 |
| 
archive
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 516
| Posted 6/28/2001 4:36 PM (GMT -6) |   | Message
adamantus
03/16/01 6:38 PM
universal reconciliation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is universal reconciliation a concept that many of you may have never concidered??
In my 15 years as a Christian I never concidered the concept. Actually I never heard of it untill about 18 months ago. I believed that annihilation would be the most mercifull end for the sinner who was not "saved".
There are basically three Biblical veiws for the final destinations of unsaved sinner.
1)eternal hell
2)annihilation
3)reconciliation
I have never really believed in eternal hell. For many years I believed that the "lake of fire" would result in annihilation.
The reason that reconciliation makes more sence to me now is because of some Biblical concepts that I have learned in the last two years.
Here is the first.
Romans 5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come. 15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one (the)many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto (the)many. 16 And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification. 17 For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.) 18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. 19 For as by one man's disobedience (the)many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall (the)many be made righteous. 20 Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound: 21 That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.
This passege in Romans teaches an equal amount that die in the first Adam shall be made alive in Christ(the last Adam)(1cor 15:45).
What Adam destroys, Christ fixes. Christ's act of righteouseness is able to completely fix what Adam's sin destroyed.
Jesus came to destroy the works of the Devil(1 John 3:8). The Devils destruction is NOT stronger then the destroying work of Chirst.
Here is another passege that shows this concept.
1 Cor 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
Again we are looking at an algebraic equality.
As many=as many. It is an equal statement.
All that die in Adam shall be made alive in Christ.
In this same passage we find some more concepts that point to universal reconciliation.
1 Cor 15:23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. 24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. (Death and hell are powers.)
25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.
26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.
27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him.
28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.
In order for God to be all in all, he must deal with the sin of the sinner as well as the church.
1 Cor 15:55 O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?
The above passage is the only place in all of Pauls writting where he uses the word "hell" The "world" grave is the greek word "hades" which is often translated hell.
"Hell" in the end shall have no victory.
Here is another passage that I like that show Puals doctrine of universal reconciliation.
Eph 1:10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:
God's plan in Christ is to reconcile all things. All.
Here is another of my favorite passages in the Bible.
1 Corinthians13:4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.8 Love never fails.
God is love!(1 John 4:8)
If love always perseveres then however long it takes God will persevere with the worst sinner untill he is won by and to the love of God.
Well, there are many more passages that show God's plan of universal reconciliation, but that is probably enough for now. Check the links at the Bottom of the link I post below, for more Biblical universal reconciliation.
http://www.theshop.net/gjess/
adamant
Ps 147:11 The LORD taketh pleasure in them that fear him, in those that hope in his mercy.
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
ModesofThought
03/17/01 11:37 AM
RE: universal reconciliation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
While I would agree that the universality of grace is strongly supported in your argument so far, it does not adequately account for the many difficult passages which speak to final nature of judgment.
Furthermore, your view would seem to undermine the ability of creatures to resist God's gift, another important biblical theme.
Just for fun, couldn't your "annihilationism" view account for the "final reconciliation" without your having to include those who (in your previous view) were thought to be annihilated/judged?
In other words, why give up what seems the more faithful (biblically speaking) of the two? (annihilation vs universalism)
Interesting questions, good to have you on board!
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
adamantus
03/17/01 6:43 PM
universal reconciliation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi ModesofThought,
I like that nick.
You said:
it does not adequately account for the many difficult passages which speak to final nature of judgment.
My reply:
Often when people read of judgement in the Bible they equate it to hell. I will post an artical about the lake of fire, that you may enjoy after I am done dealing with the rest of you post.
You say:
Furthermore, your view would seem to undermine the ability of creatures to resist God's gift, another important biblical theme.
My reply:
Jonah resisted for a while. Paul resisted for a while. I restisted for a while. You resisted for a while. The question might be would one be able to resist for eternity. I don't know of any man who I would concider to be that strong. Love Never fails.
You asked:
Just for fun, couldn't your "annihilationism" view account for the "final reconciliation" without your having to include those who (in your previous view) were thought to be annihilated/judged?
My reply:
Sure it could. The thing that makes me deny it, is that some are lost forever. The Bible said "All" in the passages above. Sould God settle for any less then what he paid for? Here is one of my favorite verses in this light.
1 Tim 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; 6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.
Why should God settle for any less then what he paid for? No matter what shape the captives are recieved, God can clean them up and make them well.......Just look what He has done for you and I!
You said:
good to have you on board!
My reply:
Thank you, This looks like a great place to share Ideas.
Here is that artical I promised about the lake of fire.
Please don't blame the author for the typo's, I scanned it and edited it.
THE SECOND DEATH
An Enquiry into its meaning and operation by A. E. SAXBY.
CHAPTER 1
THE THREE COMPANIES.
Rev. ii,l1; xx, 8; xx, 14; xxi, 8.
We should be able from these four statements in the Book of Revelation to gather all the facts about the second Death which the Lord would have us know. It is only in the Apocalypse that the phrase "the Second Death" appears, and it is only in connection with the closing scenes of the Millennium that we first learn that the lake of fire and brimstone is the Second Death.
The Second Death, however, will be in operation at the Commencement of the thousand years. for the beast and the false prophet will be cast alive into the Lake of Fire at the appearing of Christ (Rev. xix, 20, and xx, 10). It also seems clear that the fire into which the "goats " of Mat. xxv are sent is the same fire, since it is the "fire prepared for the devil and his angels" (Mat.
xxv, 41). This last statement identifies the fire with the Second Death, and shows that it is in force at the beginning of the Millennium in the form of the Lake of Fire.
The question arises whether, previous even to the thousand years, the Second Death may not be in operation in another ferm, and be set forth under another figure. As an example of this possibility no reference is made to the thousand years in that term, before we come across it in the Apocalypse, but the Old Testament is full of prophecies concerning that period. Moreover, the powers of the Millennium, or age to come, are tasted, that is to say experienced in measure, before that age arrives (Heb. vi, 6). Hence it is quite Possible that the Second Death, though no allusion is made to it as such, may be in operation in Some measure in the present age.
While it is clear, therefore, that the term "the Second Death" is never used in Scripture before it is introduced by John in his Patmos visions, it does not follow that reference may not be made to it under another form and figure, or that it may not be operating in certain spheres and to specific ends, previous to the exact form, and for the direct end, of which Revelation speaks, when it refers to it as the Lake of Fire. If it has been thus operating, these passages in Revelation should provide a clue to discover the fact, and we should be able to find in them a principle of operation in common with whatever previous working of the process of the Second Death is found in the Scriptures. We should also be able to trace an identical issue in each case.
1. The First Company (Rev. xx, 6).
One of these four statements in the Book of Revelation shows that there will be a company of overcomers who will have their part in the first resurrection, of which Paul speaks in I Cor. XV 23. "Afterwards they that are Christ's at His coming." Such are to live and reign with Christ during the thousand years. Of these it is said that "on such the Second Death hath no power." (Ch. xx, 6). Scripture does not imply that they never had anything to do with the Second Death, or that they were ignorant of its processes in any shape or form, but the inference seems clear that in the form of the Lake of Fire in which the Second Death appears in the Apocalypse, in that form it will have no power over them. The reason for this is not given in the statement itself, but must be found elsewhere.
Is it because by some means apart from themselves they had been freed from the power of the Second Death, or is it because they had already passed through the process to the goal at which the Second Death aims ? This question ought to have its answer in the Word of God. It is written of them that they are " blessed and holy," that they will be "priests of God and Christ " and will "reign with Him a thousand years." This Scripture tallies with numerous other statements in God's Word, which clearly teach that an intrinsic righteousness-founded, it is true, upon the death of Christ and the righteousness reckoned to the believer through His life and death, but issuing in an imparted righteousness which has become the very warp and woof of the believer's own character-is an absolute necessity to participation in that future reign with Christ in the ages of time to which the New Testament persistently points. Together with this, there are passages which teach clearly that it is possible for believers to stand ashamed in the day of Christ, and to come short of the standard required for reigning with Him. It is for want of the recognition of these two facts, and the failure to harmonize them that much confusion exists on the subject.
A correct and Scriptural view of that which faces the believer at the Judgment Seat of Christ would furnish us with such a right dividing of Scripture, that the obscurity which envelops this subject would disappear.
Included in this company (Rev. xx. 6) are those who had not worshipped the beast or his image, and who had not received his mark upon their foreheads or in their hands during the Tribulation. Such will have conquered the spirit of lawlessness, which in every age has revealed the working of the Antichrist, by a life marked with that meekness which is in the sight of God of great price, and which is one condition upon which the Kingdom of Heaven is possessed (Mat. v, 6). It is the future phase of the Kingdom of Heaven to which these verses refer in Revelation, when they speak of the reign with Christ for the thousand years.
We stop a moment here to point out that this company must be composite, and must include all those who up to that time will have revealed in their lives the various features spoken of in the passage, for no one else is to live till after the thousand years. Privilege is always based upon principle, and we would do well to remember that it is the actual manifestation of the Divine life in the individual that comprises the condition for reigning with Christ, rather than the dispensational place men have in the programme of God, or the correct views of truth that they hold. Upon those, therefore, who possess the holiness "without which no man shall see the Lord," and who have resisted the claim of the Antichrist in the form in which it came to them, the Second Death will have no power. Such will live and reign with Christ as kings during the thousand years. As priests, they will rule with Him in the administration of the Kingdom, as distinct from the many who will be the subjects of that Kingdom.
2. The Second Company (Rev. ii, II).
A second company. also believers, comes into view in Rev. ii, 11, who, because they are not overcomers, will not be altogetber immune from the Second Death. "He that overcometh shall not be hurt of the Second Death." What does it mean to be hurt of the Second Death ? The inference is that if a believer is not an overcomer in this age. he will in some measure be hurt of the Second Death in the day of judgment, though without being subject to its full force. A similarly constructed inference is found in Rev. iii, 6. "He that overcometh . . . I will not blot out his name out of the book of life." It is generally understood that here the inference points to a positive perfonnance of the opposite. For the overcomer not to be blotted out plainly implies that some may be blotted out. So in ch. ii, 11, not being hurt of the Second Death establishes the opposite possibility of being hurt.
The figure of being "hurt," when used with regard to the earth and the men on the earth in subsequent chapters, indicates a partial judgment. In some way, then, believers, who have not withstood successfully the tests apportioned to them but have yielded to the seductions of the tempter, will be open in measure to the operation of the Second Death. "While, then, there are joyful promises, positive and negative, to him who, at the cost of life, maintains the faith, what shall we say to those who are overcome in the struggle ? The overcomer shall not be hurt by the Second Death, in consequence of his victory. Shall not, then, the one so conquered be hurt by it, in consequence of his defeat ?" Robert Govett, .. Apocalypse Expounded." p. 42.) To the same church to whom this warning is uttered, the Lord promises "the crown of life " as a reward for faithfulness unto death. What can the crown of life be but the full reward of living and reigning with Christ during the thousand years?
When these two statements are compared, the one showing that upon some the Second Death will have no power at all, and upon others the Second Death will have a measure of power because of their having failed in the supreme test of faithfulness, it follows that the overcomers must have gone through that process during their life on earth. which those who have not overcome will have to face when the time for their judgment arrives, at least in the measure that they have been conquered by those very things that they might by grace have overcome.
If this exposition is correct, it becomes necessary to ascertain whether the general teaching of the New Testament warrants the expectation that some believers may risk rejection at the Judgment Seat of Christ. The Apostle Paul himself expressed his fear that, after he had preached to others. he might himself be a "castaway " or "unapproved " (1 Co. ix. 27). Not only did he fear this possibility himself, but he was continually pressing it upon believers. His epistles are marked with this warning. (1 Cor. vi. 9. 10; xi, 31, 32; Gal. v, 21; Ephes. v, 6; Phil. iii, 18, 19; Coi. i, 23; iii, 24, 25; Heb. x, 29; xii, 16-17.} Peter sounds the same note (I Pet. iv, 17; 2 Pet. i, 10, 11), and the Lord Jesus Christ uttered the same warning repeatedly to His disciples (Mat. v,22, 20-30; x, 33; xvi, 24-28; xviii, 1-9; John xii, 26). Without any warrant, and contrary to all the rules of exposition which demand that the application of a passage shall be limited to those addressed, these warnings have been transferred almost exclusively to unbelievers. Hence it is little wonder that, on the one hand, loose standards of Christian living prevail largely amongst believers, while on the other hand great confusion and contradiction exist in the exposition of these Scriptures. It cannot be otherwise when truth is thus misapplied.
The Word of God does persistently, therefore, press home the fact that loss and discipline of a real and serious nature faces the disciple of Christ, who in this age fails to make his calling and election to the age-lasting Kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ sure (2 Pet. i, 10, 11). Added to this, it may be noted that the same figure of fire, that is used in the definition of the Second Death, is employed in the threatened penalties that must face the disciple who does not make his calling and election sure (1 Cor. iii, 13-15; Mark ix, 45). To deal with these passages quoted would take up too much space here, but careful readers of them will discover that the claim we make as to their application to believers, and not to unbelievers, is in every case substantiated by the context.
The two facts before us, that there will be a company who will completely escape any operatiun of the Second Death at the appearing of Jesus Christ to set up His Kingdom, and that there will also be a company who will find themselves exposed in some measure to its processes, even though they have truly been born again, put us into possession of a premise which is indisputable.
If some believers at His coming are immune from its operation, but others at that time are to be " hurt" by it and lose the crown of life in consequence, it follows that those who escape altogether its processes in the form of the Lake of Fire, must have experienced it in some way at some previous time. This comes out clearly in the rest of the New Testament. Ellicott's Commentary observes that the phrase concerning the Second Death in Rev. ii, 11, "clearly points to a death which is other than that of the body, it stands in contrast with the crown of life." While the believer is yet in the flesh, and during his experience in this present life, he is regarded by Scripture as being in some real sense "dead," as the provision of grace is realised and he becomes truly sanctified. The believer is baptzed into the death of Christ and is thus planted together in the likeness of His death, and, when identification with Christ in His crucifixion is a reality, the body of sin is "done away " (Rom. vi, 1-6, R.V.). He is then referred to as "dead." "He that is dead is freed from sin", and this death consists in a complete deliverance from sin (Rom. vi,. 11). Still in the body, and yet compassed by infirmity, he has truly died to sin, and the life of holiness is the outcome.
This the remainder of the sixth chapter of Romans clearly sets forth. So real is this identification with Christ that to all the temptations and allurements of "things on the earth" , he is " dead," and his life is " hid with Christ in God " (Col. iii, 1-3).
The writer to the Hebrews reminds us that, "without holiness no man shall see the Lord" (Heb. xii, 14). Therefore, those who have part in the first resurrection are " blessed and holy " (Rev. xx, 6).
3. The Third Company (Rev. xx, 15).
There is a third company who will stand before the Great White Throne at the close ot the Millennium, whose names are not found then in the Book of life. These are cast into the lake of fire (Rev. xx, 16). This judgment, like every other of which the New Testament speaks, including even the believers judgement, is conducted with reference to works. Those who will then be Cast into the Lake of Fire have up to that time evidently experienced nothing whatever of the work of the Cross of Christ upon their lives, and therefore they will be subjected to the full processes of the Second Death. lt must be remembered that, like all mankind, they are dead in trespasses and sins. They will have suffered also the penalty of sin in the death of their bodies. Thus they will have already died spiritually, and also physically.
If we enquire what the Second Death is, and how it operates, we are not met with very satisfactory answers. The Annihilationist tells us that it is utter extinction. "Orthodox" theology holds the Second Death to be a state of endless torment in which the sufferers are held forever in conscious being by a continuous act of Divine preservation, with the sole object ot a punishment without end, amelioration, or ultimate benefit to God, the universe, or themselves. This, however, would in no sense be death, which in the Scripture is always alienation, or separation, from some conscious sphere of experience. " The truth is, death for man is simply an end to, and separation from, some given form of life in which he has lived. Death to God is separation from His world of light, by the destruction, through the lie of the serpent, of the Divine life of light and love in us. Death to sin, the exact converse of this, is the separation from the world of darkness, by the destruction, through the truth, of the dark life of unbelief and self-love. The death wrought by the law is the end of, and separation from, our fallen carnal life of self-sufIiciency; while what is commonly called death, namely the death of the body, is simply our separation from the outward world, in which we live, as partakers of its outward life, while we are in the body. Once let us see that there are three worlds, each having its own life,-a light world, a dark world, and this outward seen world,-and then what is said in Scripture of the new birth, or of the varied deaths we pass through, becomes at once selfevident. For the only way into any world is by a birth into it, even as the only way out of any world is by a death to it. We have by sin died to God's light-world, to fall into and live in a spirit-world of darkness. We must by the truth, that is by Christ, die to this dark spirit-world to return to live in God's light-world. The outward birth and death of the body, and its life, have only to do with the outward seen world." ('' Restitution of All Things," Andrew Jukes.) The sInner who is "dead in trespasses and sins" , is alienated from the life of God. No consciousness of God stirs in his experience though he lives, and moves, and has his being in God (Acts xvii, 2 . Every son of Adam who dies physically is cut off from all conscious contact with the environment in which he has lived and moved in his mortal body. The death of the believer to sin is his separation from the power of the activities of sin within and around him.
The endless preservation of the sinner in a hell where his sense of God is a ceaseless torment to his spirit would be an unspeakably awful condition. Add to this the excruciating pain of the literal fires which ordinary theology declares will be designed to produce an ever-increasing agony to the body of the sinner, which will have been recreated in its sinful and mortal condition for the sole purpose of enduring God's wrath for ever , and you have the opposite of that separation, which is always the Scriptural meaning of death. You have, instead, an endless existence, perpetuated in the most miserable condition.
The lost would not, in such a case, be deprived of a sense of God, which is the Scriptural meaning of spiritual death, for it would be the awakened sense of God that would constitute their torment. Nor would they sustain in any way that separation from physical sensation into which the death of their bodies brings them. They would be introduced instead into the keenest of physical agonies, since their reconstituted bodies would be exposed in every organ and limb to the most excruciating pains of which the physical frame is capable. This is not death in any sense in which Scripture uses that term. It is rather an existence full of unspeakable horrors in spirit, soul and body.
We have discovered that the Second Death in the experience of the first two companies also means a condition of separation.
The first Company is separated from the entire consequences of sin at the coming of Christ. The second company is separated from the consequences of sin by undergoing some measure of the Second Death subsequent to His coming. How, then, can the Second Death have the opposite effect on the third company to that which it has had upon the other companies ? In the first two companies it separates from sin. If the orthodox view is correct, the Second Death would separate those who endure it to sin and fix them hopelessly in sin.
This view of the Second Death which we are now advancing is consistent, therefore, both with the general Scriptural meaning of death, and also with the uniform idea of what is effected by the Second Death in each of the three companies mentioned in Revelation.
"The second death, therefore, so far from being, as some think, the hopeless shutting up of man for ever in the curse of disobedience. will if I err not, be God's way to free those who in no other way than by such a death can be delivered out of the dark world, whose life they live in. The saints have died with Christ. not only to the elements of this world' (CoI. ii, 20), but also to sin (Rom. vi, 10), that is, the dark spirit-world. By the first they are freed from the bondage of sense ; by the second,
from the bondage of sin, in all its forms of wrath, pride, envy, and selfishness. The ungodly have not so died to sin. At the death of the body, therefore, and still more when they are raised to judgment. because their spirit yet lives, they are still within the limits of that dark and fiery world, the life of which has been and is the life of their spirit. To get out of this world there is but one way, death; not the first, for that is passed. but the second death." " Restitution of All Things " (Andrew Jukes.)
The point becomes clearer when we also see that it is the fire of God that accomplishes this work of judgment upon sin. Fire is the symbol of judgment all through the Word of God. The baptism with the Holy Spirit and fire is just the purging of His floor, and burning of the chaff with the fire, that He declared should characterize His coming to His people (Mal. iii. 2, 3).
will be clearer. and it will throw more light upon the whole subject, if we stop for a little to study in the next chapter the figure of fire in the Scriptures.
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
ModesofThought
03/18/01 5:40 PM
Good questions: Meph, LL, help requested...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Very interesting points. Here is a brief reply:
you say:
Jonah resisted for a while. Paul resisted for a while. I restisted for a while. You resisted for a while. The question might be would one be able to resist for eternity. I don't know of any man who I would concider to be that strong. Love Never fails.
I say, one need not resist for eternity. Only a lifetime. We are not eternal by nature but are granted everlasting life as a gift. But that gift is resistable.
While I certainly recognize that in the end there will be a final consumation of all things (And God will be all in all, in some sense), there is simply too much warning from Jesus himself about hell to dismiss it, what was the warning about, in your view?
Of course, those verses which you cite regarding the gift being for all, I certainly agree with, but the question remains, can we resist God's grace? If not, why does the Bible warn us so emphatically about the dangers of risking God's faith? What is really at stake?
Actually, I'd really be interested to see if one of our compatbilist friends might have something to say on this point? Adamantus has correctly shown us that God's gift is for all, Meph, LL, how would you handle this issue? I am recommending "the power to do otherwise" here as a way of remaining faithful to what I see as the biblical warnings against resisting God's will.
Adamantus, are you not simply working out the logic of one motif (the universal breadth of Christ's work) to the exclusion of the motifs? Like the passages in revelation which speak of eternal torment of Satan and other very hard passages? Help me see how I am wrong in saying this. For instance, how would you interpret Rev. 20:10 which says Satan will be tormented "for ever and ever." That sounds pretty final to me. Perhaps I am misreading it though, I haven't yet read the lake of fire article.
Hoping for feedback from our new friend adamantus as well as others...
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
ModesofThought
03/18/01 6:30 PM
RE: universal reconciliation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adamantus,
Okay, now I have read the article you posted...and with all due respect i find its approach suspicious on several accounts even before I address its actual claims:
1. Too many absolute statements about what is quite ambiguous material. Some examples follow: "gather all the facts" with regard to second death, "imparted righteousness...beleivers character...absolutely necessary" with regard to our salvation, orthodox view's "failure to harmonize" which this person seeks to do, "obscurity would disappear" regarding this issue, "privilege is always based upon principle" and admits to trying to ascertain "dispensational" places, "the application of a passage shall be limited to those addressed", "put us into possession of a premise which is indisputable"!!
Each of these phrases raises serious flags for me and cause me to question the epistimological honesty of the author. I could not have a serious conversation with someone who really thought things were so simple to handle as this person seems to think. Another point is that this person employs the dispensationalist strategy to expedite "harmony" this is also unwarranted.
Lastly is the very weak argument which completely hangs upon his strange interpretaion of "hurt" in Rev. 2:11. Not even directly employed but rather a reverse and implausible implication dragged out of this text.
Sorry but this artice holds little stature for me. I is wanting at several preliminary levels even before addressing the argument directly.
Hope to hear back from you though!
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
writerdad
03/18/01 7:48 PM
RE: RE: universal reconciliation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It seems to me that this is an example of what Modes points out in the "Ware" post. That of elevating one motif over another. One does not disregard a belief the church has held throughout its history without good reason. I will not add to Modes post because it seems to me that it needs nothing, except for this: there will be a judgment at the end of ages. At that time God will judge us based on what we did with the grace he offered. He does not put us in hell and we get to decide from there whether or not we will accept him. As Moreland points out in Strobel's book "A Case For Faith," only an idiot wouldn't want heaven then. Therefore it wouldn't be a true decision but a decision based on pain and fear. Moreland and Habermas's book on Death has a great chapter in it, Hell: The Terrible Choice. As Moreland says in A Case For Faith, when deciding on the validity of hell we should look at the whole case, who God is, what he is revealed to be, etc. and then decide on whether it is true. I find it interesting that many Christians are trying to deny such a plain truth when many atheists throughout history understand that the Bible plainly taught it.
The Bible warns of a coming judgment. If we were all going to be reconciled to God, such warnings would be without merit and deceitful.
We must always seek to be balanced in our theology, not backing away from teachings the scriptures proclaim that we might not like. John 17:3 Harold
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
writerdad
03/18/01 7:51 PM
RE: universal reconciliation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I also find it interesting that adamantus admits from the beginning "I have never really believed in eternal hell." Sounds like he started not wanting to believe in it, looked for and found justification for what he wanted to believe in...
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
adamantus
03/18/01 8:07 PM
forever and ever.....is a contradiction.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi ModesofThought
I like that nick!
You asked:
Adamantus, are you not simply working out the logic of one motif (the universal breadth of Christ's work) to the exclusion of the motifs? Like the passages in revelation which speak of eternal torment of Satan and other very hard passages?
My reply:
No. I was sure that we would get there. I was waiting for you to bring it up.
You said:
Help me see how I am wrong in saying this. For instance, how would you interpret Rev. 20:10 which says Satan will be tormented "for ever and ever." That sounds pretty final to me. Perhaps I am misreading it though, I haven't yet read the lake of fire article. Hoping for feedback from our new friend adamantus as well as others...
My reply:
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. (YLT)
I do have an answer for you. It is rather lengthy. I cut and paisted from a link on this page.
http://www.theshop.net/gjess/
This page will help you better understand my position.
If the Greek words eis tous aionas ton aionon mean endless time, as translated in the KJV, 'forever and ever,' we have a contradiction in Scripture."
-Dr. William Barclay
"This view (Restitution of All) is so clearly Scriptural that the only surprise is that it has not been more definitely and widely held."
-Dr. A.T. Pierson
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no doubt that God has always existed, but the statement at Romans 16:26 speaks of Him as an eonian God. The Scriptures say He made the eons, so He existed before they were made, and He will exist after the eons have been concluded (1 Cor. 10:11; Heb. 9:26). He is endless. To argue that "eonian God" makes the "eonian" unlimited time because God is unlimited is illogical. Isaiah 54:5, KJV, calls Him "the God of the whole earth." This does not preclude Him from also being the God of the entire universe. In the context of Romans 16:26, He is called the "eonian God," but He was God before the eons were made; He is God during all the eons, and in post-eonian times. In other words, just because the Scriptures refer to Him as the "God of the ages" does not preclude Him from being the God of eternity. The Scriptures declare Him the "God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob," and "the God of Israel." Does that mean He cannot therefore be the God of the gentiles, of the whole universe? Of course not!
As for the KJV translation, "forever and ever," there are some students of the Greek who admit that this is not a faithful translation of the Greek words found in the text. The Greek uses three distinct phrases, all of which are translated the same in the KJV.
Hebrews 1:8: ho thronos sou ho theos eis ton aiona tou aionos, "Thy throne, O God, is for the eon of the eon." In both occurrences in this verse, the Greek word we translated "eon" appears in the singular.
Ephesians 3:21: auto he doxa en te ekklesia kai en Christo Iesou eis pasas tas geneas tou aionos ton aionon, "To Him be the glory in the ecclesia and in Christ Jesus for all the generations of the eon of the eons. Amen." Here the Greek word for eon is used twice. The first time it is in the singular; the second time it is in the plural.
Galatians 1:5: ho he doxa eis tous aionas ton aionon, "To Whom be glory for the eons of the eons." Here the Greek word for eon appears twice in the plural.
Philippians 1:10 says (ASV margin), "so that ye may distinguish the things that differ." Since the words of God are inspired and are used precisely, to ignore the differences in these passages is to ignore what He is saying.
Hebrews 1:8 is a quotation from Psalm 45:6, LXX, where the Greek text says, eis ton aiona tou aionos, "into the eon of the eon," - the singular form for eon in both occurrences. The preposition eis is translated "into" or "unto;" idiomatically, "for." Bagster's Analytical Greek Lexicon and Concordance defines it: "eis, into, to as far as, to the extent of."
Dr. E.W. Bullinger's Lexicon and Concordance says (p. 804), "eis, unto, when referring to time, denoting either the interval up to a certain point, during; or the point itself as the object or aim of some purpose, up to, for."
Dr. Nigel Turner, in his book, Grammatical Insights into the N.T., says (p. 91), "eis involves a movement for development toward a goal." If eis means as far as, to the extent of, or a movement or development toward a goal, then it cannot be used with words meaning endless or unlimited time.
Ephesians 3:21: eis pasas tas geneas tou aionos ton aionon, "for all the generations of the eon of the eons." KJV: "throughout all the ages, world without end." ASV margin: "unto all the generations of the age of the ages." Young's Literal Translation: "into the age of the ages." The "eon of the eons" refers to a crowning eon of another which precedes it.
So what is meant by this expression? Many KJV tradition scholars say that these three different Greek phrases are idiomatic expressions for "eternity." Idiotic, perhaps, but not idiomatic! Similar expressions used in the Scriptures are cited in order to illustrate the meaning: Song of Solomon 1:1, "song of songs;" Eccl. 12:8, "vanity of vanities;" Gen. 9:25, "servant of servants;" Ex. 26:33, "holy of the holies;" Deut. 10:17, "God of gods and Lord of lords;" Dan. 8:25, "prince of princes;" Phil. 3:5, "Hebrew of Hebrews;" 1 Tim. 6:15, "King of kings and Lord of lords." Most students of the Scriptures understand what is meant by such expressions, so why is Eph. 3:21, "eon of the eons" an enigma? The eon of the eons refers to the final and greatest of all eons. That it cannot refer to "eternity" is shown by the statement that there will be "generations," which implies procreation, which will not happen in eternity since we will then be like the angels. This eon succeeds the millennial eon, and is previous to the final state.
There are others who teach the same. Dr. A.T. Pierson supports this view in his book, The Bible and Spiritual Life: "This view is so clearly scriptural that the only surprise is that it has not been more definitely and widely held. It adds immeasurably, both to the glory of Christ as the coming King, and the Father as the former and framer of the ages. It is the period typified by the eighth day of the Mosaic Code: the perfect glory of Christ, reserved for 'the morrow after.' The millennial 'Sabbath.' And while the millennial period is limited to a thousand years, there are no definite limits to this final age of glory."
Mr. George Saltau, in his book, Past, Present and Future, adopts the same view.
Clarence Larkin, Dispensational Truth, or God's Plan and Purpose in the Ages, shows (p. 3, chart "The Ages") an age succeeding the kingdom age, which he calls the "perfect age." This "perfect age" is also shown in other charts in Mr. Larkin's book.
The expression, "eon of the eons," is not limited to its use at Eph. 3:21. In the LXX at Dan. 7:18 we see, heos aionos ton aionon, "until eon of the eons." In the Song of the Three Children (LXX, Septuagint), at the end of verse 68, there is, kai eis ton aiona ton aionon, "and into the eon of the eons." In the book of Enoch there is a similar expression: "until the judgment of the eon of the eons be accomplished."
Windet, in De Vita Functor Statu, states, "However you understand the phrase, it could not be used unless it signified something less than endlessness; for 'completion' does not accord with true endlessness." Therefore, the expression "eon of the eons" and "eon of the eon" mean the last and crowning eon in which Christ will hand everything to His Father, entirely subjected (1 Cor. 15:22-28). We know that the millennial eon will not be one of such complete subjection, for Christ will rule with a rod of iron, and at its close, after the most wonderful and beneficial rule by His sceptre, at the instigation of Satan, loosed from the pit, large numbers of those who have been blessed under Christ's gracious reign will revolt against Him (Rev. 20:7-9). While there may be many different interpretations about this "thousand year period," clearly we have time, and things not yet subjected. This revolt shows that the subjection spoken of at 1 Cor. 15:22-28; Eph. 1:9-11; Phil. 2:10-11; and Col. 1:10-20 has not been completed. It will take yet another eon, following the millennial one, with Christ reigning to end all insubordination in all His realms, before He will finally surrender to His Father all completed, so that the Father can be "all in all." The final eon is that of new heavens and the new earth wherein reigns righteousness (2 Pet. 3:13). That is the one called the "eon of the eon" (Heb. 1:8). It is also called the "eon of the eons" at Eph 3:21, because it is paramount to all preceding eons, including the millennial eon in which Christ Jesus reigns as Messiah and King. Paul writes (Eph. 2:6,7) of the blessings of the coming eons. He says: "And He rouses us together and seats us together among the celestials in Christ Jesus, that in the oncoming eons, He may be displaying the transcendent riches of His grace in His kindness to us in Christ Jesus" (see also Eph. 3:20-21).
Thus, in the coming eons, the millennial and the succeeding eon, Christ Jesus will be displaying His transcending riches to us. We must be careful when talking about what God will do in future generations and ages. For too often we project our own ideas onto the plan of God. I hope I have not crossed that line. Yet when it comes to the correct rendering of these words, I feel certain what you are reading sheds much light which many Bible translations have hidden from us.
Let us get back to "forever and ever." The Greek phrase eis tous aionas ton aionon, "for the eons of the eons," occurs about twenty times in the Greek New Testament in this combination. The ASV margin and some other versions, lexicons, dictionaries, and commentaries translate the phrase correctly.
Windet, in De Vita Functora Statu, of 1633 says (p. 170), "eis tous aionas ton aionon, of the New Testament meant a finite period."
At 1 Cor. 15:25, where the Greek text shows, dei gar auton basileuein achri hou thê pantas tous echthrous hupo tous podas autou, "For He must be reigning until He should be placing all His enemies under His feet." This clearly states that Christ's reigning is limited. There is no Scripture to contradict the statement when aion and aionios are correctly translated.
Dr. William Barclay concurs in his commentary (p. 166-169) on The Letters to the Corinthians. If the Greek words eis tous aionas ton aionon mean endless time, as translated in the KJV, "forever and ever," we have a contradiction in Scripture, for Rev. 11:15 says, in the same version: "The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord and His Christ, and He shall reign forever and ever." That contradicts 1 Cor. 15:25, which says: "He must be reigning till..." If Rev. 11:15 is translated "eons of the eons," or "ages of the ages," there is no contradiction. The ASV says (1 Cor. 15:24-25), "Then cometh the end, when He shall deliver up the kingdom to God., even the Father; When He shall have abolished all rule and all authority and power. For He must reign till He hath put all His enemies under His feet;" consequently, the reigning of Christ Jesus and the saints (Rev. 22:5) will be "for the eons of the eons" or "for the ages of the ages" (see the ASV margin here).
Eis tous aionas is accusative plural, "for the eons," or "for the ages," and these words are not "forever and ever," which are in the singular. The word ton is the genitive plural article, and in our syntax should be translated "of the." In this Greek clause, there is no word that means "and," as the Greek conjunction kai; "and," is not in this clause. The word aionon is the genitive plural of the noun aion, and the genitive plural in this syntax should be translated "eons," or "ages;" hence ton aionon, "of the eons." Anyone can study these words and see that "forever and ever" is not a good translation of these Greek words. As eis is used in this clause and as eis involves a movement or development toward a goal, this clause cannot mean endlessness.
As mentioned previously, there are several analogous expressions in the Scriptures which should show the meaning of the words under discussion. In Ex. 26:33 (LXX), tou hagiou ton hagion, "in the holy of the holies." This is similar to the "eon of the eons" of Eph. 3:21. In II Kings 8:6 (LXX) we see, eis ta hagia ton hagion, "for the holies of the holies"- similar to "eons of the eons." The "holy of the holies" and "holies of the holies" refer to the tabernacle. Psalm 44:7 says, ho thronos sou ho theos, eis ton aiona tou aionos, "Thy throne, O God, is for the eon of eon"- similar to Heb. 1:8. Daniel 7:18: "until eon of the eons" and similar to that of Eph. 3:21, where a singular is followed by a plural, "eon of the eons." In these expressions we see the eons corresponding to the holies in the tabernacle. While there are many different teachings on the types in the Tabernacle of Moses, it should not be too difficult to see that there were at least five divisions: (1) without the camp; (2) in the camp; (3) in the court; (4) in the holy place; and (5) in the holy of holies. These may be likened to the five eons we find in the Scriptures (past eons, present eon, future eons). The last eon is called the "eon of the eons," because it, like the "holy of holies," is the climax of the others. In Hebrews chapter 9, the Greek text of Nestle reads (margin v. 25), eis ta hagia ton hagion, "into the holies of the holies," and (v. 3), hagia hagion, "holies of holies." Just as the two holy places in the tabernacle are called the holies of holies, so the last two eons are often called the eons of the eons. As the tabernacle illustrated man's approach to God, it corresponds closely with the eonian times, which also brings man to God. The "holy of holies" was a single holy place. The "eon of eons," a single eon. It was the pre-eminence of the "holy of holies," in relation to the other holy places, which caused it to be so designated. So the pre-eminence of the "eon of the eons" lies in its being the fruitage and harvest of previous eons. The same is true of the "holies of the holies" of Heb. 9:25. They may be likened to the "eons of the eons" of Rev. 11:15; 22:5. Luke 1:33 says of Christ's "kingdom there shall be no end." While the kingdom itself will not end, but the reign of Christ for the eons of the eons will end when He delivers up the kingdom to the Father (1 Cor. 15:24-26).
Mr. W. Kelly, in his book, Lectures on the Book of Revelation, commenting upon the saints' reign, states (p. 435-436), "Supposing that God's Word speaks of the earthly state of things and uses the expression 'reigning forever and ever,' as in Daniel 7 and Luke 1, it cannot be understood absolutely. The words must be limited by the subject-matter of which God is speaking, so in Daniel 7:27 the kingdom under the whole heaven, which is given to the people of the saints of high places, is said to be an everlasting kingdom. This, I apprehend, is the same period that is called here the thousand years."
The sentence in Rev. 22:5 saying: "They will be reigning for the eons of the eons" shows that the expression has no reference either to the present or to the preceding eons. The Greek verb basileusousin, "they will be reigning" is a third-person plural future active indicative form; so this reigning must be future. In this present eon, as in those preceding ones, the slaves, or servants, of God are not reigning. Similarly, that God and Christ are living for "the eons of the eons" (Rev. 1:18; 4:9; 10:6; 15:7) has reference to the eons of the future, not to the present eon. That is not to say that God and Christ Jesus are not living during the previous eons. God was the living pre-eonian God. He is the living eonian God, and He will be the living post-eonian God. Paul, when writing to Timothy, said (1 Tim. 4:10), "For this we are toiling and being reproached, for we rely on the living God, Who is the Saviour of all mankind, especially of believers."
Two scriptures state positively that the eons will end: 1 Cor. 10:11, tauta de tupikos sunebainen ekeinois egraphê de pros nouthesian hêmon eis hous ta telê ton aionon katêntêken, "Now those things befalls them typically, yet it was written for our admonition, to whom the consummations of the eons have attained." Paul had said what those things are, which befalls them typically, in the preceding verses. Yet "it was written" is in the singular, for "our" (plural) admoniton- the "our" referring to the saints, who are the present believers. "To whom," referring to the saints, "the consummations of the eons have attained." The Corinthian saints had attained the consummations of eons in spirit because they were a new creation (2 Cor. 5:17). Some day all will be a new creation (Rev. 21:5). Now, only the saints who are in Christ are of the new creation, but it is God's goal for the eons to head up all in the Christ, as stated at Eph. 1:9-11. Salvation for all is God's plan for the eons. Those saints believing now have attained that purpose, so have attained the consummation of the eons.
While some doubt such an exegesis of 1 Cor. 10:11, others, such as the writer of the New Dictionary of the N. T. Theology, concur (vol. 1, p. 324): "Paul also speaks of a movement from God to man. 1 Corinthians 10:11 speaks of us 'upon whom the end of the ages has come.' Hebrews 9:26 contains a similar expression, 'at the end of the ages' (time, art. aion). Christ appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. The movement directed by God towards its end; with us it has now attained its goal. The thought also contains the certainty that with Christ, Who inaugurates the end of the ages, a new world era and order of things has begun. Admittedly, this is apparent only to the believer."
Consequently, with the saints it is possible in spirit to taste the powers of the ages to come (Heb. 6:5). At Hebrews 9:26 the Greek says, epei edei auton pollakis pathein apo kataboles kosmou nuni de hapax epi sunteleia ton aionon eis athetêsin tês hamartias dia testhusias autou pephanerotai, "Since then, He must often be suffering from the disruption of the world, yet now, once, at the conclusion of the eons, for the repudiation of sin through His sacrifice, He has been manifested." In the clause, "He has been manifested," the verb is a third-person singular perfect passive indicative. The Greek perfect tense denotes the present state, resultant upon a past action. There is no English tense which corresponds to that of the Greek perfect, so this form is a difficult one to convey into English. It may be translated: "through His sacrifice, He is manifested." But it is clear His sacrifice was not at the "end of the world," as the KJV says, since the world continues. But it is equally clear that His sacrifice was not at the "conclusion of the eons," since Paul wrote of "this present wicked eon" and the "on-coming eons" (Gal. 1:4; Eph. 2:7). Sin still remains, and there is a world of sinners; but when the eons come to a conclusion, sin will be repudiated by virtue of His sacrifice.
In Romans 4:17 Paul says, "According as it is written that, a father of many nations I have appointed you, facing which, he believed it of the God Who is vivifying the dead and calling what is not as if it were." Here Paul is writing of Abraham, that Abraham believes God. The God Abraham believes is the God "who is vivifying the dead and calling what is not as if it were." God did not say, "I will appoint you a father of many nations," but "I have appointed you," using a Greek perfect verb, which indicates a completed action with a resultant state of being. As God stated it, it is already an accomplished fact, yet at the time, Abraham did not even have a son, and he was nearly one hundred years old. So God was there calling what was not as though it were. God speaks so of us, when He says: "Now whom He designates beforehand, these He calls also, and whom He calls, these He justifies also, now whom He justifies, these He glorifies also" (Rom. 8:29-30; see Eph. 1:3-8). Are we glorified now? Certainly not! But God is following the same pattern of dealing with us as with Abraham, in that He is calling what is not as if it were. God says that He "seats us together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus" (Eph. 2:6), yet we are still in this world, and a part of an ecclesia on the earth. He can make such a statement because He can, and will, do what He says.
Because we are a new creation in Christ Jesus (2 Cor. 5:17), we have attained to the consummations of the eons (1 Cor. 10:11). At the conclusion of the eons, sin will be repudiated. At present God is "calling what is not as if it were." Only God is able to do that.
The Scriptures teach that during the eons mankind is experiencing evil, sin, sickness, death, judgments, generation, opposition from sovereignties, authorities and powers, all of which will be nullified or abolished, as stated in 1 Cor. 15:22-28.
Luke 1:50 says, kai to eleos autou eis geneas kai geneas tois phoboumenois auton, "and His mercy is for generations and generations, for those who are fearing Him." In the phrase, "for generations and generations," there is an example of two plural nouns being used with the conjunction kai, "and;" but in the expression aionas ton aionon, there is no conjunction. The word ton, "of the," is the genitive plural article, and should not be translated "and," as is done in the KJV's "forever and ever." The LXX, at Psa. 90:1, states, en genea kai genea, "in generation and generation." Another example of the use of the conjunction kai, "and," between the two words for "generation" in the singular. At Heb. 1:8 the noun aion, "eon," is used twice in the singular form, but with no "and" between. At Ex. 15:18, kurios basileuon ton aiona kai ep aiona kai eti, "the Lord is reigning the eon and upon eon and longer." Eon, as used here, cannot refer to time without end, for there could be nothing beyond, or longer than, endless time. Here the Latin Vulgate says, Dominus regnabit in aeturnum et ultra, "The Lord will reign unto [or into] eternity and beyond." The Latin word in, when used with an accusative aeturnum, has the meaning of placing His reign in eternity, but the ultra, "beyond," shows it did not stop when it was placed there, but continued beyond the time of the placing. The English words, "forever and ever," unfortunately, do not convey the same meaning.
The Hebrew text shows, "to the eon and further." Similar expressions appear frequently in the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin texts (see Daniel 12:3, for example).
Wycliffe's version, the first translation into English, did not use the words "forever and ever." Several versions in modern English do not use those words either: The Emphasized Bible, by J.B. Rotherham; The N. T., A Translation, by E.L. Clementson; The Emphatic Diaglott, by Benjamin Wilson; Young's Literal Translation, by Professor Robert Young; and The Concordant Literal New Testament, by A.E. Knoch as well as others.
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
adamantus
03/19/01 4:05 AM
The first century
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello to writterdad,
You wrote:
there will be a judgment at the end of ages. At that time God will judge us based on what we did with the grace he offered. He does not put us in hell and we get to decide from there whether or not we will accept him. As Moreland points out in Strobel's book "A Case For Faith," only an idiot wouldn't want heaven then. Therefore it wouldn't be a true decision but a decision based on pain and fear. Moreland and Habermas's book on Death has a great chapter in it, Hell: The Terrible Choice.
My reply:
I don't think that heaven is as much a future issue as it is a present issue. Many Christians think that getting "saved" pertains to a future life. I think that salvation is for the living. Faith is to be lived, not for reward, but because it is the way to live. Paul said it like this.
Rom 8:6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Paul was not talking about a future judgement. Paul was talking about life NOW.
Jesus says much the same when he says:
Matt 6:33 But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.
34 Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.
Jesus was saying to seek the kingdom while you live, not for a future reward, but for true life NOW. He said NOT to fear the future, because it will take care of itself.
You said:
I find it interesting that many Christians are trying to deny such a plain truth when many atheists throughout history understand that the Bible plainly taught it. The Bible warns of a coming judgment.
My Reply:
History is an interesting thing. It is written by the winners. The theology of universal reconciliation was vastly heald in the first-fith centuries.
An interesting book that you can read on line is: "UNIVERSALISM:The Prevailing Doctrine Of The Christian Church During Its First Five Hundred Years", by J.W. HANSON, D. D. 1899
http://www.theshop.net/gjess/updcontents.htm
Here is a quote from the book:
"The seat and center of Christianity during the first three centuries was Alexandria. West of Alexandria the influence of the Latins, Tertullian, Cyprian, Minucius Felix and Augustine prevailed, and their type of Christianity was warped and developed by the influence of Roman law. Maine says that in going from East to West theological speculation passed from Greek metaphysics to Roman law. The genius of Augustine, thus controlled, gave rise to Calvinism. The gloomy and precise Tertullian, the forceful and somber Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, and Augustine, the gloomiest and most materialistic of theologians, who may almost be said to have invented the hell of the Middle Ages, contributed the forces that later adulterated the genuine Christian faith. Even yet the Greek population of the Eastern church, who read the Greek Gospels as we read the English, are like the Greek fathers of the first ages of the church; they know nothing of the doctrine invented by the Latin theologians." (Stanley's Eastern Church, p.49.) In such a city as Alexandria--with its museum, its libraries, its lectures, its schools of philosophy, its splendid synagogue, its avowed atheists, its deep-thinking Oriental mystics--the Gospel would have been powerless if it had been unable to produce teachers who were capable of meeting Pagan philosophers and Jewish Philoists on their own ground. Such thinkers would refuse their attention to men who could not understand their reasonings, sympathize with their perplexities, refute their fundamental arguments, and meet them in the spirit of Christian courtesy.4 Different instruments are needed for different ends. Where Clement of Rome might have been useless, Clement of Alexandria became deeply influential. Where a Tertullian would only have aroused contempt and indignation, an Origen won leading Pagans to the faith of Christ. From Alexandria came the refutation of Celsus; from Alexandria the defeat of Arius. It was the cradle of Christian theology.5 "There can be no doubt that the wonderful advance of Christianity among the cultivated, during the First and Second Centuries, was made by the remarkable men who founded and maintained the Alexandrian school of Christian thought. While the common people heard gladly the simple story of the Gospel, the world's scholars were attracted and won by the complete, achieved learning and genius of Clement and Origen, and their assistants." "Pagan thinkers would have paid attention to Clement when he spoke of Plato as truly noble and half-inspired; they would have looked on the African father as an ignorant railer, who had nothing better to say of Socrates than that he was 'the Attic buffoon,' of Aristotle than 'miserum Aristotelem!' Such arguments as Tertullian's: It is credible because it is absurd, it is certain because it is impossible, would have been regarded as worse than useless in reasoning with philosophers." The Alexandrine Universalists met philosophers and scholars on their own ground and conquered them with their own weapons. Under God, the agency that gave Christianity its standing and wonderful progress during the first three centuries, was the Catechetical school of Alexandria, and the saintly scholars and Christian philosophers who immortalized the famous city that was the scene of their labors. They met and surpassed the apostles of culture, and proved at the very beginning that Christianity is no less the religion of the wise and learned than of the unlettered and simple. The Universalist Church has never sufficiently recalled and celebrated the great labors and marvelous successes of the founders in the primitive years of Christianity.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~End quote~~~~ Will post more later, Got to run to work!
adamant
Ps 147:11 The LORD taketh pleasure in them that fear him, in those that hope in his mercy.
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
writerdad
03/19/01 11:11 AM
RE: The first century
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would again add that the history of the christian church and the scriptures support a judgment. I would also caution you not to take verses that were not meant to deal with a certain issue and use them for that issue. I am sure you know what I am talking about. Again, while not meaning to be critical, it sounds to me as if you started out not wanting to believe in a future judgment and hell and have simply made the case for that. But it is important to understand each scripture in its context and to seek the truth of the scripture as it is, not as one would want it to be. Having read much on the website you noted, I found the fact that the author seems "obsessed" with there not being a hell and the need to "disprove" it disconcerting. Hell is scriptural. It was taught by the Christian church because it is scriptural, not because the "winners" won out. Finally, we are saved now, but we have not been fully redeemed from the effects of sin as of yet. This is not heaven. We are saved now, but we are not fully redeemed as of yet. (I am looking next for your teaching on the fact that we can be perfect in this life...I can see it coming...) I do not think most Christians believe they are saved in a future life. I think most Christian simply realize that they are saved in this life, yet must endure and persevere until redeemed from the effects of sin in the life to come. Again, I exhort you to read the scriptures quoted within the context that they were intended, not to support a view for which they were not intended. God Bless! John 17:3 Harold
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
adamantus
03/19/01 8:33 PM
RE: RE: The first century
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello to writerdad, Herold!
John 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
I think I may have been misleading when I said that I never believed in eternal torment.
I got saved when I was about 9 or 10 years old. The suday school teacher did a teaching on Noah and the ark. She added that just as the doors shut on the ark, so, those who do not get saved will also suffer the same type fate from God.
I was scared. I prayed that night in my bed for God to please save me. I started trying to be a good boy after that. Throughout my teen years I was in a leagalistic church. I never felt good enough for God. I'd go to youth group and fell loved, I'd hear a good sermon and be convicted. I'd repent and end up going back to my old ways. I felt like a hypocrite. I was full of self hate.
I'm sure my story is not unlike many who grew up in leagalistic churches.
At about 16 I quit the hypocracy. I knew that there was a God, but I just did not feel that I could live up to the Christian walk. I still had Christian friends. They'd ask when I was going to get it right with God. I'd tell them that one day I would, but I just could not do it now, because I was not ready.
At about 18 I started to journal. As I journalled I came to some startaling conclusions. I was selfish. I decided that most every thing I did was for me. I also noted that most other people where selfish too. I decided that selfishness was the main problem in the world. I remember thinking, "I don't want to be part of the problem, I want to be part of the solution". I decided to quit being selfish. Whithin a couple of days I realized that I was trying to do what I had heard in church all my life. I was trying to give selflessly. I was trying to love.
From that day on I started to read the Bible every day. I finnished it in about a years time. As I read the Bible, God started to teach me. My quest was love. I memorized this scripture.
1 Corinthians13:4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.8 Love never fails.
Whenever I found a verse that I liked, I memorised it. I started to be delivered from the self-hate that I had for so long. The word of God was working in me. I became a changed person. I began a personal relationship with God, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit. He has never left me, even in my worst days. He loved me even when I did not love myself.
As for your comment about "we can be perfect", no. I see my flaws every day.
1 Cor 12:12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
That which is perfect, has not yet fully come to be. We all see through a glass darkly. That is why we need one another. As a collective body we make the body of Christ. Jesus Christ is the head. There is one who is perfect, Jesus Christ.
I do believe that we can walk by the Spirit. I do believe that we can be "joined to the Lord". I believe in the fruit of the Spirit and the gifts of the Spirit. I believe that Jesus is alive and well and walks among us and through us. I believe that the purpose of the Christian in the world is to "be Jesus" in the world. To do what Jesus would do.
I also believe in judgement and hell. Here is what I believe about hell.
My next two posts will be about hell and about the word "eternal" in the Bible.
Thanks for your reply writerdad.
adamant
Ps 147:11 The LORD taketh pleasure in them that fear him, in those that hope in his mercy.
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
adamantus
03/19/01 8:38 PM
Hell
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have taken parts from an artical at:
www.theshop.net/gjess/aswdl.htm#14
Please let this spark your interest to the reading of the whole artical.
The only Hebrew word translated "hell" in what is commonly called the Old Testament, is the word "Sheol." "Sheol" occurs 65 times. It is translated "hell" 31 times, "grave" 31 times, and "pit" 3 times in the King James Bible. It is obvious that if "Sheol" means "hell," it should not be translated "grave." "Sheol" means the same as the Greek noun "Hades."
"Hades" occurs 11 times in the King's Greek Text.
Another Greek word "Gehenna" occurs 12 times in the New Testament; 11 times in the Gospels and one time in the Epistle of James. Jesus used "Gehenna" about 7 times.
"Gehenna" is the Greek form of the Hebrew "ge-hinnom." It literally means "valley of Hinnom"
"Gehenna" is a valley that lays on the west and southwest of Jerusalem. In the valley, Israel offered up its children as a burnt offering to a god who came to be known as Moloch.
In Jesus' day, this valley was a city dump very much like modern dumps-always being filled, and therefore always having something for the fire to consume and worms to eat. ("where the worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.) It was a place fit only for waste.
Returning to "Gehenna," one can walk through this valley even today and return unscathed by its fires and untouched by the worms which actually consumed a good part of the religious Priestly community of Israel in the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. Their bodies were piled up and their blood ran down into this very valley which Jesus prophesied would be the disgraceful burial place for hundreds of thousands of Jews of that very generation Jesus was speaking to.
It should be mentioned that most of these references come from Jesus' mouth and every reference to this word "gehenna" was addressed to God's own people, not to the nations around Israel.
The Greek word "tartarus" occurs one single time in the entire Bible and it is found in 2 Peter 2:4. It is the place where sinning messengers (angels) are reserved unto judgment.
The English word "Hell" occurs 54 times in the King James Bible, and is a translation of 4 Hebrew and Greek words. Not one of the words has a meaning even closely related to the meaning theologians have given the English word "Hell."
"Sheol" should never have been translated "Hell." The Jews today, whose Bible consists of the Old Testament do not translate it "Hell" because in no way does "Sheol" correspond with the images and doctrines the church associates with the word "Hell." The Greek word "Hades" is the equivalent of "Sheol" and has the same meaning.
The case against "Gehenna" being translated into "Hell" is very aptly summarized by Dr. J.W. Hanson in his The Bible Hell when he listed the following regarding "Gehenna" :
1. Gehenna was a well-known locality near Jerusalem, and ought no more to be translated Hell, than should Sodom or Gomorrah. See Josh. 15:8; 2 Kings 17:10; 2 Chron. 28:3; Jer. 7:31,32; 19:2.
2. Gehenna is never employed in the Old Testament to mean anything else than the place with which every Jew was familiar.
3. The word should have been left untranslated as it is in some versions, and it would not be misunderstood. It was not misunderstood by the Jews to whom Jesus addressed it. Walter Balfour well says: 'What meaning would the Jews, who were familiar with this word, and knew it to signify the valley of Hinnom, be likely to attach to it when they heard it used by our Lord? Would they contrary to all former usage, transfer its meaning from a place with whose locality and history they had been familiar from their infancy, to a place of misery in another world? By what rule of interpretation, then, can we arrive at the conclusion that this word means a place of misery after death?
4. The French Bible, the Emphatic Diaglott, Improved Version, Wakefield's Translation, and Newcomb's, retain the proper noun, Gehenna, the name of a place as well-known as Babylon. (Many other Bibles since this was written, have also removed "Hell" and put "Gehenna" back.
5. Gehenna is never mentioned in the Apocrypha as a place of future punishment, as it would have been, had such been its meaning before and at the time of Christ.
6. No Jewish writer, such as Josephus, or Philo, ever used it as the name of a place of future punishment, as they would have done had such then been its meaning.
7. No classical Greek author ever alludes to it, and therefore, it was a Jewish locality, purely.
8. The first Jewish writer who ever names it as a place of future punishment is Jonathan Ben Uzziel, who wrote, according to various authorities, from somewhere between the second to the eighth century A.D.
9. The first Christian writer who calls Hell, Gehenna, is Justin Martyr, who wrote about A.D. 150.
10. Neither Christ nor his apostles ever named it to Gentiles, but only to Jews, which proves it a locality only known to Jews, wheras, if it were a place of punishment after death for sinners, it would have been preached to Gentiles as well as to Jews.
11. It was only referred to twelve times, on eight occasions, in all the ministry of Christ and the apostles, and in the Gospels and Epistles. Were they faithful to their mission to say no more than this, on so vital a theme as an endless Hell, if they intended to teach it?
12. Only Jesus and James ever named it. Neither Paul, John, Peter, nor Jude ever employ it. Would they not have warned sinners concerning it, if there were a Gehenna of torment after death?
13. Paul says he 'shunned not to declare the whole counsel of God,' and yet, though he was the great preacher of the Gospel to the Gentiles he never told them that Gehenna is a place of after-death punishment.
14. Dr. Thayer (author of Thayer's Lexicon and also on the translation committee to the American Standard Bible) significantly remarks: 'The Savior and James are the only persons in all the New Testament who use the word. John the Baptist, who preached to the most wicked of men, did not use it once. Paul, wrote 14 epistles, and yet never once mentions it. Peter does not name it, nor Jude; and John, who wrote the gospel, three epistles, and the Book of Revelation, never employs it in a single instance. (the Greek words of "lake of fire" in Revelation is not Gehenna) Now if Gehenna or Hell really reveals the terrible fact of endless woe, how can we account for this strange silence? How is it possible, if they knew its meaning, and believed it a part of Christ's teaching, that they should not have used it a hundred or a thousand times, instead of never using it at all; especially when we consider the infinite interests involved? The Book of Acts contains the record of the apostolic preaching, and the history of the first planting of the church among the Jews and Gentiles, and embraces a period of thirty years from the ascension of Christ. In all this history, in all this preaching of the apostles of Jesus, there is no mention of Gehenna. In thirty years of missionary effort, these men of God, addressing people of all characters and nations, never, under any circumstances, threaten them with the torments of Gehenna, or allude to it in the most distant manner! In the face of such a fact as this, can any man believe that Gehenna signifies endless punishment, and that this is a part of divine revelation, a part of the Gospel message to the world? These considerations show how impossible it is to establish the doctrine in review on the word Gehenna All the facts are against the supposition that the term was used by Christ or his disciples in the sense of endless punishment. There is not the least hint of any such meaning attached to it, nor the slightest preparatory notice that any such new revelation was to be looked for in this old familiar word.
15. Jesus never uttered it to unbelieving Jews, nor to anybody but his disciples, but twice (Matt. 23:15-33) during his entire ministry, nor but four times in all. If it were the final abode of unhappy millions, would not his warnings abound with exhortations to avoid it?
16. Jesus never warned unbelievers against it but once in all his ministry, ((Matt. 23:33) and he immediately explained it as about to come in this life.
17. If Gehenna is the name of Hell then men's bodies are burned there, and well as their souls. (Matt. 5:29; 18:9)
18. If it be the name of endless torment, then literal fire is the sinner's punishment. (Mark 9:43-4
19. Gehenna is never said to be of endless duration, nor spoken of as destined to last forever, so that even admitting the popular ideas of its existence after death, it gives no support to the idea of endless torment.
20. Clement, a Universalist, (of the early church) used Gehenna to describe his ideas of punishment. He was one of the earliest of the Christian Fathers. The word did not then denote endless punishment.
21. A shameful death, or a severe punishment, in this life, was, at the time of Christ, denominated Gehenna, (Schleusner, Canon Farrar, and others), and there is no evidence that Gehenna meant anything else, at the time of Christ." (end of insert from The Bible Hell)
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
adamantus
03/19/01 8:42 PM
Eternal
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is from this link:
www.theshop.net/gjess/saviour.htm
The noun AION nowhere means eternal. Its simple meaning is an age. In its plural form it means ages. We have unquestionably and incontrovertibly demonstrated this fact from numerous New Testament passages. Now once we understand that AIONIOS is the adjective form of the noun AION, a simple little sixth-grade grammar lesson should once and for all establish the exact meaning of AIONIOS.
A noun is a word that tells what you are talking about. A noun is a word that names something, a person, place, thing, quality, etc. Boy, water, tree, age and truth are all nouns. An adjective is a word that is used with a noun to describe it. It is a word that tells you what kind, what color, which one, etc. If you wanted to tell me about the hat a woman was wearing you would describe the hat in some way. You might say that it was a large hat, an atrocious hat, or a red hat. These are adjectives, words that describe what kind, what color of hat. When you add one or more of these "describing words" or "adjectives" to hat, you give a clearer picture of what the hat is like. Some words are both nouns and adjectives, that is, the same word can be used both ways. Sometimes the adjective form of the word is identical to the noun form, while at other times the spelling is slightly different. Look at these sentences: "I would like to visit France." "I am learning the French language." France is a proper noun, but the adjective form of the same word is spelled differently - French. But in both cases they indicate the same setting. Anyone with even an elementary knowledge of grammar (English or Greek) knows that the meaning of a noun and the meaning of the same word in its adjective form MUST CORRESPOND! It cannot have one meaning as a noun and exactly opposite meaning as an adjective!
Let me illustrate. If we say "John is in college," the word college is a noun. But if we say, "John has sixteen college credits," college is an adjective, modifying the word credits - telling what kind of credits. Now we all know what a college is - an institution of higher education that grants degrees - so we understand what kind of institution John is attending in the first sentence. Since we know the meaning of college, when we come to the second sentence we have no difficulty understanding what kind of credits John has - college credits - credits gained through study in an institution of higher education granting degrees! No one in his right mind is going to read the second statement and conclude that John has just finished kindergarten, or that he has a diploma showing that he finished sixteen lessons in leathercraft at the YMCA, or that he has $16.00 worth of credit at a department store! College as a noun and college as an adjective cannot have altogether different meanings. They mean the same in both cases!
Ah, brethren, let's be fair with the basic rules of English grammar and interpretation, and Greek, too, for they both follow the same basic rules. No one can say that AIONIOS means eternal without breaking the basic rules of English or Greek. The adjective AIONIOS which is directly derived from the noun AION occurs seventy times in the New Testament. It is an axiom of grammar that derivatives cannot have a greater force than the parent word. When we have an adjective derived from a noun, the meaning of the adjective is dependent upon the meaning of the noun. A daily paper is one that comes every day. A monthly bill is due for payment every month, not once a year. A yearly automobile license is good for one year, not for ever.
Thus the adjective AIONIOS, a derivative of AION, carries within itself its own solution; for AIONIOS is simply what belongs or relates to the AIONS - the ages - hence it cannot carry a force or express a duration greater than that of the ages of which it speaks. If therefore these ages are limited periods, some of which are already past, while others are yet to come, the word AIONIOS cannot mean infinity!
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
Still_unsure
03/20/01 8:22 AM
RE: universal reconciliation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I've always believed in an enternal hell but enternal punishment would be a much more useful doctrine to an institutionalized church than would universal reconciliation. It's much scarier!
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
BobHill
03/22/01 12:10 AM
RE: universal reconciliation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
adamantus,
I must agree with you that Rom 5:18 shows us that This passage in Romans teaches an equal amount that die in the first Adam shall be made alive in Christ. In fact, that’s why there is a recognized parenthesis that starts with Rom 5:13 and ends with Rom 5:17 in all the major translations. Greek syntax demands it.
Rom 5:12-21 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned— 13 (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come. 15 But the free gift is not like the offense. For if by the one man’s offense many died, much more the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abounded to many. 16 And the gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned. For the judgment which came from one offense resulted in condemnation, but the free gift which came from many offenses resulted in justification. 17 For if by the one man’s offense death reigned through the one, much more those who receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.) 18 Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life. 19 For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous. 20 Moreover the law entered that the offense might abound. But where sin abounded, grace abounded much more, 21 so that as sin reigned in death, even so grace might reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Therefore, I would like to take out the verses in between Romans 5:12 & 18 for the time being.
Rom 5:12&18 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned—18 Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life.
We can see that the same group who sinned in Adam in verse 12 were also justified through one Man’s righteous act in verse 18. We can also see that the ones who sinned in Adam had nothing to do with the sinning. Just because they were seminally in Adam, they took part of Adam’s sin and death. Likewise, they had nothing to do with the free gift that came to them all resulting in justification. It was Christ’s righteous act for Adam’s sin that resulted in the justification for Adam’s sin. Therefore, we can confidently say there was universal justification for all who sinned in Adam.
When we look at the material within the parenthesis, we see a different story. Here, we see that God is writing about many, not all. Death passed over all because of Adam’s sin, but the many are the ones who “who receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness”. Inside the parenthesis we find the many, who did their own sinning, are those who respond to God’s gracious gift. When they responded to God’s gift, their act of belief resulted in justification for their sins, and they “will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.”
Therefore, the universal justification is for the sin of Adam. The whole world is justified for Adam’s sin. We still suffer the act of dying physically since that seems to be a genetic change that took part when Adam sinned. We also inherit that thing called flesh, which is always contrary to God’s will.
We are responsible for our own sins. There is no universal justification for the sins of those who do not receive the “abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness” of “the One, Jesus Christ.”
Universal vivification is different. In 1 Co 15:22, it shows us that all were in Adam. Because of that, all died. It is a different story with Christ. All are not in Christ. Romans 6 shows us that those who receive Christ are the ones who die to sin. Only those who have trusted in Christ are in Christ. That’s why it says in 1 Co 15:22, “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive.” All of us were in Adam. Only those who believe are in Christ. There is no universal vivification here.
The same goes for universal reconciliation. God wanted Christ to have the preeminence in everything. He was the firstborn of all creation in Col 1:15. In Col 1:18, it says, “He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence.” And for us, His Church, He was the firstborn among many brethren. Rom 8:29 “For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren.”
The Father’s purpose for all this was to show the preeminence of our Lord Jesus. Col 1:13b and transferred us into the kingdom of His beloved Son. We have redemption: Col 1:14 in whom we have redemption. We have forgiveness of sins: Col 1:14 in whom we have . . . the forgiveness of sins. We, the fullness, dwell in Him. Col 1:19 for He delighted to have all the fullness (to playroma) dwell in Him. How do we know this fullness is talking about us? Col 2:9,10 For in Him dwells all the fullness (to playroma) of the Deity bodily; 10 even you are filled (peplayromenoi) in Him, who is the head of all principality and power. That’s us according to Eph 1:22,23 And He . . . gave Him to be head over all things to the church, 23 which is His body, the fullness (to playroma) of Him who fills (playroumenou) the all (ta panta) in all.
Now, we get to our reconciliation. He reconciled the all things (ta panta, That’s us.) in Christ, making peace. Col 1:19 He delighted to have all the fullness (to playroma) dwell in Him, 20 and through Him to reconcile the all (ta panta) things in [eis] Him, having made peace through the blood of His cross, through Him, whether the things (ta) on the earth or the things (ta) in heaven, 21 even you, who once were alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now He has reconciled 22 in the body of His flesh through death. How do we know the all is us, believers who are members of the body of Christ because they were baptized into Christ when they believed? Eph 2:11-16 tells us. “Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh—who are called Uncircumcision by what is called the Circumcision made in the flesh by hands— 12 that at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. 14 For He Himself is our peace, who has made the both (ta amfotera) one, and has destroyed the middle wall of separation, 15 having annulled in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, making peace, 16 and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity by Him.” The both, were the Jews and the Gentiles who believed and were made one body in Christ.
Christ reconciled us to present us holy and blameless. Col 1:22 to present you holy, and blameless before Him. This was the most important thing: Christ’s work for the whole world. At one time, we were all alienated from God because of our sin and evil deeds. But our wonderful God was delighted to do something about our rotten condition. Col 1:19-22 for He delighted to have all the fullness [That’s us] dwell in Him, 20 and through Him to reconcile the all things [That’s the Jews and the Gentiles—the body of Christ.] in (eis) Him, having made peace through the blood of His cross, through Him, whether the things on the earth or the things in heaven, 21 even you, who once were alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works [That’s us, the Gentiles.], yet now He has reconciled 22 in the body of His flesh through death [Again, in the body of Christ.].
Our security in Christ is for this purpose: Col 1:21,22 He has reconciled (you) 22 in the body of His flesh through death, to present you holy and blameless. Eph 1:3-5 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, 4 just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, to be holy and without blame before Him in love, 5 having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will.
Justified, made alive and reconciled in Christ,
Bob Hill
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
adamantus
03/22/01 4:14 AM
universal reconciliation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi to Bob!
Very interesting.
Just goes to show, just when you thought you'd heard it all..........
You said:
The Father’s purpose for all this was to show the preeminence of our Lord Jesus. Col 1:13b and transferred us into the kingdom of His beloved Son. We have redemption: Col 1:14 in whom we have redemption. We have forgiveness of sins: Col 1:14 in whom we have . . . the forgiveness of sins. We, the fullness, dwell in Him. Col 1:19 for He delighted to have all the fullness (to playroma) dwell in Him. How do we know this fullness is talking about us? Col 2:9,10 For in Him dwells all the fullness (to playroma) of the Deity bodily; 10 even you are filled (peplayromenoi) in Him, who is the head of all principality and power. That’s us according to Eph 1:22,23 And He . . . gave Him to be head over all things to the church, 23 which is His body, the fullness (to playroma) of Him who fills (playroumenou) the all (ta panta) in all. Now, we get to our reconciliation. He reconciled the all things (ta panta, That’s us.) in Christ, making peace. Col 1:19 He delighted to have all the fullness (to playroma) dwell in Him, 20 and through Him to reconcile the all (ta panta) things in [eis] Him, having made peace through the blood of His cross, through Him, whether the things (ta) on the earth or the things (ta) in heaven, 21 even you, who once were alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now He has reconciled 22 in the body of His flesh through death. How do we know the all is us, believers who are members of the body of Christ because they were baptized into Christ when they believed?
My reply:
Looks like I will have to study the book of Colosians whith this veiw in mind. I've never heard it put like that before.
Do you have a web page I can look at?
I'd also be interested in your take on the word "aionios", and the Youngs Literal Translation. Young always translates "aionios" as age-during.
Thanks for your reply..........I will be slow to reply.
adamant.
Ps 147:11 The LORD taketh pleasure in them that fear him, in those that hope in his mercy.
ps. I have not yet looked at the thread on Baptism. Since you have been posting quite a bit in that thread I will read it soon.
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
BobHill
03/23/01 7:14 PM
RE: universal reconciliation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
adamantus,
My web page is biblicalanswers.com. About 45 years ago I had to wrestle with 2 theological concepts because my wife's uncle presented a biblical idea called Universal Reconciliation. I have most of the Unsearchable Riches magazines that were published from v. 1 n. 2, 1909 through 1979. I also have many books on UR and also Conditional Mortality. I treasure these books. I also have almost the whole set of The Differentiator from 1940 to 1970.
I was trying to decide between the fifth point of Calvinism, limited atonement and UR. I found a different truth, the Openness of God, and I recognized that the basis of the UR I was wrestling with did not fit the word of God. It took me about five years to finally resolve that. It wasn't until I became fairly fluent in Greek that I had the equipment to answer their very consistent theology.
In Christ,
Bob Hill
| | Back to Top | | |
 | Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 10:53 AM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|