1 Tim 4:10, A Special Salvation for Believers?

[digging]

I'm not saying that you are the one saying everyone goes there, I'm saying everyone gets to hear the call of the great shepherd in this age or the next and the ones who turn away after they have been given the fair chance like everyone else then they are lost. So I say far more people will yet be saved as the vs in Exodus points too.

Are you saying it will be just for millions of babies who died a few days old to be resurrected to then be cast into the lake of fire?

Digging

 

[KingJ]

I'm not saying that you are the one saying everyone goes there, I'm saying everyone gets to hear the call of the great shepherd in this age or the next and the ones who turn away after they have been given the fair chance like everyone else then they are lost. So I say far more people will yet be saved as the vs in Exodus points too.

Are you saying it will be just for millions of babies who died a few days old to be resurrected to then be cast into the lake of fire?

Digging

Rev 20:7 is proof to me that if Adam and Even had their day in the sun with the devil, all mankind will. Your reasoning is correct. God is good and just. No babies will be in hell, but at the same time none will stay as babies in heaven.

 

[lukethreesix]

Digging, you asked who are the spirit and the bride inviting to come in?
The Spirit and the bride say, "Come." And let the one who hears say, "Come." And let the one who is thirsty come ; let the one who wishes take the water of life without cost.
The answer is two verses back, that is the answer to everyone else's question: can people get out of the lake of fire?
Those who were cast in are now standing out side the open gates (21:25), with the invite to come in. Rev 22:2, the leaves of the tree of life are for the healing of the nations. Do those in the city in need of healing? No, but those who are outside.
The last chapter of the Bible is a beautiful picture of the Gospel continued to be preached until the fulfillment of scriptures like: 1 Cor 15:28, Phil 2:10, Is 25:7-8, Luke 3:6, Eph 4:13, Ps 65:2-3, and a 100 more...

 

[Wormwood]

I disagree.. Sodom is restored in Ez 16.
Webster defines eternal as, without beginning without end. By definition only God can be eternal.
So does forever and ever mean. Ages and ages or eternities and eternities?
Jesus tells us to love our enemies and do good to them... he goes on to say, if you love only those who loves you back you are no better than a pagan.
Will God love his enemies and do good to them, will he only love those who love him back? Is God no better than a pagan? Or does he hold us to a higher moral standard than himself?
Paul tells us in Romans 12, that we pour coals of fire upon the heads of our enemies when we do good to them. "Evil is overcome by doing good."
Jerome said, "all of Gods enemies will perish, not that they cease to exist, but cease to be enemies."
Is there any heart to hard for God to soften?
"Is there anything too hard for me?" - God (Jer 32:27)
Luke 3:6, All flesh will see salvation.

1. The judgment on Sodom was absolute. God destroyed every person except Lot and his family. This act of judgment was not corrective, but an absolute annihilation of the cities. What is being spoken about in Ezekiel is hundreds of years later and is comparing and contrasting the wickedness of one city to another. Even if Sodom is rebuilt, its speaking of the city, not the individuals who were judged in the days of Abraham. Those cities were completely wiped out. The same is true with Babylon, Assyria, Edom, and the Canaanites that lived in the land when Israel was taking possession of it. God's desire was these peoples and cities be completely destroyed. This was not an effort to correct them as God had done with Israel, but to destroy them. This is why Paul says, "If the Lord had not left us decedents, we would have been like Sodom, we would have been made like Gomorrah." Why would he quote such a passage if God's punishments on such people was for the purpose of restoring them? I also notice you didn't reference the flood. I'll take that to mean you concede that the flood was not an effort to restore, but to condemn and judge.

2. You are taking generic English definitions and trying to cram them into theological concepts apart from the context of any passage. It is obvious that Matt. 25 is talking about an everlasting time period, and the same is true with the passages I cited in Revelation. Yes, "eternal" means without beginning or end. However, we are talking about "into eternity" which is quite different. It means going "into" a timeless era/age. As noted before, aionios, is most often referring to an "age" that is endless or timeless.

3. This line of reasoning is very problematic and unbiblical. First, we are not sinless, eternal gods with absolute knowledge and power. We are sinful human beings who are just as guilty and worthy of condemnation as the person next to us. This is why we are to show grace and love, because we are recipients of grace and love. We are in no position to judge or be haughty, because we are in need of grace. Second, I prefer to stick with what the Bible teaches. If you want to find obscure quotes from people throughout Christian history and use philosophical rhetoric to develop your theology and views on God, fine. We develop whatever ideas we want with such tactics im afraid. If you want to use history as your guide, then I think the evidence is overwhelming that the early church believed in eternal torment. But it seems to me like this is not about an objective look at things at this point but finding any shred of evidence to affirm that which you are already convinced.

4. My views on this matter or not based on a small view of God that sees him as incapable and I think you know that. It is based on what I believe the Bible teaches. If you would like to give me biblical reasons to think otherwise, Im listening.

 

[lukethreesix]

"The age of eternity?" What? An age has both a beginning and an end, eternity has neither. There is no such thing as "entering the age of eternity". That is the silliest thing I've ever heard.
Eternal torture was NOT THE MAINSTREAM in the early church until Augustine.
The city/nation of Sodom is not brick. In the parable of the sheep and goats, Christ speaks of separating the "nations" but I think we would agree he is speak to the individual as he was in Matt 7.
I too, can change my views and theology as evidence proves. I once believed as you, but I praise God every day I don't anymore.
Have you ever heard of the Rotherham's Emphasized Bible?

 

[ScottAU]

How is the following reconciled with universal salvation?


Rev 22:11 He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.
Rev 22:12 And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.
Rev 22:13 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.
Rev 22:14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.

Does not that passage imply that the state one dies in is the state they remain in?

I really don't see the Bible indicating death -----> judgement ------> cleansing.

Although I do speculate in regards to how does God deal with the immaturity of sinful children. Clearly a young child at some stage chooses to do evil and thus falls under condemnation. Is a ten year old doomed if they perish at ten? I know for sure that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom but my sense of compassion in regards to ignorance tugs at my conscience as to whether there is more to it.

I am very suspect of doctrines that teach salvation after death because they clearly excuse being able to sin now. I have seen a few Bible teachers go down that road and they end up stressing more on universalism than purity of heart in the present.

 

[lukethreesix]

Sin is deadly! Paul was accused of the same thing, "grace gives a liclicence to sin!" GOD FORBID!
we are all unrighteous and ignorant (at least to some degree), the doctrine of "age accountability" is man made no where to be found in scripture. "All are condemned and going to hell unless they believe upon the Lord Jesus Christ and repent". But it is clear you truly don't believe that. "Well they (babies and others we FEEL deserve a second chance) will have a chance after death" but "there are no chance after death"!
make up your minds.

 

[Wormwood]

"The age of eternity?" What? An age has both a beginning and an end, eternity has neither. There is no such thing as "entering the age of eternity". That is the silliest thing I've ever heard.
Eternal torture was NOT THE MAINSTREAM in the early church until Augustine.
The city/nation of Sodom is not brick. In the parable of the sheep and goats, Christ speaks of separating the "nations" but I think we would agree he is speak to the individual as he was in Matt 7.
I too, can change my views and theology as evidence proves. I once believed as you, but I praise God every day I don't anymore.
Have you ever heard of the Rotherham's Emphasized Bible?

So, are you still arguing with me about the meaning of aionios? I've quoted multiple lexicons, shown you how every major translation with their thousands of linguistic scholars unwaveringly translate this word and yet you still want to debate the fact with me? One last time I will quote to you the most standard and thorough lexicon for pretty much every Greek scholar, the TDNT.

αἰών in the Sense of Prolonged Time or Eternity.

1. The Formulae "from eternity" and "to eternity."
a. The concepts of time and eternity merge in the formulae in which αἰών is linked with a preposition to indicate an indefinite past or future, e.g., ἀπʼ αἰῶνος (Lk. 1:70; Ac. 3:21; 15:18) and ἐκ τοῦ αἰῶνος (Jn. 9:32) in the sense of "from the ancient past" or "from eternity," or εἰς αἰῶνα (Jd. 13) and εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα (27 times, esp. common in Jn. e.g., 4:14) in the sense of "for ever" or "to all eternity." Only in the light of the context can it be said whether αἰών means "eternity" in the strict sense or simply "remote" or "extended" or "uninterrupted time." Thus in Lk. 1:70 and Ac. 3:21 οἱ ἅγιοι ἀπʼ αἰῶνος προφῆται means "the holy prophets of old time." The meaning is particularly weak when we have an αἰών formula in a negative statement. Thus Jn. 9:32: ἐκ τοῦ αἰῶνος οὐκ ἠκούσθη, simply means that "it has never been heard," and οὐ (μὴ) … εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα merely signifies "never" (cf. Jn. 13:8; 1 C. 8:13). The full significance of "eternity" is perhaps to be found in passages like Lk. 1:55; Jn. 6:51; 12:34; 14:16; 2 C. 9:9 (ψ 111, 9); Hb. 5:6; 7:17, 21 etc.; 1 Pt. 1:25; 1 Jn. 2:17; Jd. 13, if the question can ever be answered with any certainty.
In order to bring out more fully the stricter concept of eternity, religious usage generally prefers the plur. Esp. in doxologies we find: εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας (Mt. 6:13 [Rd]; Lk. 1:33; R. 1:25; 9:5; 11:36; 2 C. 11:31; Hb. 13:8; and also εἰς πάντας τοὺς αἰῶνας with πρὸ παντὸς τοῦ αἰῶνος, Jd. 25). This plur. use is simply designed to emphasise the idea of eternity which is contained but often blurred in the sing. αἰών. Thus in Hebrews the εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα used under the influence of the LXX (e.g,. 5:6; 7:24) is materially identical with εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας in 13:8. The plur. is also to be found in formulae which refer to the past. In 1 C. 2:7 it is said of the θεοῦ σοφία: ἣν προώρισεν ὁ θεὸς πρὸ τῶν αἰώνων ("from all eternity"); similarly in Col. 1:26: ἀπὸ τῶν αἰώνων καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν γενεῶν, and Eph. 3:9: ἀπὸ τῶν αἰώνων, cf. Eph. 3:11: κατὰ πρόθεσιν τῶν αἰώνων ἣν ἐποίησεν (== κατὰ πρόθεσιν ἣν ἐποίησεν πρὸ τῶν αἰώνων). In these cases the sing. ἀπὸ or πρὸ τοῦ αἰῶνος might well be used instead of the plur. But the plur. presupposes knowledge of a plurality of αἰῶνες, of ages and periods of time whose infinite series constitutes eternity. Thus the idea of prolonged but not unending time is also present in the αἰών formulae. Noteworthy in this respect is the parallel αἰῶνεσ/γενεαί in Col. 1:26. The concepts of limited and unlimited time merge in the word αἰών. The implied inner contradiction is brought to light in the expression χρόνοι αἰώνιοι which is used as an equivalent of the plur. in R. 16:25; 2 Tm. 1:9; Tt. 1:2; for eternal times is strictly a contradiction in terms.
Also designed to emphasise the concept of eternity is the twofold use of the term in the formula εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα τοῦ αἰῶνος (Hb. 1:8, ψ 44:6). In 21 passages this twofold use is linked with the plur., thus giving rise to the distinctive formula of the Pauline Epistles and Revelation (cf. also Hb. 13:21; 1 Pt. 4:11; 5:11): εἰς τοῦς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων. Finally, there are cases in which the αἰών formulae are united with similar expressions. Thus in the phrase: εἰς πάσας τὰς γενεὰς τοῦ αἰῶνος τῶν αἰώνων Eph. 3:21 (cf. Col. 1:26), we can pick out the components εἰς πάσας τὰς γενεάς and εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα τῶν αἰώνων; and εἰς ἡμέραν αἰῶνος (2 Pt. 3:18) can be dissected into the two constituents εἰς ἡμέραν (sc. κυρίου) and εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα.

Yes, aion means age, but when used as a plural speaking of an indefinite time in the future, its almost always rendered eternity. This is true both in the Bible and in non biblical texts. The issue is not really in question. Contextually, a person can argue that a particular context may refer to a distinct period of time, but there is no debate on whether or not the plural form of aion or various phrases like we find in Revelation can and often do mean "eternity."

If you, in spite of all the scholars, lexicons and current Bible translations, still want to argue that the word can not mean eternity, then there is nothing I can do for you. I cant force you to see what every scholar, dictionary, and Bible translation clearly teaches if you simply refuse. You provide absolutely no sources or arguments for your perspective other than circular reasoning or nit-picking terms. If you want to convince me you are correct, you need to provide some actual substance for your argument rather than trying to nit-pick nuances of mine.

There was no MAINSTREAM teaching on eternal punishment/annihilation or other such doctrines for the first 300 years of the Church as most church writing was dedicated to apologetics against cults and surviving persecution. The church did not formally organize during this period to discuss such matters. When the church was able to more formally organize after the Edict of Milan, eternal condemnation was viewed as the accepted view of the church. However, it is clear that what writings we do have from the early church fathers show that hardly any of them were universalists. That much is very plain. I'd quote to you from some church history books on the matter, but clearly that would make no difference at this point. I cant even get you to believe a lexicon.

I don't understand your statement about Sodom.

Yes, I have heard of the REB. Its a translation done by one person in the 1800's. Its an okay translation.

 

[lukethreesix]

Actually its the EBR, (there is a different bible REB) anyway....it translates anion as an age, and aionios as age-abiding. The only place you will find the word eternal is in Romans 1:20 speaking about God Himself, who is the only eternal being with eternal qualities. The EBR is not the only translation where you will not find "hell" or "everlasting/eternal". Young's Literal, Concordant New Testament and others. Just as the old KJV was revised over and over, finding "hell" fewer and fewer times as translations became more accurate, so has these "literal" translations" doing away with the misinterpretations of words like "olam" and "aion"
I can't convince you, only the Spirit can do that. Knowing the true character of God is such a blessing. It is the only way we can have peace in this "age"

 

[Wormwood]

I never said that aionios could not be translated as "ages" or aion as "age." I said the context determines, and most often, scholars translate the plural form as eternity. My point is that 99.99% of scholars would not agree with you. Maybe that .01% you turn to are right, but I'd say its very unlikely that you are better informed than these tens of thousands of experts in the Biblical languages.

The EBR is not the only translation where you will not find "hell" or "everlasting/eternal". Young's Literal, Concordant New Testament and others. Just as the old KJV was revised over and over, finding "hell" fewer and fewer times as translations became more accurate, so has these "literal" translations" doing away with the misinterpretations of words like "olam" and "aion"

You make it sound like the EBR and YLT are recent translations using modern scholarship to correct past errors. This is not true. Both of these translations are over 100 years old and the EBR was put together by one individual, not a group of scholars. Furthermore, the way the YLT has translated aionios is not meant to signify a limited time, but an indefinite period that could be endless. It is a little more indefinite in its rendering than translations that translate the plural form "eternity" but this does not mean finite...as you are proposing.

The Spirit uses the Word to teach us about the true character of God, which we are examining. I do not allow my personal presumptions or feelings of what God should be or should do as a means of determining his actions or character. Using the expectations and assumptions of our culture as the rule by which we establish the character of God has never been appropriate. Yet it is this which is what has brought about so much universalism in our postmodern culture and recent arguments for the embrace of homosexuality as a God-approved lifestyle. Also, I don't think this kind of judgment is any stain on God's character as you imply. I think you have been reading too much Rob Bell (who is not the voice of the Spirit)

 

[lukethreesix]

We are very much alike Wormwood, we just happen to disagree. Maybe we can start over and examine one verse at a time. I have, in the past, changed my views and am willing to do so now (if moved by the Spirit).
Jesus holds the title of "Savior of the World". John the Baptist (greatest among prophets) proclaims "Behold! Jesus, the Savior (redeemer) of the World (kosmos)!" Paul, apostle to the Gentiles, says "He is the Savior of all men."
Thesestatements, to me, do not reflect any doubt. Maybe he could save? He might be savior, or if the World thinks he is savior, or the lamb could take away the sin of the world. I don't see any doubt. I see nothing but a factual statement that Jesus Christ is the Savior (and I will go so far as to say not just for man, or some men, but in fact the redeemer of the universe, all of creation being restored by the work of Christ. Is he not the potter? To tell you the truth, the big problem I have with an eternal/everlasting hell, is that it would keep sin, pain, evil, hatred toward God, filthy lusts, preserving all these like canned green beans on the shelf, only containing sin but never destroying it. I see Satan the victor in that, not Christ?
From the first pages of the bible to the last page of the bible, scripture shows a God who will not keep his creation forever in sin. Genesis 3:22, God cast out man from the garden, removing the tree of life. Judgment is set: Death! The wages of sin is death. Price paid. Justice is met. But why did God take away the tree of life? Mercy! God said, lest they live forever...God is too loving and merciful to allow His creation to live forever in a state of sin, pain and regret. But that is exactly what the church today teaches hell is: a state of sin, pain and regret where one lives forever. Totally contradicting Gods judgment and character in this passage. Skip 1,000 pages and we come to the end of the book. Where we see "all things" created new and no more tears, the old ways are gone. We see in Revelation 22:2, the tree of life reintroduced, and its leaves are for the healing of the nations. In Rev 21:25, the gates of heaven are never shut, and in Rev 22:15, we see all those who were cast into the lake of fire standing outside the gates, and in Rev 22:17, they are being invited in to take the water of life. We see Gods grace, His love, and His patience towards His creation, the gospel never ceasing to be preached until all those standing outside, who were cast out and judged, come in and be restored. Which will fulfill so many scriptures like Isaiah 45:23, and Psalms 65:2-3, and Phil 2:9-11, and Luke 3:6, and so many more....

 

[digging]

Please then explain WHEN will everyone hear if they are dead and NEVER heard the call of the message of Christ in their life time? If the spirit and bride calling is happening now?

Digging

 

[Wormwood]

digging,

who are you addressing?

lukethreesix,

Jesus is the savior of all men as opposed to only the savior of some men. These statements are not arguing for universalism as the context of almost all the teaching and narratives of the NT show that the early preaching of the Gospel demanded human response in order for people to be saved. These statements are claiming (much to the anger of the Jews) that faith in Jesus Christ was the savior of all (both Jews and Gentiles. This does not mean he saves all regardless of their faith or acceptance. It means he is the savior of all people, not of national Jews only (which is what most of the Jews expected of their Messiah). Jesus has come to save the world, not just his own. As John 1 says, "He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. But to all who received him, to all who believed on his name, he gave the right to be called children of God."

To cast the devil, his angels and all wickedness into a place of eternal torment is to effectively eliminate it. I think the problem here is more about your perception of what constitutes proper disposal of evil rather than any particular verse.

 

[lukethreesix]

The calling of the Spirit and the Bride is calling now. It was also calling in the time of Noah, Moses, the Prophets, John, Jesus, and will continue throughout the ages. Peter and Paul tell Jesus, during the 3 days and nights before the resurrection, went to "the prison""heart of the earth" and preached to the dead, leading the captives out of captivity. God tells us in Isaiah 45, that He swears to His own Name and His word will not turn back, that every one will bow and confess, and even declare righteousness in the LORD. I must believe God will do what He says He will do and take scripture in context of His character (Ex 34:6).
You said, Jesus came to save the world (I take it that means everyboby?). So his aim was to save all, his target was the world but hit only a portion. The definition of sin is to miss the mark. If Jesus was aiming for all but only landed some, he missed his mark. And we know Jesus does not sin.

 

[Dodo_David]

Please then explain WHEN will everyone hear if they are dead and NEVER heard the call of the message of Christ in their life time? If the spirit and bride calling is happening now?

Digging

Digging,

God is just. So nobody will be unjustly placed into the Lake of Fire.

What you are asking is this: How can people have their names written in the Lamb's Book of Life if they never heard the Gospel?

That is something that God knows, even if we don't know.

 

[digging]

Sorry I missed that, my reply was to lukethreesix,

but also everyone who thinks final condemnation can happen in this life time. Everyone who thinks that, I believe is misunderstanding something every important. The only thing that can happen now is to come out from under condemnation. Everyone is born under the wrath curse from Adam already. If someone dies as a baby or an adult who never got to hear the message will get to hear the call in the age to come after the resurrection of the unrighteous. that's why it called the judgement because it really will matters what they do in the age to come!

Digging

 

[lukethreesix]

I interpret all scripture in context of His character (Ex 34:6).