Will God Say "Just Kidding" about Eternity?

[Lois]

I wonder if we should make a thread just for discussing Mr Talbott so we don't get this one to jumbled up with different subjects.
I do have things to say about his musings.I went to thomastalbott.com and I read the whole site.Salvation through Jesus Christ or Jesus is not mentioned anywhere..you do not have to be some kind of web wizard to put that on your website if that is where your mind and heart are at,truly.

1 Cor 3:15 - I believe it to be a refining fire in the present tense, not the fiery hell of damnation.

1 Pet 3:19 - I believe the "prison" to be the prison and bondage to sin here and now..not hell.

1 Peter 4.6 - The "dead",I believe to be present tense,we are dead in our sins and trespasses.

Eph 4:8-9 - "he led captivity captive",I believe that to be present tense.,not He(Jesus) went to hell and let everybody out.We are the captives now,in bondage to sin not later.

I see no hint so far anywhere that it means later and not right now.

For me to go through the whole of chapter 25 of Isaiah would take a whole page or more.I'm not seeing where Jesus goes to hell to preach to the captives there..or anyone else going to hell to preach to the captives there.

1Cor 15:29 could take another whole page or pages for me to go through point by point but the real point is keeping things in context.


1Co 15:29 Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?

Paul was speaking about the resurrection and false teachings.He was pointing out an inconsistency in the practice of these false teachers.

Mat 12:32 - Actually I think this verse more proves my point than yours.There is a something that you can never be forgiven for.

Mar 3:29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation:

I know you most likely believe that eternal only means eternal in select places.I find it very odd that eternal never means eternal when it speaks of damnation and hell fire but it means eternal everywhere else.That is very convenient.
There seems to always be something wrong with the translation..when we come across something we don't like or understand.

Rev 21:24 - Does not sound all inclusive to me.It says "them which" not all there and if you read down to verse 27 it isn't all inclusive there either it says "but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life."

It sounds to me like you have to have your name written in that book to be there.

"(1) the Bible promises that everyone will be saved"

The Bible promises that everyone that accepts Christ Jesus as their Lord and Savior will be saved. (interesting how people keep leaving Jesus out of the equation)


I do believe that there are some aspects of different doctrines that people can safely disagree with.

If people adhere to your theory and Talbott's theory(I call them theories because they can not be upheld by scripture) then that places them right in hell with just a so called "hint" of an escape that can not be substantiated through the practical use of scripture.

I'm concerned for you and for anyone that might listen to you or him.

Let's say I am wrong and in the end everyone gets to go to heaven. Yipee! What a great day that would be but what if you are wrong and everyone that believes what you have said goes to eternal damnation?

You say,why would He? I say,why wouldn't He?

There is no scripture that says there will be a chance for repentance when someone is in hell.It really is complete speculation.

[Solo Christo]

Lois Wrote:I wonder if we should make a thread just for discussing Mr Talbott so we don't get this one to jumbled up with different subjects.
I do have things to say about his musings.I went to thomastalbott.com and I read the whole site.Salvation through Jesus Christ or Jesus is not mentioned anywhere..you do not have to be some kind of web wizard to put that on your website if that is where your mind and heart are at,truly.

Perhaps after we finish going through this article? i.e. this thread is taking up all the spare hours I have at the moment. Jesus is mentioned multiple times in the free chapters he has on his site, and his book goes into even more detail. Personally I think it’s unwise to state where another’s mind & heart are at, particular if one hasn’t sat down & talked with them.

Lois Wrote:1 Cor 3:15 - I believe it to be a refining fire in the present tense, not the fiery hell of damnation.

v13 “for the Day will disclose it” (ESV) & HCSB footnotes says “the Day” refers to Judgment Day. v14 seems to be the future tense too i.e. “will receive a reward.” I don’t think this verse on it’s own is a watertight example of postmortem repentance, but I think it shows the concept of “refining fire” is Biblical.

Lois Wrote:1 Pet 3:19 - I believe the "prison" to be the prison and bondage to sin here and now..not hell.

”For 1Pet 3:18-19, HCSB” Wrote:For Christ also suffered for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, that He might bring you to God, after being put to death in the fleshly realm but made alive in the spiritual realm. In that state He also went and made a proclamation to the spirits in prison

Now admittedly, it’s not as explicit as that in the KJV, however even there, the progression seems to be “put to death”, “quickened by the Spirit”, “he went and preached [past tense] unto the spirits in prision” i.e. it appears to me the preaching was something that occurred immediately after His death in a spiritual prison (Sheol?), rather than something that’s occurring here & now (additionally v20 talks about the people preached to being from the past).

Lois Wrote:1 Peter 4.6 - The "dead",I believe to be present tense,we are dead in our sins and trespasses.

As far as I know, unlike Paul, Peter only uses “dead” in the physical sense (e.g. 1Pet 1:3,21) so it would seem probable that is the sense in 1Pet 4:6.

I'll try to continue after I've put my children to bed

[Solo Christo]

Lois Wrote:Eph 4:8-9 - "he led captivity captive",I believe that to be present tense.,not He(Jesus) went to hell and let everybody out.We are the captives now,in bondage to sin not later.

Yeah, I certainly don’t think this verse is unambiguous, not least because there are many differences between the NT quote & the original in Ps 68 (which I’ve read is the “textually and exegetically the most difficult and obscure of all the psalms”!). Although one interesting thing is that I’ve read that Rom 10:7 & Ps 63:9 refer to the same place as v9b.

Lois Wrote:I see no hint so far anywhere that it means later and not right now.

Although you obviously don’t agree with the above interpretations of the verses, I hope that you can at least now start to see how other Christians came to them.

Lois Wrote:For me to go through the whole of chapter 25 of Isaiah would take a whole page or more.I'm not seeing where Jesus goes to hell to preach to the captives there..or anyone else going to hell to preach to the captives there.

The OT doesn’t often mention Jesus explicitly by name :-D Happy to leave this one, I only included it as I’ve seen other Christians make a case from the chapter, personally I don’t think it’s that clear!

Lois Wrote:1Cor 15:29 could take another whole page or pages for me to go through point by point but the real point is keeping things in context.

[quote="Lois"]1Co 15:29 Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?

Paul was speaking about the resurrection and false teachings.He was pointing out an inconsistency in the practice of these false teachers.

I agree he was speaking of the essentialness of resurrection, but sorry I see no mention of “false teaching” or “false teachers” in this chapter, so I’m unsure why you think he was condemning baptism for the dead?

Sorry it's past my bedtime so I'll have to continue tomorrow, God willing.

[Vic]

(06-20-2012 07:26 AM)Solo Christo Wrote:  

Lois Wrote:Eph 4:8-9 - "he led captivity captive",I believe that to be present tense.,not He(Jesus) went to hell and let everybody out.We are the captives now,in bondage to sin not later.

Yeah, I certainly don’t think this verse is unambiguous, not least because there are many differences between the NT quote & the original in Ps 68 (which I’ve read is the “textually and exegetically the most difficult and obscure of all the psalms”!). Although one interesting thing is that I’ve read that Rom 10:7 & Ps 63:9 refer to the same place as v9b.

Lois Wrote:I see no hint so far anywhere that it means later and not right now.

Although you obviously don’t agree with the above interpretations of the verses, I hope that you can at least now start to see how other Christians came to them.

Lois Wrote:For me to go through the whole of chapter 25 of Isaiah would take a whole page or more.I'm not seeing where Jesus goes to hell to preach to the captives there..or anyone else going to hell to preach to the captives there.

The OT doesn’t often mention Jesus explicitly by name :-D Happy to leave this one, I only included it as I’ve seen other Christians make a case from the chapter, personally I don’t think it’s that clear!

Lois Wrote:1Cor 15:29 could take another whole page or pages for me to go through point by point but the real point is keeping things in context.

[quote="Lois"]1Co 15:29 Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?

Paul was speaking about the resurrection and false teachings.He was pointing out an inconsistency in the practice of these false teachers.

I agree he was speaking of the essentialness of resurrection, but sorry I see no mention of “false teaching” or “false teachers” in this chapter, so I’m unsure why you think he was condemning baptism for the dead?

Sorry it's past my bedtime so I'll have to continue tomorrow, God willing.

Solo, I am just going to disagree on the interpretations and use of those Scriptures. Can't elaborate right now, but suffice it to say, they do not even hint at postmortem repentence because Christ died and rose again and was proclaimed for all to know Him---while they are alive on this earth. He is the only way to the Father and only those who are "rooted in and built up in Him" and who "live for Him" while they are alive, know Him and can do that.

Heb 9:24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:
Heb 9:25 Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;
Heb 9:26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.
Heb 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
Heb 9:28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

Luk 16:19 There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day:
Luk 16:20 And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores,
Luk 16:21 And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.
Luk 16:22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;
Luk 16:23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.
Luk 16:24 And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.
Luk 16:25 But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.
Luk 16:26 And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.
Luk 16:27 Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house:
Luk 16:28 For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.
Luk 16:29 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.
Luk 16:30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.
Luk 16:31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

Joh 3:14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:
Joh 3:15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Joh 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
Joh 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
Joh 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
Joh 3:20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
Joh 3:21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

Joh 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

[Lois]

Solo ,

Quote:Personally I think it’s unwise to state where another’s mind & heart are at, particular if one hasn’t sat down & talked with them.

The Bible says we can know them by their fruits..and that from out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks.A person has to read his book to hear/read him mention Jesus?
I know it may seem I am making a big deal out of it because I am. lol

I have googled him and read some of his postings on other sites and can't find him mentioning Jesus Christ..of course I haven't read absolutely everything he has written on the net.I just find it odd that I have to dig around to find it.
It should be obvious.I just think that is a major red flag.

I know he is not here to answer any of this,not as if he has to really,at least not to me.I think it is important to note his lack of mentioning a need for a Savior.I don't know how one is to be reconciled to God without Him.He is a pretty key factor IMHO.



Vic has an articles on Bible versions http://www.seekgod.ca/chart.htm

There is also a thread http://www.seekgod.ca/forum/showthread.php?tid=516

A quick comparison.

Mark 6:11
(KJB) And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.

(HCSB) If any place does not welcome you and people refuse to listen to you, when you leave there, shake the dust off your feet as a testimony against them.”

HCSB left out the judgement so I can now see why people reading it would leave out God's judgement to..or limit His judgement.

One more comparison.

Romans 8:1
(KJB) There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

(HCSB) Therefore, no condemnation now exists for those in Christ Jesus,


HCSB leaves out that you have to walk the walk.

1Co 15:44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.

How do you do this in hell "walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit."If we have a spiritual body?

As far as 1Co 15:29,Paul refers to the ones being baptized for the dead as "they", not as "you" (the Corinthian Christians he wrote to)


1Co 15:33 Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners.

Who is trying to deceive them?What evil communications?

1Co 15:35 But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?
36 Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die:

"some man will say"

What man?

I don't see an approval of the practice but a warning to not be deceived about such things.

I really don't think that 1Co 15:29 helps your argument.If we all make it to heaven as Universalism believes, what would be the point of being baptized for the dead?
If I can be here and pluck people out of hell by being immersed in some water,there would be no need for Jesus either.

[Solo Christo]

So the thread doesn't get too confusing, if it's ok with everyone, I'll finish responding to Lois' previous post before attempting to respond to the latest two?

Lois Wrote:Mat 12:32 - Actually I think this verse more proves my point than yours.There is a something that you can never be forgiven for.

Saying XYZ won’t be forgiven postmortem, implies that not-XYZ might be. I agree the verse raises a fresh question that at first glance is problematic for Universalists. However, one of the most helpful things I've read on this topic is in the book "The Inescapable Love of God" (brilliant book addressing many difficult questions). Anyway, here's an excerpt from the 4 pages looking at this question (I hope it's helpful, if not I'll try to send you some more context):

”Talbott” Wrote:A point worth re-emphasizing here is that God’s refusal to pardon a given sin—for example, his refusal to pardon blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, whatever exactly such blasphemy might be—in no way implies a lack of compassion or mercy on his part. When we speak of forgiveness, we typically have in mind an attitude or state of mind in the one who forgives; that is, a state of mind that exists when a person gives up all resentment towards an offender. But when Jesus speaks of forgiveness in the present context, he has in mind, as we noted above, the canceling of some obligation, debt, or prescribed punishment.

A little reflection will reveal that the two kinds of forgiveness are utterly different. A governor may pardon a criminal for reasons, such as political expediency, that have nothing to do with a forgiving attitude; alternatively, loving parents, despite their forgiving attitude, may judge it best to hold their rebellious child to a given punishment. Precisely because the parents do love and do forgive their child, they may refuse to forgive the punishment in the sense of setting it aside. And that, I want to suggest, is exactly how we should understand the idea of a sin that God will not forgive or pardon as well.

Because a refusal to forgive others, a refusal to repent, and a willful opposition to the work of the Spirit within undermine the very possibility of reconciliation and are so contrary to the conditions of our own future happiness, God will require that we experience in full the painful consequences of, and hence the punishment for, such sins as these. He could not express his love for us—his concern for our future happiness—in any other way. For when mercy itself requires severity, or a harsh means of correction, that is just what we can expect, says Jesus, either in this age or in the age to come.

Lois Wrote:Mar 3:29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation:

My comment above hopefully helps with this verse too. This verse is a little bit tricky as the manuscripts vary regarding the last word in this verse, some have ἁμαρτήματος (G265 usually translated as “sin”) some have κρισεως (G2920 usually translated as “trial/judgment”). The word translated here as “eternal” is αἰωνίου (G166), transliterated as aionios. Aionios (& olam, it’s Hebrew equivalent) is a word that has a wide semantic range, both in the Bible & in other Greek texts written between 300BC-300AD. It’s used to describe things that are clearly limited duration, such as mountains, time in fish, how far back in the past Moses lived, priesthoods, length of time things burned, prison sentences, walls, etc. However, it also describes things that we believe are infinite, such as God. Obviously this makes translating it consistently very difficult!

One possibility that fits many verses is defining it as the location/quality of something, e.g. God is in this eon & in the eon to come (that doesn’t diminish Him, particularly when God is also described as immortal, “I am”, before Creation, etc.) Likewise I believe there will be eonian punishment & eonian life - that is to say punishment & life that occur in the eon to come.

Alternatively words like “ancient”, “lasting”, “beyond sight” fit in many places as its precise duration is undefined yet typically a significant amount of time.

In order to figure out how long the life or chastisement will be, we need to look at other passages...

In regards to chastisement, often the word used is kolasis, which Aristotle & St Clement of Alexandria (a native Greek speaker, Head of the Catechetical School in Alexandria in 189AD) both describe as being for the good of the one receiving it. e.g. like disciplining a child. Therefore, if that's the purpose of chastisement, we can expect there will come a day when it's achieves it purpose.

I think it’s worth pointing out that because the authors had at their disposal words with much clearer/narrower semantic ranges, if Eternal Conscious Torment is a reality, they could’ve made the warnings a lot clearer, especially in the OT that has very little to say on the topic... The fact that they didn’t either suggests God doesn’t really care about people going to Eternal Conscious Torment (which seems to go against many passages & His description as the loving Father), or that Eternal Conscious Torment isn’t a reality.

”Lois” Wrote:I know you most likely believe that eternal only means eternal in select places.I find it very odd that eternal never means eternal when it speaks of damnation and hell fire but it means eternal everywhere else.That is very convenient.
There seems to always be something wrong with the translation..when we come across something we don't like or understand.

Hopefully from my previous comment you can see that I’m actually wanting aionios to be translated more consistently & more literally, as opposed to the way it appears in many translations now. Secondly whilst I believe the original manuscripts are inspired & God has preserved the Bible down through the ages for us to read, translation into English is less precise - hence there are so many. Don’t get me wrong, I think everything we need for faith & obedience is clear, and it’s still the best source we’ve got to test against. However, I actually think God purposely leaves some things unclear in the Bible so that we don't become proud about how perfect our theology is.

Lois Wrote:Rev 21:24 - Does not sound all inclusive to me.It says "them which" not all there and if you read down to verse 27 it isn't all inclusive there either it says "but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life."

It sounds to me like you have to have your name written in that book to be there.

I think that Rev talks about the permanent end of institutions of the devil's, the beast's, false prophet's, Death & Hades, however, I think the people in them "escape through the flames" (like 1Cor 3:15). I think there is room for this in the remainder of Rev. For example, Rev 21:24 where we see "The nations" & "the kings of the earth" (up until now both are consistently the label of non-believers) coming in through the open gates. Likewise Rev 22:2 speaks of "The leaves of the tree are for healing the nations" (the only people in view who need healing are the non-believers).

Again I would suggest Rev 22:14 tells us those who are outside the city (the wicked v15) are “blessed” & “washed” so that they may “enter the city by the [open] gates”. I see Rev 22:17 inviting the thirsty (I assume only non-believers are still thirsty) to “Come!”

Finally it’s even possible the last verse of the Bible supports it (see ESV), “The grace of the Lord Jesus be with ALL. Amen”

Regarding the comment about the Book of Life, a helpful response is the Appendix 3 of The Evangelical Universalist. The author notes that we agree that:
a) Some people have their names written in the BOL and some people do not
b) Those whose names are written in the BOL enter the new Jerusalem
c) Those whose names are not written in the BOL will not enter the new Jerusalem

So the question becomes: Is the content of the BOL fixed?
a) Rev 3:5 strongly suggests that one could have one’s name removed from the BOL
b) Rev 21:24-26 can be seen as possibly indicating some will be added into the BOL

Lois Wrote:"(1) the Bible promises that everyone will be saved"

The Bible promises that everyone that accepts Christ Jesus as their Lord and Savior will be saved. (interesting how people keep leaving Jesus out of the equation)

Everytime I post, my username should remind you that I think salvation is only when one accepts Christ Jesus as Lord and Savior. It takes hours to write these posts as I’m trying to read the chapters the verses are in, commentaries, etc. so occasionally I abbreviate things I’ve already explicitly stated.

Lois Wrote:I do believe that there are some aspects of different doctrines that people can safely disagree with.

I’m glad we agree

Lois Wrote:If people adhere to your theory and Talbott's theory(I call them theories because they can not be upheld by scripture) then that places them right in hell with just a so called "hint" of an escape that can not be substantiated through the practical use of scripture.

To be fair, surely you & I both have theories, and we both have some scriptual support for them. It’s not as either of us are arguing from a purely philosophical perspective or one that disregards the Bible. It’s just we disagree on what some verses mean.

Lois Wrote:I'm concerned for you and for anyone that might listen to you or him.

I assume that because you think I’m wrong, I’m in danger of hell & leading others there? However, please try to see it from my perspective, I’m concerned you may be inadvertently hindering some people from coming to Christ (i.e. 1 of the top 10 reasons for rejecting Christianity is Eternal Conscious Torment) and inadvertently attributing to God something false. Having said that, I think God’s wise/powerful enough to achieve His purposes despite us (although obviously we both want to be working with God rather than hindering Him!).

Lois Wrote:Let's say I am wrong and in the end everyone gets to go to heaven. Yipee! What a great day that would be but what if you are wrong and everyone that believes what you have said goes to eternal damnation?

The problem with that approach is that it becomes a matter of “hedging bets”, something pretty much any religion could say, “Follow us, just in case, you’ve got nothing to lose...”. Even within Christianity, someone could say “believe in the worst possible God and you’ll never be disappointed”. I don’t think God wants us to be pessimistic like that, but the opposite - to expect Him to vastly exceed the greatest we can imagine.

I was under the impression that God that those accepting Christ Jesus as their Lord and Savior will be saved (which I do), are you saying that I also need to believe the right things concerning the end times, in order to be saved?

Lois Wrote:You say,why would He? I say,why wouldn't He?

To be fair I gave lots of reasons why I believe God will persist. I should’ve also added that according to Heb 13:8, Jesus (God) is the same yesterday and today and forever, so given He shows love & mercy to everyone now (e.g. Matt 5:45)...

Lois Wrote:There is no scripture that says there will be a chance for repentance when someone is in hell.It really is complete speculation.

Hmm... complete speculation” is fairly strong, I had hoped you’d at least acknowledge it’s Christians trying to understand the Scriptures, although perhaps misunderstanding some verses.

[Vic]

Alex as much as I appreciate your need to use someone else's reasoning and writings to explain your beliefs, I would ask that you refrain from quoting from anyone else's books, websites, etc, and merely explain your beliefs about this. You should be able to explain your beliefs, not someone else's writings entirely from the Scriptures. I usually don't allow newbies to be posting from outside sources to start with.

I am sure since you are an advocate for EU, you should be able to discuss it here without anyone else's interpretations. If you believe in Christ alone and you say believe the Scriptures to be true, you should also believe and show the dependence on Him and His Word to prove all things.

[Lois]

We are not to base our doctrines on the musings and words of uninspired men.
I trust that God did not fail to deliver the Scriptures to us in a language that we can understand.

Solo, we can go round and round but I think the heart of the matter is, is hell eternal?
Do people actually face eternal punishment?
What is the purpose of hell?
Is hell a place for those that would finally be tormented into accepting Jesus Christ as Lord or is hell a place of punishment for those that have already rejected Him?


You can accuse me of falsely attributing something to God,that's fine but of course I could say the same to you.
I believe you to present an imbalanced god.
It is all well and good "to expect Him to vastly exceed the greatest we can imagine."..but to expect God to vastly supercede one of His attributes over another would make Him imbalance.

Pro 20:23 Divers weights are an abomination unto the LORD; and a false balance is not good.
Mat 19:17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

God is good therefore He can not have a false balance.To say His love will override his other attributes would be a false balance and therefore NOT good..and therefore NOT God.
God is an infinite God, so the offense is infinite..that would also have to make the punishment infinite.


You should be consistent with the application and meaning of words.If "aion" implies an age or a period of time that comes to an end all of the following shall also come to an end because they all consistently use the same word.


1Ti 1:17 Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.
Php 4:20 Now unto God and our Father be glory for ever and ever. Amen.

Heb 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.


The duration of God's glory and dominion would have to end to be consistent with your application and meaning of the word.

Rev 1:6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.


1Pe 1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

1Pe 4:11 If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; if any man minister, let him do it as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

1Jn 2:17 And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.

You cannot have your cake and eat it too. Matthew 25:46 sums up the judgment on the “sheep and goats” with the words. "And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life." The same word aionion (eternal) is used to describe the punishment of the wicked and the blessing of the righteous. Whatever you say about the duration of “eternal” life for believers must be said about “eternal” punishment for unbelievers. Since “life” for believers is everlasting (John 10:28), so must be the punishment for unbelievers.
The same word is used for everlasting punishment that is used for eternal life but you want to say one use of the word is correct and the other is incorrect.You should really be consistent with your application and meaning of a word.
Mat 25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.
2Th 1:9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;
Rev 14:11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.

You override the clear teaching of the Bible.You insist it is unclear.I don't know how it could be any clearer.

Heb 9:14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

Heb 5:9 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;
10 Called of God an high priest after the order of Melchisedec.


Riddle me this,what sense would it make for Satan to be prowling around the earth seeking the ruin of souls - if he would not really ruin a soul since we all go to heaven?
You also seem to forget that there is someone else that is vying for our souls.

Jesus said we could lose our own souls.
Mar 8:36 For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?


The same words in Greek and English are used to describe the future punishment of the wicked that are used to describe God, the Spirit, salvation, and the kingdom.
You have to be consistent with the meaning and application of the word/words and not contradictory.

Quote:Having said that, I think God’s wise/powerful enough to achieve His purposes despite us (although obviously we both want to be working with God rather than hindering Him!).

So which is it? Is God all powerful or can I hinder Him?




Tit 2:11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,
12 Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;
13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;
14 Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.

[Mary]

Hi Lois,

I really agree with what you are saying, but at the same time find I have to ask some of the questions I have been asking myself:

- have not many of us Christians been influenced for many years by the uninspired doctrines of Calvin, Zwingli, Knox and Luther (etc)?
By asking this, I'm not suggesting UR is a correct doctrine. I say repeatedly we should always use the bible as our standard. But how many of us if we are even aware of these doctrines and how they influence our understanding and interpretation of the Word? I don't think there is anything wrong with taking someone's ideas and holding them up to the Word; after all, that is what we do with each other on this forum. So another question I ask myself is :

- do I have a preconceived idea of hell, or is my knowledge of hell based on what I have learned from the bible? So back I go to the bible to check.

-What does eternal mean, and is it the same as infinite?

- Does the Bible say God is eternal, and does it say God is infinite? Is eternal one word in Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic and is infinite a different word?

- if as a saved person, I am going to spend eternity/infinity with God, am I not in eternity/infinity now?

[Solo Christo]

Vic Wrote:Alex as much as I appreciate your need to use someone else's reasoning and writings to explain your beliefs, I would ask that you refrain from quoting from anyone else's books, websites, etc, and merely explain your beliefs about this. You should be able to explain your beliefs, not someone else's writings entirely from the Scriptures. I usually don't allow newbies to be posting from outside sources to start with.

I am sure since you are an advocate for EU, you should be able to discuss it here without anyone else's interpretations. If you believe in Christ alone and you say believe the Scriptures to be true, you should also believe and show the dependence on Him and His Word to prove all things. Thank you!

I agree we should try to depend on God & the Bible, and try to think & write our own thoughts, rather than simply repeat others. Looking back over my posts, I’d suggest 90% of what I’ve written is already doing that, however I’ll try to do so more.

Even though Talbott has 3 chapters on his website that do talk about Jesus, Lois seems convinced he doesn’t. I would show more examples where he does but I’m not allowed link to them or now even quote them :-| I feel slightly hard done by given Lois has used URLs & in your article you have quoted/referenced a newspaper, Strong’s, the dictionary, & other articles - in fact every time you quote the KJV you are in essence quoting the interpretation (albeit a reasonable one) of some uninspired translators (not that I think you shouldn’t quote, but I think it’s important to remember that we are always building on the work of others to some degree). I thought you were just trying to limit spammers not handicap brothers & sisters genuinely trying to have a discussion?

---

Lois if you keep posting things before I've had a chance to reply to your previous post, I won't be able to keep up :-(