 "And when He saw a fig tree in the way, He came to it, and found nothing thereon, but leaves only, and said unto it, "Let no fruit grow on thee henceforward for ever." And presently the fig tree withered away.:

This doesn't present no beginning or no end but that the tree simply withered away and died. And so the forever is true, it can't produce anymore fruit.

aion and aionion can change depending on the context. Here's another example of eternal not being really eternal as in no end

Jude 7 "Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them, in like manner giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

We know for a fact that Sodom and Gomorrah is not still burning to this day. So that eternal fire did in fact end once it finished the job. Unquenchable where the Lake of Fire is concerned is that it can't be quenched until it's finished turning the wicked to ash- causing them to perish.



That's why I would rather take the entire Bible into context in order to believe something rather than just depend on a few verses because context changes things.

 

[leafchomper100]

I'm not a Universalist but since no one has responded I'll say that I believe once the Lake of Fire has done it's job it will pass away as it will be a "former thing" Those in it will suffer the second death. We can't just assume that death does not really mean death. If Christ himself states it's death I will believe that. If we start saying death doesn't really mean death than we can start stating that life doesn't mean life as well but we know that's not the case.

Revelation 20:14 "And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death."

You are presenting an annihilationists position on a post where I am specifically trying to prove and justify that “eis tous aiōnas tōn aiōnōn” means “forever and ever” and in relation to Revelation 20:10 which I know conflicts with your view just like it does for Universalists. While Revelation 20:10 is a powerful verse for my position and devastating for yours it is not the only verse that traditionalists can use to defend our view. It is interesting that you didn’t even engage with Revelation 20:10. This isn’t a post dedicated to annihilationism. However, I will respond to what you have written.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

As for the second death, I believe what John wrote, which is that the second death is the lake of fire. You can’t just assume that the second death means annihilation or a cessation of existence when death isn’t defined that way in scripture nor do we see those in the lake of fire being annihilated.

Physical death is a separation of soul and body. Whereas the second death is separation of soul and body from God for eternity. This is seen in many passages such as :

“They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might” - 2 Thessalonians 1:9

“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.” - Matthew 25:41

“ Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they may have the right to the tree of life and that they may enter the city by the gates. Outside are the dogs and sorcerers and the sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices falsehood.” - Revelation 22:14-15
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
The lake of fire is described as eternal therefore it doesn’t just pass away and it won’t pass away if those in the lake of fire are being tormented for eternity. When you cite Revelation 21:4 keep it in context, the former things that passed away is not a reference to the Lake of fire passing away or the wicked being annihilated in the lake of fire but is of the things previously mentioned : "He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore" These are promises for the one who overcomes and what they will experience this has nothing to do with the unsaved or the ones who did not overcome.

Moving on, the beast and false prophet were thrown into the lake of fire alive in Revelation 19:20 and in Revelation 20:10 we see that after a thousand years they were still there and conscious and Satan has now been cast into the lake of fire with them where they will be tormented day and night forever and ever. To say that the beast and false prophet (who are humans) were annihilated after the thousands years is scripturally untrue as Revelation 20:10 says that “they will be tormented" and the “they” is in a third person plural which means it includes the beast, false prophet, and Satan. Also you cannot be tormented if you are not conscious and present.The lake of fire doesn’t annihilate but torments. For if it does annihilate, why weren’t the beast and false prophet annihilated after such a long period of time?

The word John uses “torment”, is never used in scripture to describe annihilation but always conscious suffering and pain. When it is applied to people it refers to conscious suffering and not annihilation : Matthew 4:24 ; 8:6 ; 29 ; 18:34 ; Mark 5:7 ; 6:48 ; Luke 8:28 ; 16:23 ; 28 ; 2 Peter 2:8.

Which means that John is clearly not describing annihilation because to be tormented one must be conscious and John says that it will endure for eternity. If you read this post you can see that when“eis tous aiōnas tōn aiōnōn”is used in Revelation it is used to describe something that is eternal in duration and never ending. Notice that John says that the wicked will be tormented “day and night”it should also be noted that Revelation uses the phrase "day and night" to refer to things that occur continuously. (4:8, 7:15, 12:10). Reading from verse 10 all you have to do is read a couple of verses and we see that all humans whose names were not found in the book of life were cast into the same lake of fire where those three are being tormented. As Jesus already told us in Matthew 25:41 he likened the fate of the unsaved human beings to that of the devil and his angels. So as the demons identified that they would be tormented (Matt. 8:29) and we know that the devil and unsaved humans will be tormented for eternity so will it be for all unsaved people. I could of course explain Revelation 14:9-11 and Matthew 25:46 but this isn’t the post to do so because it would be too long.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Judith 16:17 : “Woe to the nations that rise against my people! the Lord Almighty will requite them; in the day of judgment he will punish them: He will send fire and worms into their flesh, and they will weep and suffer forever.” (Judith is a canonical book)

This passage also confirms eternal punishment. Meaning that the wicked will never cease to exist.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

What about “weeping and gnashing of teeth”

What about many other passages that speak of those in the lake of fire as “weeping and gnashing their teeth” ? Annihilationists say that the text doesn’t say that this “weeping and gnashing of teeth” will endure for eternity. Which they are correct it doesn't but they are missing the point of what Jesus is saying. Jesus refers to the lake of fire as a place of weeping and gnashing of teeth, the fire causes them to do this but on the contrary we have no evidence that this torment will stop. Since we know that this is what those in the lake of fire will be undergoing and it is a punishment and to compare it with Matthew 25:46 we know that this punishment is eternal suffering for eternity. As supported by John and Judith respectively. The only one who has verses that speak about the condition of those in the lake of fire is the traditionalist side. The annihilationist side can only look at verses that speak of the wicked being tormented in the lake of fire and not annihilated. Jesus in Luke 16:19-31 speaks about the Rich Man in hades even in the intermediate state the fire for the wicked as one that torments and not annihilates.


Annihilationists often refer to the language that Jesus uses in his parabolic teaching of the fate of the wicked as teaching Annihilationism. One example of this is in Matthew 13:24-30 and Matthew 13:37-40. Where Jesus explains the parable of the weeds among wheat and then later he explains what that means to the disciples. Now the Annihilationists fixate on the language that Jesus uses in the parable which is that the wicked or in this case the weeds are “burned up” and they will say that means they will cease to exist because if you throw weeds into a fire they will be consumed entirely and cease to exist. However when we read Jesus’ explanation of this parable we see in verse 40 he says : “Just as the weeds are gathered and burned with fire, so will it be at the end of the age.” He’s going to now explain what the language of the weeds being burned or burned up means : “The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all law-breakers,and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” That fire that burned up the weeds that Jesus spoke of had nothing to do with annihilation since Jesus interprets it as being consciously tormented in the lake of fire as “weeping and gnashing of teeth”. If Jesus was teaching annihilationism he would have said that they would have been burned up and cease to exist in the lake of fire but instead he describes the fire that burns up the weeds as one that torments those that are in it. Notice that Jesus did not speak of the fire consuming or annihilating the wicked that are in it but Jesus warns about the suffering that accompanies those that are in the lake of fire and the furnace of fire is a place that is marked by “weeping and gnashing of teeth” , suffering and pain. The lake of fire is a place of suffering=, torment and anguish not annihilation or extinction. The fire that burns up the weeds = a fire that torments those that are in it. Jesus is explaining what the parable translated to in reality. What is also interesting is Judith 16:17 confirms that this weeping will endure forever.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Jude 1:13 : "wild waves of the sea, casting up the foam of their own shame; wandering stars, for whom the gloom of utter darkness has been reserved forever."

2 Peter 2:17 : "These are waterless springs and mists driven by a storm. For them the gloom of utter darkness has been reserved."

Matthew 8:11-12 : "I tell you, many will come from east and west and recline at table with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven, while the sons of the kingdom will be thrown into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”

Matthew 22:13 : "Then the king said to the attendants, ‘Bind him hand and foot and cast him into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’"

Matthew 25:30 : "And cast the worthless servant into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’"

We also see the final state of the damned also described as "outer darkness" which will be the home for the wicked forever. This outer darkness causes "weeping and gnashing of teeth" or torment. Surely, one has to be conscious if they are to be in utter darkness for eternity? If they were to cease to exist they would not. Also there is no language or any hint at annihilation in these passages that I presented. We see in Matthew 8:11-12 the opposite of being in heaven or eternal bliss is to be consigned to outer darkness which produces weeping and gnashing of teeth. How could outer darkness alone which is presented in these passages denote annihilation? Forever is such a word as could not have been used if it had been meant that they would not suffer forever.

How do you reconcile the non destructive and annihilation language in these passages with language that clearly speaks of never ending existence and suffering.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Matthew 10:28 : “And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell.”

This passage doesn’t prove annihilationism. The word apollumi, doesn't even mean annihilation but it can mean ruin and loss of well being or being lost. Thayer’s Greek Lexicon defines it as being given over to “eternal misery” in the context of Matthew 10:28.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Jude 1:7 : “ just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.”

Thayer’s Greek Lexicon states concerning the fire in Jude 1:7 they take it as referring to Hell or the lake of fire for the damned : “of the fire of hell we find the following expressions — which are to be taken either tropically (of the extreme penal torments which the wicked are to undergo after their life on earth; so in the discourses of Jesus), or literally (so apparently in the Apocalypse): τό πῦρ, Mark 9:44, 46,(T WH omit; Tr brackets both verses),48; τό πῦρ τό αἰώνιον, Matthew 18:8; Matthew 25:41, cf. 4 Macc. 12:12; ἄσβεστον, Mark 9:43, 45 (G T Tr WH omit; L brackets the clause); πυρός αἰωνίου δίκην ὑπέχειν, Jude 1:7; γηννα τοῦ πυρός, Matthew 5:22; Matthew 18:9; Mark 9:47 (R G Tr brackets); κάμινος τοῦ πυρός, Matthew 13:42, 50 (Daniel 3:6); ἡ λίμνη τοῦ πυρός, Revelation 19:20; Revelation 20:10, 14, 15; πυρί τηρεῖσθαι, 2 Peter 3:7; βασανισθῆναι ἐν πυρί, Revelation 14:10 (cf. Luke 16:24); βαπτίζειν τινα πυρί (see βαπτίζω, II.

When Sodom and Gomorrah on earth were destroyed did their torment and punishment continue in the afterlife or did they cease to exist? When the Rich Man died in Luke 16 he woke up in hades and was being punished he was in perpetual torment. Who told us that Sodom and Gomorrah’s fiery torment ended when they were destroyed on earth? They will never be free from fiery torment it will endure forever and in Jude 1:7 when it says that they are “undergoing punishment” it is in the present tense denoting that they are currently undergoing this punishment of eternal fire.

God Bless!

 

[leafchomper100]

I'm not a Universalist but since no one has responded I'll say that I believe once the Lake of Fire has done it's job it will pass away as it will be a "former thing" Those in it will suffer the second death. We can't just assume that death does not really mean death. If Christ himself states it's death I will believe that. If we start saying death doesn't really mean death than we can start stating that life doesn't mean life as well but we know that's not the case.

Revelation 20:14 "And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death."

I just wanted to add a follow up in regards to the passages that speak of "outer darkness" that I quoted. I don't know if you hold to this view but I have heard some annihilationists say that may only be referring to a temporal holding place and not the final state for the wicked. But that position is untenable because in Matthew 13:40-43 we read :

"Just as the weeds are gathered and burned with fire, so will it be at the end of the age. 41 The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all law-breakers, 42 and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. 43 Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He who has ears, let him hear."

Jesus is clearly speaking about the lake of fire where the wicked will be thrown at the end of the age and in there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth just like in the passages that speak of outer darkness in Matthew. Which is clearly a reference to the final state for the wicked. Also Jude 1:13 says that the wicked will be in the outer darkness forever which means that it can't me simply temporal.

God Bless!

 

[leafchomper100]

Additionally, If Jesus described weeping and gnashing of teeth which occurs in outer darkness and Jude says outer darkness is home to the wicked forever then the weeping and gnashing of teeth will never end. Unless you think that Jude doesn’t believe that those in the same outer darkness spoken of by Jesus includes weeping and gnashing of teeth. If so I’d say go and prove it. Jude wouldn’t be writing contrary to what Jesus wrote. Jude just gave us a time qualifier. This would just support many other verses supporting the traditionalist position like Revelation 14:9-11 ; Revelation 20:10,15 ; Matthew 25:46 ; Judith 16:17 ; 2 Thess. 1:6-9 etc.

 

[JulieB67]

If so I’d say go and prove it

Again, I choose to believe that death means just that death. Especially since it's noted that it's the second death.

And second death fits with verses like these-

Malachi 4:1 "For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave then neither root nor branch.

That's what a fire does.


Matthew 3:12 "Whose fan is in His hand, and He will thoroughly purge His floor, and gather His wheat into the garner; but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire."


Psalms 37:38 "But the transgressors shall be destroyed together: The end of the wicked shall be cut off."

This passage doesn’t prove annihilationism.

Again, we can't get around the words-"second death" It doesn't state second life in the Lake of Fire.


Psalms 37:20 "But the wicked shall perish, And the enemies of the Lord shall be as the fat of lambs: They shall consume; into smoke shall they consume away."

Again, that's what a fire does.

Some of these people claim to be Christians when the Lord comes back but obviously they fell away...


Luke 13:25 "When once the master of the house is risen up, and hath shut to the door, and ye begin to know at the door, saying, `Lord, Lord, open unto us;' and He shall answer and say unto you, `I know you not whence ye are:

Luke 13:26 "Then shall ye begin to say, `We have eaten and drunk in thy presence, and Thou hast taught in our streets.' "

Luke 13:27 "But He shall say, `I tell you, I know you not whence ye are; depart from Me, all ye workers of iniquity.' "

Luke 13:28 "There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrust out."

That's from shame

Psalms 112:10 "The wicked shall see it, and be grieved; he shall gnash with his teeth, and melt away: the desire of the wicked shall perish.


I used to believe as you did once when I was brought up with this belief. But when taking the Bible as a whole, I honestly believe the wicked will indeed perish/burn up. There's just too many verses that state it. And when that's the case than it makes sense that aion, etc has to be taken into context. And in this case, the entire Bible can be used as context.

I don't think we're going to agree and I realize this thread was geared toward Universalists but since no one had responded, I thought I would share mine.

 

[leafchomper100]

Again, I choose to believe that death means just that death. Especially since it's noted that it's the second death.

And second death fits with verses like these-

Malachi 4:1 "For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave then neither root nor branch.

That's what a fire does.


Matthew 3:12 "Whose fan is in His hand, and He will thoroughly purge His floor, and gather His wheat into the garner; but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire."


Psalms 37:38 "But the transgressors shall be destroyed together: The end of the wicked shall be cut off."





Again, we can't get around the words-"second death" It doesn't state second life in the Lake of Fire.


Psalms 37:20 "But the wicked shall perish, And the enemies of the Lord shall be as the fat of lambs: They shall consume; into smoke shall they consume away."

Again, that's what a fire does.

Some of these people claim to be Christians when the Lord comes back but obviously they fell away...


Luke 13:25 "When once the master of the house is risen up, and hath shut to the door, and ye begin to know at the door, saying, `Lord, Lord, open unto us;' and He shall answer and say unto you, `I know you not whence ye are:

Luke 13:26 "Then shall ye begin to say, `We have eaten and drunk in thy presence, and Thou hast taught in our streets.' "

Luke 13:27 "But He shall say, `I tell you, I know you not whence ye are; depart from Me, all ye workers of iniquity.' "

Luke 13:28 "There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrust out."

That's from shame

Psalms 112:10 "The wicked shall see it, and be grieved; he shall gnash with his teeth, and melt away: the desire of the wicked shall perish.


I used to believe as you did once when I was brought up with this belief. But when taking the Bible as a whole, I honestly believe the wicked will indeed perish/burn up. There's just too many verses that state it. And when that's the case than it makes sense that aion, etc has to be taken into context. And in this case, the entire Bible can be used as context.

I don't think we're going to agree and I realize this thread was geared toward Universalists but since no one had responded, I thought I would share mine.

I don't know if you did but I have had multiple responses to you and I don't know if you have seen them all but please read them.

For the Malachi and Psalms passages words “destruction” and “death,” which sometimes are used in the Bible to describe eternal punishment, are to be understood by your position as involving the complete cessation of existence. Arguments against this position are as follows:

(1) These words obviously are not used to describe cessation of existence in other Biblical passages. For example the Heb. word for “perish” is used also to describe the condition of the righteous (Isa 57:1) and the loss of Kish’s asses (1 Sam 9:3, 20). The Heb. word tr. “cut off” to describe the condition of the wicked (Ps 37:9) is used to describe the fate of the Messiah (Dan 9:26). The wicked will be destroyed (Ps 145:20) but the word cannot mean complete annihilation for it is used also to describe the fate Israel had experienced (Hos 13:9) and the fate of Egypt during the plagues (Exod 10:7). It is predicted that sinners will be “consumed,” but the same word describes a wall demolished by hailstones (Ezek 13:13, 14). The fate of the wicked was that “he was no more” (Ps 37:36), but the same Heb. word describes the blessed fate of Enoch (Gen 5:24).

As for Psalms 37:20 The wicked will vanish away from the earth, not because they will cease to exist, but because they will no longer exist on the earth with God’s people. Their existence will be in the lake of fire instead of the earth (Rev 20:10, 15). The wicked will not be present in the new heavens and new earth, but they will be present in hell outside the new Jerusalem (Rev 22:15). They will not be part of the redeemed humanity.

As for Malachi 4:1 Malachi is drawing an analogy between the burning up of a plant and the destiny of those who are evil. But this language is analogical, not literal. The wicked are not literally a plant, but their end will be the fire of hell. We must interpret statements of analogy in light of those verses which explicitly teach on the nature of hell. I'll point you to my previous responses where I point out that Jesus interprets this parabolic language not as annihilation but as conscious torment in the lake of fire. So to use it as proof for annihilation is incorrect as Jesus did not. Matthew 3:12 & 13:24-30 is explained in Matthew 13:36-43. The weeds that are burned up at the end of the age are not annihilated Jesus says that being burned up means "weeping and gnashing of teeth" in the lake of fire. That is conscious torment, not a good experience and one that is synonymous with Revelation 14:9-11 ; 20:10 etc. Parabolic language that you are hinging on is interpreted in many passages like Matthew 13:40-43 and we see in other clear passages that speak about the wicked's state in the lake of fire and they are not annihilated, we can't lie to ourselves they are conscious and are tormented for eternity.

As for the weeping and gnashing of teeth I think also comes from shame (Daniel 12:2) but it is a form of torment and we see in Matthew 13:40-43 and Matthew 8:11-12 and Revelation 20:10 and Luke 16:19-31 and Judith 16:17 that the fire that the wicked will be in is what causes this torment to them. I urge you to please read all of my responses to you. I do find it weird that you don't reply to any verses I give you, you just insist on your own verses instead of engaging with the ones I gave you.

So no I don't agree that the fire acts the same as it does on Earth because we are not told it does we are not told that the fire will annihilate those in it. My previous responses have many more examples as well showing this. I also believe that if annihilationism was so clearly taught in scripture it would have been the Church's teaching on Hell but it never was because it is false and this is from the early church to now and into Protestant church's and Orthodox and Catholics who reject annihilationism. I don't believe that all of Christianity has been in error for 2000 years but the small sect of annihilationists have had it right, considering that scripture backs up the trad view.

Thank you for responding and soon I will open a thread specifically geared towards Annihilationism so we can chat it further.

God Bless!

 

[JulieB67]

So no I don't agree that the fire acts the same as it does on Earth because we are not told it does we are not told that the fire will annihilate those in it.

That's my entire point though -we are told they will be annihilated. We are specifically told it's the second death. I don't think it's can be anymore clear than that. You don't believe death really means death. If death doesn't mean the opposite of life, why use it? And I feel like we are told they will be annihilated in many passages. That's why it seems pointless to continue as usual like I've had with others because many don't see the second death as death. I do and I will always see it as the death of the soul.

Even the most famous verse of the bible has those perishing or receiving everlasting life, it doesn't state everlasting eternal life in the Lake of Fire. Because that's what it would be. It wouldn't be death/perishing.

The word apollumi, doesn't even mean annihilation

The very first definition of apollumi -is to destroy "fully" And that's what's going to happen when we take Matthew 10:28 into account. We can state it can mean ruin loss, etc but by Christ including body and soul, as well as the words "second death" there can be no other meaning other than destroying "fully".

As for Malachi 4:1 Malachi is drawing an analogy between the burning up of a plant and the destiny of those who are evil. But this language is analogical, not literal.

Our Father always uses husbandry when talking about people, etc. And again, it's a perfect analogy of exactly what will happen. And you yourself used the analogy that Christ uses about the weeds being burned.

Malachi 4:1 "For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave then neither root nor branch."

Malachi 4:3 "And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do this, saith the Lord of hosts."

The lake of fire is described as eternal therefore it doesn’t just pass away and it won’t pass away

Its is perpetual in the sense that it will burn (unquenchable) until everyone is turned to ash but it is still a "former thing" by the definition that it's not part of the new.

Revelation 21:1 "And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea."

. When you cite Revelation 21:4 keep it in context, the former things that passed away is not a reference to the Lake of fire passing away or the wicked being annihilated in the lake of fire but is of the things previously mentioned : "He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore" These are promises for the one who overcomes and what they will experience this has nothing to do with the unsaved or the ones who did not overcome.

Revelation 21:4 "And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.

If we were going by just the things in that verse it would state for "those" former things are passed away. Or those things are passed away. But it states the former things are passed away which coincides with the fact that there will be a new heaven and earth.

, but they will be present in hell outside the new Jerusalem (Rev 22:15).

It's not stated they will be in hell.

Christ states it is done in Rev 21

Revelation 21:6 "And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely."

In chapter 22:6 we are brought back to the present time with John.-

Revelation 22:6 "And he said unto me, These sayings are faithful and true: and the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done."

Revelation 22:7 "Behold, I come quickly: blessed is he that keepeth the sayings of the prophecy of this book."

Revelation 22:8 "And I John saw these things, and heard them. And when I had heard and seen, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel which shewed me these things."

Revelation 22:9 "Then saith he unto me, Seee thou do it not: for I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren the prophets, and of them which keep the sayings of this book: worship God."

Revelation 22:10 "And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand."

This next verse is to the readers of this prophecy-

Revelation 22:11 "He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.

Revelation 22:12 "And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be."

Again, that's future and so is this next verse-

Revelation 22:14 "Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city."

Revelation 22:15 "For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie."

Verse 15 is just telling us they will not be there, and we know that because they've already suffered the second death. When Christ states it is done. That's it. After that Christ is just reiterating what will happen in chapter 21. And again, we are brought back to the present with John in chapter 22.

I urge you to please read all of my responses to you. I do find it weird that you don't reply to any verses I give you, you just insist on your own verses instead of engaging with the ones I gave you.

Sorry I have read them I'm extremely busy with work and family so sometimes I'm in too much of a hurry which is my fault because I did engage the conversation.

I find that Judith has some big enough errors to be taken seriously. It was considered non canon by the Jews. -One of the biggest errors- Nebuchadnezzar being an Assyrian king instead of Babylonian,etc.

As for outer darkness and other things, the angels are kept in chains until Judgement Day, that's for sure but I do believe in the gulf right now that Christ described. I don't believe anyone is in the Lake of Fire right now.

Physical death is a separation of soul and body. Whereas the second death is separation of soul and body from God for eternity. This is seen in many passages such as :

“They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might” - 2 Thessalonians 1:9

It's states they will suffer eternal destruction and yes, that naturally separates them from the presence of the Lord.

I don't believe that all of Christianity has been in error for 2000 years but the small sect of annihilationists have had it right, considering that scripture backs up the trad view.

I don't think too small of a sect and I often find that it's not always great to side with the majority. Traditions can make void the word of God in many points.

Matthew 7:14 "Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it."

So no, I don't always want to fall in with the majority.

One only has to read God's word and see his nature. And again, if he has no delight that the wicked should perish why would he assume he would burn someone with no end? They will simply be blotted out of existence. However long that takes for certain ones I don't know but they will be turned to ashes, thye will cease to exist. They will be part of the former things.

"Just as the weeds are gathered and burned with fire, so will it be at the end of the age. 41 The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all law-breakers, 42 and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. 43 Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He who has ears, let him hear."

But if we read a few verses up we find what happens to them in the fiery furnace (which I still believe happens at Judgement Day) God is not going to pull someone out of a fire to judge them to only thrown them back in at Judgement Day. I believe as I said in the gulf. And I also believe in the 1000 years reign.

Burned as utilized in verse 40 is katakaio- to burn down (to the ground) i.e -to consume wholly-burn (up, utterly)

There can be no other definiton. They will be burned to the ground and completely consumed, which again, is what a fire does.

Matthew 13:40 "As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world."

Thank you for responding and soon I will open a thread specifically geared towards Annihilationism so we can chat it further.

No problem, but I don't know where we go from here. I will not all of the sudden believe the second death does not mean exactly that, second death. But thanks for the conversation

 

[leafchomper100]

That's my entire point though -we are told they will be annihilated. We are specifically told it's the second death. I don't think it's can be anymore clear than that. You don't believe death really means death. If death doesn't mean the opposite of life, why use it? And I feel like we are told they will be annihilated in many passages. That's why it seems pointless to continue as usual like I've had with others because many don't see the second death as death. I do and I will always see it as the death of the soul.

Even the most famous verse of the bible has those perishing or receiving everlasting life, it doesn't state everlasting eternal life in the Lake of Fire. Because that's what it would be. It wouldn't be death/perishing.






The very first definition of apollumi -is to destroy "fully" And that's what's going to happen when we take Matthew 10:28 into account. We can state it can mean ruin loss, etc but by Christ including body and soul, as well as the words "second death" there can be no other meaning other than destroying "fully".




Our Father always uses husbandry when talking about people, etc. And again, it's a perfect analogy of exactly what will happen. And you yourself used the analogy that Christ uses about the weeds being burned.

Malachi 4:1 "For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave then neither root nor branch."

Malachi 4:3 "And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do this, saith the Lord of hosts."


Its is perpetual in the sense that it will burn (unquenchable) until everyone is turned to ash but it is still a "former thing" by the definition that it's not part of the new.

Revelation 21:1 "And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea."



Revelation 21:4 "And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.

If we were going by just the things in that verse it would state for "those" former things are passed away. Or those things are passed away. But it states the former things are passed away which coincides with the fact that there will be a new heaven and earth.




It's not stated they will be in hell.

Christ states it is done in Rev 21

Revelation 21:6 "And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely."

In chapter 22:6 we are brought back to the present time with John.-

Revelation 22:6 "And he said unto me, These sayings are faithful and true: and the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done."

Revelation 22:7 "Behold, I come quickly: blessed is he that keepeth the sayings of the prophecy of this book."

Revelation 22:8 "And I John saw these things, and heard them. And when I had heard and seen, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel which shewed me these things."

Revelation 22:9 "Then saith he unto me, Seee thou do it not: for I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren the prophets, and of them which keep the sayings of this book: worship God."

Revelation 22:10 "And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand."

This next verse is to the readers of this prophecy-

Revelation 22:11 "He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.

Revelation 22:12 "And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be."

Again, that's future and so is this next verse-

Revelation 22:14 "Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city."

Revelation 22:15 "For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie."

Verse 15 is just telling us they will not be there, and we know that because they've already suffered the second death. When Christ states it is done. That's it. After that Christ is just reiterating what will happen in chapter 21. And again, we are brought back to the present with John in chapter 22.


Sorry I have read them I'm extremely busy with work and family so sometimes I'm in too much of a hurry which is my fault because I did engage the conversation.

I find that Judith has some big enough errors to be taken seriously. It was considered non canon by the Jews. -One of the biggest errors- Nebuchadnezzar being an Assyrian king instead of Babylonian,etc.

As for outer darkness and other things, the angels are kept in chains until Judgement Day, that's for sure but I do believe in the gulf right now that Christ described. I don't believe anyone is in the Lake of Fire right now.




It's states they will suffer eternal destruction and yes, that naturally separates them from the presence of the Lord.


I don't think too small of a sect and I often find that it's not always great to side with the majority. Traditions can make void the word of God in many points.

Matthew 7:14 "Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it."

So no, I don't always want to fall in with the majority.

One only has to read God's word and see his nature. And again, if he has no delight that the wicked should perish why would he assume he would burn someone with no end? They will simply be blotted out of existence. However long that takes for certain ones I don't know but they will be turned to ashes, thye will cease to exist. They will be part of the former things.


But if we read a few verses up we find what happens to them in the fiery furnace (which I still believe happens at Judgement Day) God is not going to pull someone out of a fire to judge them to only thrown them back in at Judgement Day. I believe as I said in the gulf.

Burned as utilized in verse 40 is katakaio- to burn down (to the ground) i.e -to consume wholly-burn (up, utterly)

There can be no other definiton. They will be burned to the ground and completely consumed, which again, is what a fire does.

Matthew 13:40 "As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world."





No problem, but I don't know where we go from here. I will not all of the sudden believe the second death does not mean exactly that, second death. But thanks for the conversation

Yeah so you haven't proven that apollumi means annihilate which it doesn't. Also again death is not annihilation but a separation, scripture is clear on that. I already explained Malachi 4:1 which doesn't prove annihilation of the wicked. Again I don't know why you are quoting Rev. 21:4 which states what the former things are and that doesn't speak of the annihilation of the wicked or the cessation of the lake of fire. I explained this to you in my first response.

Moving on, I don't know why you are quoting verse 40 in Matthew 13 when I already explained to you that Jesus explains the weeds and wheat parable that he spoke about in verse 24-30 in verses 41-43. He interprets the fire that you are saying will annihilate the wicked as a fire that doesn't annihilate but one that torments those that are in it. I already explained this in my previous response to you, which you should read before you respond. All you had to do was read the next couple of verses lol to see that Jesus isn't speaking of annihilation.

Where do we go from here? I don't know I already told you that I can open up another thread or you can to speak on this matter. This isn't the thread for annihilationism and you know that. I will not all of a sudden believe that the second death means annihilation, but thanks for the conversation I would suggest that you read all of what I have written in response to you because it seems that you did not as you are repeating things that I have explained to you and you never refuted or engaged with any passage of scripture I gave you from my responses but that is ok, like I said we can pick up this convo in another thread which is dedicated to this topic and also because I don't want to keep repeating myself.

God Bless!

 

[leafchomper100]

That's my entire point though -we are told they will be annihilated. We are specifically told it's the second death. I don't think it's can be anymore clear than that. You don't believe death really means death. If death doesn't mean the opposite of life, why use it? And I feel like we are told they will be annihilated in many passages. That's why it seems pointless to continue as usual like I've had with others because many don't see the second death as death. I do and I will always see it as the death of the soul.

Exactly, that is what you "feel" like and many others don't see death like you do because death isn't annihilation but separation. You may feel like the passage says they are annihilated because you cherry pick certain verses out of context and try and change the meaning of words to support your emotion based doctrine but the Bible doesn't teach annihilationism. You haven't engaged with any passage of scripture I give you which is very telling. I haven't hidden from answering verses you put forth, although I don't think you read them but you didn't engage with any passage I put forth. You also said that since God doesn't delight in the death of the wicked that mean they will be annihilated? Who told you that? The passage surely doesn't say that, that is your opinion and feelings being inserted into the text to make it want to say that. God wouldn't delight in their death because of what awaits those who reject God and it isn't annihilation. You haven't convinced me of your doctrine. On the contrary you are making it seem very unscriptural and mainly emotion based in your argumentation which isn't a good sign.

 

[leafchomper100]

That's my entire point though -we are told they will be annihilated. We are specifically told it's the second death. I don't think it's can be anymore clear than that. You don't believe death really means death. If death doesn't mean the opposite of life, why use it? And I feel like we are told they will be annihilated in many passages. That's why it seems pointless to continue as usual like I've had with others because many don't see the second death as death. I do and I will always see it as the death of the soul.

Even the most famous verse of the bible has those perishing or receiving everlasting life, it doesn't state everlasting eternal life in the Lake of Fire. Because that's what it would be. It wouldn't be death/perishing.






The very first definition of apollumi -is to destroy "fully" And that's what's going to happen when we take Matthew 10:28 into account. We can state it can mean ruin loss, etc but by Christ including body and soul, as well as the words "second death" there can be no other meaning other than destroying "fully".




Our Father always uses husbandry when talking about people, etc. And again, it's a perfect analogy of exactly what will happen. And you yourself used the analogy that Christ uses about the weeds being burned.

Malachi 4:1 "For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave then neither root nor branch."

Malachi 4:3 "And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do this, saith the Lord of hosts."


Its is perpetual in the sense that it will burn (unquenchable) until everyone is turned to ash but it is still a "former thing" by the definition that it's not part of the new.

Revelation 21:1 "And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea."



Revelation 21:4 "And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.

If we were going by just the things in that verse it would state for "those" former things are passed away. Or those things are passed away. But it states the former things are passed away which coincides with the fact that there will be a new heaven and earth.




It's not stated they will be in hell.

Christ states it is done in Rev 21

Revelation 21:6 "And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely."

In chapter 22:6 we are brought back to the present time with John.-

Revelation 22:6 "And he said unto me, These sayings are faithful and true: and the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done."

Revelation 22:7 "Behold, I come quickly: blessed is he that keepeth the sayings of the prophecy of this book."

Revelation 22:8 "And I John saw these things, and heard them. And when I had heard and seen, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel which shewed me these things."

Revelation 22:9 "Then saith he unto me, Seee thou do it not: for I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren the prophets, and of them which keep the sayings of this book: worship God."

Revelation 22:10 "And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand."

This next verse is to the readers of this prophecy-

Revelation 22:11 "He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.

Revelation 22:12 "And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be."

Again, that's future and so is this next verse-

Revelation 22:14 "Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city."

Revelation 22:15 "For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie."

Verse 15 is just telling us they will not be there, and we know that because they've already suffered the second death. When Christ states it is done. That's it. After that Christ is just reiterating what will happen in chapter 21. And again, we are brought back to the present with John in chapter 22.


Sorry I have read them I'm extremely busy with work and family so sometimes I'm in too much of a hurry which is my fault because I did engage the conversation.

I find that Judith has some big enough errors to be taken seriously. It was considered non canon by the Jews. -One of the biggest errors- Nebuchadnezzar being an Assyrian king instead of Babylonian,etc.

As for outer darkness and other things, the angels are kept in chains until Judgement Day, that's for sure but I do believe in the gulf right now that Christ described. I don't believe anyone is in the Lake of Fire right now.




It's states they will suffer eternal destruction and yes, that naturally separates them from the presence of the Lord.


I don't think too small of a sect and I often find that it's not always great to side with the majority. Traditions can make void the word of God in many points.

Matthew 7:14 "Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it."

So no, I don't always want to fall in with the majority.

One only has to read God's word and see his nature. And again, if he has no delight that the wicked should perish why would he assume he would burn someone with no end? They will simply be blotted out of existence. However long that takes for certain ones I don't know but they will be turned to ashes, thye will cease to exist. They will be part of the former things.


But if we read a few verses up we find what happens to them in the fiery furnace (which I still believe happens at Judgement Day) God is not going to pull someone out of a fire to judge them to only thrown them back in at Judgement Day. I believe as I said in the gulf. And I also believe in the 1000 years reign.

Burned as utilized in verse 40 is katakaio- to burn down (to the ground) i.e -to consume wholly-burn (up, utterly)

There can be no other definiton. They will be burned to the ground and completely consumed, which again, is what a fire does.

Matthew 13:40 "As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world."





No problem, but I don't know where we go from here. I will not all of the sudden believe the second death does not mean exactly that, second death. But thanks for the conversation

I will not be taking this discussion any further. Take Care.

 

[JulieB67]

Yeah so you haven't proven that apollumi means annihilate

apollumi Greek 622-"To destroy fully (reflex to perish, or lose) lit or fig -destroy, die, lose, mar, perish. I

If you want to choose one that doesn't mean destroy fully that's fine. But I will continue to believe that's what it means especially when Christ tells us that it's the second death. Which coincides with his teaching in Matthew 10:28. That's been my entire point. Yes, you have given your own explanations as well but how is that proof when mine isn't concerning apollumi? I've shown you that it can certainly mean destroyed "fully" which is annihilation.

You may feel like the passage says they are annihilated because you cherry pick certain verses out of context and try and change the meaning of words to support your emotion

I have not cherry picked or changed the meanings of words. I have my Strong's right next to me. And I have the entire bible to fall back on in regards to it being life or death.


But we see it differently...

 

[JulieB67]

You also said that since God doesn't delight in the death of the wicked that mean they will be annihilated?

Ezekiel 18:23 "Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord God: and not that he should return from his ways, and live?"

This tells us that if he doesn't want anyone to die, he's certainly not going to want to burn someone with no end. That's makes no sense at all considered what the Father has just stated. You on the other hand think even though he has no pleasure in the death of the wicked, he will have no problem burning someone with no end.

Ezekiel 18:24 "But when the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doeth, shall he live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned: in his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die."

Ezekiel 18:25 "Yet ye say, 'The way of the Lord is not equal'. Hear now, O house of Israel; Is not My way equal: are not your ways unequal?"

Ezekiel 18:26 "When a righteous man turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and dieth in them; for his iniquity that he hath done shall he die."

Ezekiel 18:27 "Again, when the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness that hath committed, and doeth that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul alive."

Moving on, I don't know why you are quoting verse 40 in Matthew 13

Because you have to have context. We can't just pull verses out without context.

He interprets the fire that you are saying will annihilate the wicked as a fire that doesn't annihilate but one that torments those that are in it

. He does not state that they will not burn up or not be annihilated. We know there will be gnashing of teeth but it does not state they will not be destroyed. In verse 40 it states they will be completely consumed if you take it back to the Greek with the word burned.

You haven't convinced me of your doctrine.

That's fine, I really didn't think I would. When I see these types of threads I'm always curious what someone's views are on the second death and when they tell me they don't think it means death -no offense but I know we're pretty much done at that point. So forgive me if you don't think I've responded enough to your verses, etc.

But it's of my belief that the eternal hell doctrine is based on a handful of verses with questionable context concerning definitions, how words are utilized, etc when most of the Bible points to the soul that sins will die/perish.

 

[Matt5]

Interesting discussion here. Great material for review.

My take is more gruesome.

The parable of the talents in Matthew 25 seems to show us the way in the matter of hell. The harvests (nuclear wars) come along and take out the lazy servant. Apparently, he is too lazy to get out of the way of a harvest and is tossed into hell (Matthew 25:30). In other words, he gets caught up in a nuclear war.

Interestingly, hell sounds a lot like the effects of a fatal dose of radiation: Lots of weeping, pain, gnashing of teeth due to the intense pain, thirst, general torment. The truth is much worse than even that. This lasts for 3 days to 3 weeks depending on dosage. And then you die.

What radiation does to the human body | HBO's Chernobyl - YouTube

 

[Nicholas Vara]

If Jesus’ kingdom will have no end that means it is eternal. Just like Revelation 11:15 says. This just adds further support that John is speaking of an eternal duration of something that has no end and not of something that does have an end. That is not how John in Revelation uses “eis tous aiōnas tōn aiōnōn”.

Inside or unto the age of the ages would not mean eternal in this context either. I know that a lot of our hymns give the impression that Christ "reigns" forever and ever, but this would be in direct contradiction of 1 Corinthians 15 where it says that once the last enemy that is death is placed under Christ feet he hands the kingdom over to this Father. The entirety of 1 Corinthians 15 is very apokatastasis sounding though out. Now I do think aiōnios can mean eternal in certain context. It is an adjective and not a noun. Adjectives take on the properties of the noun they are attached to. Aion meaning "age" and aiōnios would be pertaining to an age or of an age or age during etc. "The TALL man stands next to the TALL building". Tall is not a unit of measurement, the man is tall for a man and the building is tall for a building. What people on both sides of this debate are doing would render the man and the building the same size. What I see a lot of when it pertains to this debate about aiōnios (by the way this isn't even a matter of debate) is just flash card Greek where the person on either side of the argument believes that adjectives work the same as nouns. They don't. The New Testament itself is full of examples where aiōnios is being used in reference to things that have already come and gone. So in Matthew 25 with the sheep and the goats you have "Kolasis" (chastisement) attached to aiōnios in the same sentence aiōnios is used to describe the life of the righteous in Christ. Chastisement by definition comes to an end because it is remedial, but the life of the believer goes on for as long as Christ' lives. Its pertaining to a different age. If we can't agree on anything else, we ought to agree that adjustives are dependent upon their noun. This is just a fact.

24 then -- the end, when he may deliver up the reign to God, even the Father, when he may have made useless all rule, and all authority and power --

25 for it behoveth him to reign till he may have put all the enemies under his feet --

26 the last enemy is done away -- death;

27 for all things He did put under his feet, and, when one may say that all things have been subjected, [it is] evident that He is excepted who did subject the all things to him,

28 and when the all things may be subjected to him, then the Son also himself shall be subject to Him, who did subject to him the all things, that God may be the all in all.

 

[cfposter]

The meaning "aionios" is that it is a not speaking of limited duration or unlimited duration. It is speaking in relation to the aion "age". It is an adjective and is describing something that CONTINUES (that is the key take away here) beyond the age into an adjacent age or ages (indefinitely).
Now the meaning of "to the ages of the ages" does mean an endlessness. This phrase is far more rare in the scriptures since a lot of focus is placed on the next age to come which is why often forever just means "to the age".

Here is the verse where the phrase "to the ages of ages" is used:

Rev 20:10 and the Devil, who is leading them astray, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where are the beast and the false prophet, and they shall be tormented day and night—to the ages of the ages.

Now the Devil and the references to the Beast and the False Prophet are all spiritual references. They can't burn per say in the physical literal sense. This Fire is a Spiritual Fire. In fact, that fire is the Holy Spirit. It is the same fire today that prevents the Devil from taking over those that have Faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. It is why those cloven tongues of fire came upon the disciples at Pentecost when they received the Holy Spirit. They (those Apostles) are the STONES that will get thrown at sinners to SPIRITUALLY Destroy the old man inside them so as to bring forth Christ within them.

God will save everyone in due time. None of the sons of men are going to be tormented endlessly. God doesn't fail. And it is God that started the work in all and for His Purpose was that work started.

 

[The Liturgist]

eis tous aiōnas tōn aiōnōn is used to this day in the Greek Orthodox liturgy, translated into Latin as “Saeculae saeculorum” and into English in a variety of ways, but in Orthodoxy we favor “Unto ages of ages.”

 

[leafchomper100]

Inside or unto the age of the ages would not mean eternal in this context either. I know that a lot of our hymns give the impression that Christ "reigns" forever and ever, but this would be in direct contradiction of 1 Corinthians 15 where it says that once the last enemy that is death is placed under Christ feet he hands the kingdom over to this Father. The entirety of 1 Corinthians 15 is very apokatastasis sounding though out. Now I do think aiōnios can mean eternal in certain context. It is an adjective and not a noun. Adjectives take on the properties of the noun they are attached to. Aion meaning "age" and aiōnios would be pertaining to an age or of an age or age during etc. "The TALL man stands next to the TALL building". Tall is not a unit of measurement, the man is tall for a man and the building is tall for a building. What people on both sides of this debate are doing would render the man and the building the same size. What I see a lot of when it pertains to this debate about aiōnios (by the way this isn't even a matter of debate) is just flash card Greek where the person on either side of the argument believes that adjectives work the same as nouns. They don't. The New Testament itself is full of examples where aiōnios is being used in reference to things that have already come and gone. So in Matthew 25 with the sheep and the goats you have "Kolasis" (chastisement) attached to aiōnios in the same sentence aiōnios is used to describe the life of the righteous in Christ. Chastisement by definition comes to an end because it is remedial, but the life of the believer goes on for as long as Christ' lives. Its pertaining to a different age. If we can't agree on anything else, we ought to agree that adjustives are dependent upon their noun. This is just a fact.

Actually it is better put that 1 Corinthians 15 can’t contradict Luke 1:33 which says that Jesus’ kingdom has no end.

"and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end.”

Luke 1:33 is one of the clearest texts that goes directly against what you are saying. It's clear that Jesus’ kingdom will last forever and it will never have an end and 1 Corinthians 15 doesn’t contradict it nor does it prove that his kingdom ends. As I have already demonstrated, aionios and “eis tous aiōnas tōn aiōnōn” means forever and ever.

You said :

“ So in Matthew 25 with the sheep and the goats you have "Kolasis" (chastisement) attached to aiōnios in the same sentence aiōnios is used to describe the life of the righteous in Christ. Chastisement by definition comes to an end because it is remedial, but the life of the believer goes on for as long as Christ' lives. Its pertaining to a different age. “

First “kolasis” in this passage is not “chastisement” but punishment. Out of the hundreds and thousands of scholars that translated the New Testament from Greek into English I have not found one translation that renders “kolasis” as chastisement in Matthew 25:46 but as punishment and I have checked 46 translations spanning from modern to early modern to classical to catholic to aramaic to literal and none of them render kolasis as chastisement. I wonder why? lol. I don’t want to see some off-brand Universalist translation that renders it that way in order to fit a false dogma.

Also I find it interesting that you speak of aionios in Matthew 25:46 as if it means two different things for the duration of the punishment and for the life., Jesus did not use aionios in the same sentence in two different ways. You say that “kolasis” in this verse means chastisement which has to have an end (in order to fit your theology) but in the same verse a couple of words later aionios means unending life because it is life that lasts as long as Christ lives which is forever according to Romans 6:9 :

“We know that Christ, being raised from the dead, will never die again; death no longer has dominion over him.”

So your conclusion is faulty and incorrect. However, long the life of the righteous lasts is how long the punishment of the wicked will last. Since you have already said that the righteous in Matthew 25:46 we live eternally or have unending life because Christ will live perpetually and he will never die. Then that means that the wicked’s punishment will never end. If the wicked are not punished for eternity than the righteous will not have life for eternity. Which contradicts your statement that in Matthew 25:46 the believers will go into life as long as Christ lives. Unless you want to say that Jesus Christ will not live forever and that he is to die again which would contradict Romans 6:9 and the very fact that Jesus is God.

St. Augustine described it best :

“If both destinies are eternal, then we must either understand both as long-continued but at last terminating, or both as endless. For they are correlative — on the one hand, punishment eternal, on the other hand, life eternal. And to say in one and the same sense, life eternal shall be endless, punishment eternal shall come to an end, is the height of absurdity. Wherefore, as the eternal life of the saints shall be endless, so too the eternal punishment of those who are doomed to it shall have no end.”

 

[Nicholas Vara]

Actually it is better put that 1 Corinthians 15 can’t contradict Luke 1:33 which says that Jesus’ kingdom has no end.

"and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end.”

Luke 1:33 is one of the clearest texts that goes directly against what you are saying. It's clear that Jesus’ kingdom will last forever and it will never have an end and 1 Corinthians 15 doesn’t contradict it nor does it prove that his kingdom ends. As I have already demonstrated, aionios and “eis tous aiōnas tōn aiōnōn” means forever and ever.

You said :



First “kolasis” in this passage is not “chastisement” but punishment. Out of the hundreds and thousands of scholars that translated the New Testament from Greek into English I have not found one translation that renders “kolasis” as chastisement in Matthew 25:46 but as punishment and I have checked 46 translations spanning from modern to early modern to classical to catholic to aramaic to literal and none of them render kolasis as chastisement. I wonder why? lol. I don’t want to see some off-brand Universalist translation that renders it that way in order to fit a false dogma.

Also I find it interesting that you speak of aionios in Matthew 25:46 as if it means two different things for the duration of the punishment and for the life., Jesus did not use aionios in the same sentence in two different ways. You say that “kolasis” in this verse means chastisement which has to have an end (in order to fit your theology) but in the same verse a couple of words later aionios means unending life because it is life that lasts as long as Christ lives which is forever according to Romans 6:9 :

“We know that Christ, being raised from the dead, will never die again; death no longer has dominion over him.”

So your conclusion is faulty and incorrect. However, long the life of the righteous lasts is how long the punishment of the wicked will last. Since you have already said that the righteous in Matthew 25:46 we live eternally or have unending life because Christ will live perpetually and he will never die. Then that means that the wicked’s punishment will never end. If the wicked are not punished for eternity than the righteous will not have life for eternity. Which contradicts your statement that in Matthew 25:46 the believers will go into life as long as Christ lives. Unless you want to say that Jesus Christ will not live forever and that he is to die again which would contradict Romans 6:9 and the very fact that Jesus is God.

St. Augustine described it best :

“If both destinies are eternal, then we must either understand both as long-continued but at last terminating, or both as endless. For they are correlative — on the one hand, punishment eternal, on the other hand, life eternal. And to say in one and the same sense, life eternal shall be endless, punishment eternal shall come to an end, is the height of absurdity. Wherefore, as the eternal life of the saints shall be endless, so too the eternal punishment of those who are doomed to it shall have no end.”

It's nothing personal but these are not good arguments.

We can take these one at a time but there seems to be a bit of resentment in your responses that gives me pause about continuing.

Luke 1:33, you say that Paul can't mean what he says in 1 Corthithians 15 because Luke says "forever" here in reference to the length of Christ reign.

Below is from strongs concordance under Luke 1:33

//αἰῶνας (aiōnas)
Noun - Accusative Masculine Plural
Strong's 165: From the same as aei; properly, an age; by extension, perpetuity; by implication, the world; specially a Messianic period.//

This would not contradict what Paul explicitly states in 1 Corinthians 15: 20-19 from the NASB (not some special universalist translation, whatever that means)

//20But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep. 21For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead. 22For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. 23But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ’s at His coming, 24then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power. 25For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. 26The last enemy that will be abolished is death. 27For HE HAS PUT ALL THINGS IN SUBJECTION UNDER HIS FEET. But when He says, “All things are put in subjection,” it is evident that He is excepted who put all things in subjection to Him. 28When all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all. 29Otherwise, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why then are they baptized for them? //

This not only contains a christology that pertains to ALL THINGS, you even have a vague hint that they affirmed some form of postmortem salvation complete with ritual baptism.

You say that you've got "hundreds of thousands of scholars" who have translated Greek to English and that none of them have translated Kolasis as chastisement.

Again we can just stay consistent and keep with Strongs

//STRONGS G2851:
κόλασις, κολάσεως, ἡ (κολάζω), correction, punishment, penalty: Matthew 25:46; κόλασιν ἔχει,brings with it or has connected with it the thought of punishment, 1 John 4:18. (Ezekiel 14:3f, etc.; 2 Macc. 4:38; 4 Macc. 8:8; Wis. 11:14 Wis. 16:24, etc.; Plato, Aristotle, Diodorus 1, 77 (9); 4, 44 (3); Aelian v. h. 7, 15; others.)//


In classical Greek the word had to do with pruning or cutting back. I am quite okay using kolasis as punishment in general though outside of Matthew 25 it's only used two other places, in Acts when the apostles are whipped to change their behavior of preaching Christ and in 1 John where he says fear has to do with kolasis and perfect love cast out fear.

Aristotle explains the difference: timōria and kolasis (in Rhet. 1.10.17).

"Punishment" - kolasis (κόλασις) or its verb form "to punish" - kolasō (κολάζω) to correct, where as Timōria (τιμωρία) punishment that is for retribution and vengeance, kolasis punishment in the classical sense is intended for correction, discipline, and ultimately for good.

But admittedly by late antiquity it could be used as punishment of any kind so the context is important.

Plato's Protagoras 323-324.

[323ξ] Take my word for it, then, that they have good reason for admitting everybody as adviser on this virtue, owing to their belief that everyone has some of it; and next, that they do not regard it as natural or spontaneous, but as something taught and acquired after careful preparation by those who acquire it,—of this I will now endeavor to convince you.
[323δ] In all cases of evils which men deem to have befallen their neighbors by nature or fortune, nobody is wroth with them or reproves or lectures or punishes (κολάζει) them, when so afflicted, with a view to their being other than they are; one merely pities them. Who, for instance, is such a fool as to try to do anything of the sort to the ugly, the puny, or the weak? Because, I presume, men know that it is by nature and fortune that people get these things, the graces of life and their opposites. But as to all the good things that people are supposed to get by application and practice and teaching,
[323ε] where these are lacking in anyone and only their opposite evils are found, here surely are the occasions for wrath and punishment (κολάσεις) and reproof. One of them is injustice, and impiety, and in short all that is opposed
[324α] to civic virtue; in such case anyone will be wroth with his neighbor and reprove him, clearly because the virtue is to be acquired by application and learning. For if you will consider punishment (κολάζειν), Socrates, and what control it has over wrong-doers, the facts will inform you that men agree in regarding virtue as procured. No one punishes (κολάζει) a wrong-doer from the mere contemplation
[324β] or on account of his wrong-doing, unless one takes unreasoning vengeance (τιμωρεῖται) like a wild beast. But he who undertakes to punish (κολασθέντα) with reason does not avenge (τιμωρεῖται) himself for the past offence, since he cannot make what was done as though it had not come to pass; he looks rather to the future, and aims at preventing that particular person and others who see him punished (κολασθέντα) from doing wrong again. And being so minded he must have in mind that virtue comes by training: for you observe that he punishes (κολάζει) to deter. This then is the accepted view
[324ξ] of all who seek requital (τιμωροῦνται) in either private or public life; and while men in general exact requital (τιμωροῦνται) and punishment (κολάζονται) from those whom they suppose to have wronged them, this is especially the case with the Athenians, your fellow-citizens, so that by our argument the Athenians also share the view that virtue is procured and taught. Thus I have shown that your fellow-citizens have good reason for admitting a smith's or cobbler's counsel in public affairs, and that they hold virtue to be taught and procured

Plato explains in great detail what the word means - that it is not retributive punishment but explicitly corrective in purpose. He uses it as part of a quarter of words: θυμοῦται, νουθετεῖ , διδάσκει, κολάζει (“provokes, reproves, lectures, punishes”) which he uses throughout to refer to all measures designed for the betterment of a person’s character.

Aristotle Rhetoric. 1.10.17

But there is a difference between revenge (τιμωρία) and punishment (κόλασις); indeed for punishment (κόλασις) is inflicted in the interest of the sufferer, and revenge (τιμωρία) in the interest of him who inflicts it, that he may obtain satisfaction.

Xen. Ec. 20.12

And again, all the ways of treating the soil when it is too wet for sowing or too salt for planting are familiar to all men—how the land is drained by ditches, how the salt is corrected (κολάζεται) by being mixed with saltless substances, liquid or dry.

Plat. Gorg. 491e

Oh, you most certainly do, Socrates. For how can a man be happy if he is a slave to anybody at all? No, natural fairness and justice, I tell you now quite frankly, is this—that he who would live rightly should let his desires be as strong as possible and not chasten (κολάζειν) them

To the final bit you quote Augustine who by his own admission could not read Greek, he claimed his Greek tutor beat him as a boy but that Latin was a superior medium for the scriptures. Which is kind of like saying you can't really appreciate Shakespear until you've read it in Russian.

The argument he makes no matter how beautful the prose is the worst argument in the history of christendom for or against any proposition. Adjectives do not work like that in any language. Again

"The TALL man stands next to the TALL building" does not mean that the man and the building are the same height.

Ultimately the point of any linguistic argument for apokatastasis is that the text does not force the idea of eternal punishment. In fact without any ambiguity words existed and were in common usage for both retributive punishment and eternity that were not and are not controversial. So why didn't they ever use them? There would be no ambiguity in Timōria(retibutive punishment) and Aiodios (eternity). But this is never used.

 

[Light of the East]

Universalists I have come across commonly state that the lake of fire is not a place of eternal duration but of temporal duration. It may last an age and then those in it will get out as they have come to faith in Christ because the fire is not a punishment but a correction. John uses “forever and ever” or in the Greek “eis tous aiōnas tōn aiōnōn” to describe not something temporal in duration but of something that is eternal in duration something that’ll never come to an end. To say otherwise could actually be considered heretical. Keep reading to see what I mean:

In the research I did regarding Universal Restoration, it became clear to me that the Latin translators of the Greek text were ignorant of the meaning of the Greek words in the NT. When you add to this a mixture of bad theology, bad tempered rulers ((such as Justinian the Great) and outright tyrants, along with an agenda to keep the riff-raff in line in the Church, it becomes obvious that the original Greek was either tampered with or ignored in translation to achieve a certain agenda.

The revived interest in Universal Restoration comes from the widespread publication of scholars such as Dr. Illaria Ramelli, Dr. David Bentley Hart, Thomas Talbot and others, who are not bound by either threat of damnation from pope-hated church rulers or fulfilling an agenda. Truth trumps agenda for them.

Unfortunately, for people like us, we have been thoroughly brain-washed into believing that what we are being taught today is A.) faithful to the Scriptures (which it ain't) and that which was taught in the very beginning (which it wasn't).

In regard to "aionios ton aionios", I refer you to this link for further study. There is simply too much there, which refutes your idea, to post here.

Why Can't Aionas Ton Aionon Mean Eternity?

A website with tons of info and teachings on Christian universalism; (also known as TURA, Ultimate Reconciliation, etc) as well as Biblical word studies, church reformation, law/grace and many other subjects. Hosted by Tentmaker Ministries/Gary Amirault.

tentmaker.org

Revelation 20:10 is our target passage as it does one of two things. It first establishes that when Jesus uses “aiōnios” in Matthew 25:41 to refer to the eternal fire that is prepared for the devil and his angels that the wicked will be thrown into aiōnion does mean eternal. Secondly, to show that those who go in the lake of fire never get out but will be tormented for eternity.

Revelation 20:10 reads :

“and the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.”

Let me use this verse to show you just how bigoted and prejudiced the Latin translators of the Bible were. In the Greek text, the word translated "tormented" is βασανίζω basanizō. and the following definition is given at Blue Letter Bible online:

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

This means that the verse should read

and the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tested day and night unto the ages of the ages (Rotherham's Emphasized New Testament)

Now you can present all you wish to try to convince us that Universal Salvation is not the mind, the heart, and the very plan of God from the ages of the ages, but those of us who have done our homework know better. You are working off CORRUPTED WESTERN TRANSLATIONS and they are misleading you. Not only do we have proper Greek translation on our side, but we also have the history of Universalism on our side (the main soteriology of the first 500 years of the Church until Augustine attacked it) and the character of God on our side.