Do You Really Believe The Full Gospel?

[Me2]

The tragedy is when scholarly people take words from figurative stories, or parables, or dreams, and attempt to imply literal applications to their life and continuing this error by going further to impress these "interpretations" on others.

Jesus spoke to those of that age. Specically those living under the mosaic law. A new Age was about to begin. A period in our linear time which enabled the Holy Spirit to Dwell Within the believer. An age that was totally different and radical from the age that was being replaced.
Notice one age ends..another begins..this current age will end our bodies will be discarded and a new body will be given. One that does not contain entropy.

just as when the apostles asked jesus what was the end of their age...He told them about the day of pentecost when the holy spirit would introduce a living God that would come to destroy the works of the law within those believers chosen by the father.
Those chosen to live by Grace through faith.
Not 2000 years or even 10,000 years in the future.
But his messages was told to those listening and to be understood by those.
We today can derive spiritual application from some of his dark sayings. through understanding Gods work of Sanctification and the processes which those chosen are transformed by.

We who are now living are being tutorer by a living God.
Not by a book. The book helps us to comprehend in our own language and to use our communication skills. yet obedience comes from living by standards under anothers leadership. Not another man, but A Living God.
We literally live under anothers choices. Our goal is to accept those choices above what outside influences would force upon us..
and yes..thats means also our understandings that we derive from reading a book. which in a sense is "the letter" that kills.

now as the worm turns...

there are no known molecular structures in our universe that does not contain entropy. The breakdown of the very energies necessary to hold its chemical structures intact. Everything eventually physical is destroyed...Everything..even worms.

Me2

 

[GH]

Strong's Number: 166 Browse Lexicon
Original Word Word Origin
aijwvnioß from (165)
Transliterated Word TDNT Entry
Aionios 1:208,31
Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech
ahee-o'-nee-os Adjective

Definition
1.without beginning and end, that which always has been and always will be
2.without beginning
3.without end, never to cease, everlasting

Dear Doubting,

Below is a study on the words forever and eternal based on information found in G. Campbell Morgan's book, "God's Methods With Man" (pages 185-186) and Christ Triumphant by Thomas Allin I did not write it. It has been modified and paraphrased in the course of various discussions and studies I’ve had with other believers. It is information free and open to the general public and is widely believed many people. My only reason for posting this information is to lift up the all-sufficient work of Jesus Christ at Calvary and for God’s glory and honor – blessed be His Holy Name. His grace superabounds!:

The true meaning of the words "aion" and "aionios” which are the originals of the terms rendered by our translators "everlasting," for ever and ever:" and on this translation, which is so misleading, so much of the popular dogma of endless torment is taught. This is misleading and incorrect; for "aion" means "an age," a limited period, whether long or short, though often of indefinite length; and the adjective "aionios" means "of the age," "age-long," "aeonian," and NEVER "everlasting", but it can be truly applied to things that are endless.

In the Greek version of the Old Testament (the Septuagint)—which was in common use among the Jews in our Lord's time, from which He and the Apostles usually quoted, and whose authority, therefore, should be decisive on this point--these terms are repeatedly applied to things that have long ceased to exist. For example: the Aaronic priesthood is said to be "everlasting," (Numb.25:13). And we know that this priesthood does not exist any more. Another is: The land of Canaan is given as an "everlasting" possession, and "for ever", (Gen. 17:8...Gen. 18:15). In Deut. 23:3, "for ever" = "even to the tenth generation." In Lamentations 5:19, "for ever and ever" = from "generation to generation." In Jude 7, Sodom and Gomorrah are said to be suffering the vengeance of eternal (aeonian) fire, i.e., their temporal overthrow by fire, for they have a definite promise of final restoration.--(Ezek. 16:55) And Christ's kingdom is to last "for ever," yet we are distinctly told that this very kingdom is to end.--(I Cor. 15:24)

Aion Either Means Endless Duration Or It Does Not

Also if aionios is translated as "eternal," in the sense of endless, then aion must mean eternity, i.e., endless duration. This would surely change many Scripture verses by speaking of the “eternities” (there is more than one eternity?). We know what "eternity" is, but what are the "eternities?" You cannot have more than one eternity. The doxology would be: "Thine is the kingdom, the power, and the glory, 'unto the eternities.'" In the case of the sin against the Holy Spirit, the translation would then be, "it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this eternity nor in that to come." Our Lord's words, (Matt. 13:39), would then be, "the harvest is the end of the eternity," i.e., the end of the endless, which is to make our Lord talk nonsense. Again, in Mark 4:19, the translation should be, "the cares," not of "this world," but "the cares of this eternity choke the word." In Luke 16:8, "The children of this world," should be "the children of this eternity." In 1 Cor. 10:11, the words, "upon whom the ends of the world are come," should be: "the ends of the eternities." Take next, Gal. 1:4: "That He might deliver us from this present evil world," should run thus: "from this present evil eternity." In 2 Tim. 4:10, the translation should be: "Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present eternity." And "Now once at the end of the ages hath He been manifested," should read "at the end of the eternities."

1. How, if it means an endless period, can aion have a plural?

2. How come such phrases to be used as those repeatedly occurring in Scripture, where aion is added to aion, if aion is of itself infinite?

3. How is it that we repeatedly read of the end of the aion?--Matt. 13:39-40-49;...Matt. 24:3...Matt. 28:20...1 Cor. 10:11...Hebr. 9:26.

4. If aion be infinite, why is it applied over and over to what is strictly finite? e.g. Mark 4:19...Acts 3:21...Rom. 12:2...1 Cor. 1:20...1 Cor. 2:6...1 Cor. 3:18, 10:11, etc. etc.

Aionios in the Greek is a mystery; there is only one person to whom it may properly be applied, and that one person is God. ETERNAL LIFE IS NOTHING OTHER THAN THE LIFE OF GOD. The gift of Jesus Christ here is a foretaste of the life divine."

\o/

Peace, GH

 

[Smoky]

I don't see how it's possible for God to be a God of love and not eventually reconcile all mankind to himself. True there's judjment, true there is hell, but these have to be remedial. Even God's judgment springs from his love." Mercy triumphs over judgment". I don't believe God would ever create a being to start with if He knew that the being would reject Him forever. If He predestines some to be saved and others to be lost, then that would mean that He loves some and hates others. The belief that its no longer necessary to witness or be concerned is nonsense. In the first place, to be a Christian makes life infinatelly more joyfull and worth living in the present world. Also, it is infinatelly better to be redeemed now that it will be to face the descipline of hell in the next world.

 

[GH]

I say Amen to your post Leon.

Let's go and tell the great things that the Lord has done and how He sets us free.

Ambassadors of Christ.

Peace, GH

PS: Some would say, including me, that that remedial hell you spoke of exists now in this life too. Designed to sanctify and reflect a life in Christ - now.

Blessings to you in Jesus, our beloved Savior.

 

[rufus]

Eternal Punishments denied. 1. By Annihilationists. 2. Restorationists. 3. Universalists.

Those who deny the eternity of future punishments may be divided into three classes.

First are those who resolve the punishment of the wicked into annihilation. They believe accordingly, that only the redeemed enjoy a resurrection.

Second are the ancient and modern Restorationists, who hold to future punishments, longer or shorter, according to men’s guilt; but who suppose that each man’s repentance will be accepted after his penal debt is paid; so that at length, perhaps after a long interval, all will be saved. It is said that the Originists believed that Satan and his angels would also be at last saved.

The third opinion is that which is now widely prevalent among modern Universalists. This supposes, that the external and internal sufferings which each soul experiences during this life, and in articulo mortis , will satisfy all the essential demands of the divine justice against its sins: and that there will, accordingly, be no future punishments. At death, they suppose, those not already penitent and holy, will be summarily sanctified by God, in His universal mercy through Christ, and at once received into heaven forever. This scheme is the baldest and most extreme of all the forms of Universalism, and stands in most complete opposition to Scripture.

Dabney, R. L. 1996. Systematic Theology.

 

[neal4christ]

Dear brother, that’s just the point – it isn’t about what I do or what you do, but what God has done, is doing and will do. It is about relationship with the Living God from which all these “things” come.

Thanks for the answer, but you dodged the questions. Yes, I understand is about a relationship, a covenant, if you will. But according to your logic, why waste time with it here on earth? Are you telling me that you have no desires that are contrary to God?

If you think that God didn’t know what Adam and Eve was going do before they did it, then you aren’t seeing the sovereignty of God.

Please show me where I said that I think this. I am not an Open Theist. I believe very much in God's sovereignty. However, is what God wants always what He gets? I agree that all He decrees He gets, because He is sovereign. But does He always decree what He wants? If so, the God of all good, wanted Adam and Eve to fall and for pain and suffering to enter the world. Is this what God really wanted, i.e. would choose on His own?

It worships doctrine, a denomination, a leader and ITSELF.

I would disagree. There are some that do, but I don't worship a denomination, leader, doctrine, or myself. I worship the Creator of all things.

I can do nothing without HIM – for HE is the center and the source of ALL THINGS.

I would agree that I can do nothing without Him. And I would appeal to James 1:17 for what comes from God. But I would not be so blasphemous to attribute evil and sin to God.

Neal

 

[neal4christ]

It is funny (or really, sad) to see the Universalists dance around or ignore evidence to the contrary of their theology. Do you just ignore the evidence or what? Why are you even concerned with those who teach there is a hell that is everlasting? They will just be reconciled, right? So why waste your time on it? I am suprised that my concerns have not been addressed and no Scriptural support is offered on behalf of the Universalists. Do you base everything off of your feelings and what is in your heart?

"For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies: These are the things that defile a man." Matthew 15:19-20a, KJV

Neal

 

[neal4christ]

One can believe in the next age but it will be through the fire of the lake of fire that such a one believes.

Please show me how you arrived at this conclusion. If you don't mind, support it Scripturally. Please don't post links, I want to know what you think.

Neal

 

[KenH]

1 Peter 4:5-6(Notice that they live according to God.)

1 Timothy 2:3-6(If God does not always get what He wants, then He is not omnipotent.)

 

[KenH]

Originally posted by neal4christ:
Do you just ignore the evidence or what?

Of course, brother, I would ask do you ignore the evidence throughout the Bible that teaches that Jesus is the Savior of the world? The Bible doesn't teach that He is potentially the Savior of the whole world, but that He is the Savior of the whole world.

 

[KenH]

Originally posted by neal4christ:
If so, the God of all good, wanted Adam and Eve to fall and for pain and suffering to enter the world. Is this what God really wanted, i.e. would choose on His own?

Adam and Eve had truly free will as they were not created with a sin nature. We only have free choice within the context of our sin nature. And none of us had a choice as to whether we would have a sin nature or not. The traditional teaching of hell that arose out of the Dark Ages says that even though you had no choice in the matter concerning the nature you are born with, yet you can suffer torture by God without end if you don't overcome your sin nature and repent and believe within a few short years here in this age on earth.

 

[neal4christ]

Adam and Eve had truly free will as they were not created with a sin nature.

Okay, so you do agree that God wanted Adam and Eve to sin and for death and suffering to exist now, correct?

Neal

 

[neal4christ]

1 Timothy 2:3-6(If God does not always get what He wants, then He is not omnipotent.)

This does not deal with your original assertion, i.e. that men have a chance to be saved after death. The other passage I will look into.

Neal

 

[BobRyan]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
worms really do die!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am not going to argue about what type of worms they will be, but I would like to point out that blind men don't see. Yet somehow Jesus had power over that.............

The FIRE that does not end - and the WORM that does not die - BOTH refer to the TEARING down - process of fire and worms - not being "terminated" it is not "promising eternal life to worms".

The obvious result of a fire that can not be put out - is that it will completely consume whatever it is "burning up" - it will destroy thoroughly without anyone being able to stop it.

Interesting that we find that "sinners are to be CONSUMED" and sinners are "destroyed" by fire - Matt 10 "He is able to DESTROY both body AND soul in hell fire".

It is clear - as Jude states that Sodom IS an explicit example of "destruction" by "eternal Fire".

In Christ,

Bob

 

[GH]

Dear Neal,

You wrote: Thanks for the answer, but you dodged the questions. Yes, I understand is about a relationship, a covenant, if you will. But according to your logic, why waste time with it here on earth? Are you telling me that you have no desires that are contrary to God?

I reply: No dodging, Neal. I answered your questions.

I said: It is about relationship with the Living God from which all these “things” come.

I also said: If you think that God didn’t know what Adam and Eve was going do before they did it, then you aren’t seeing the sovereignty of God.

You said: Please show me where I said that I think this. I am not an Open Theist. I believe very much in God's sovereignty. However, is what God wants always what He gets? I agree that all He decrees He gets, because He is sovereign. But does He always decree what He wants? If so, the God of all good, wanted Adam and Eve to fall and for pain and suffering to enter the world. Is this what God really wanted, i.e. would choose on His own?

I reply: God created good and evil (remember that tree?) He put A & E in the Garden and told them not to eat of that tree. Do you think He was surprised when they did?

For your consideration: Isaiah, chapter 45, we read, from verse 5, "I am the Lord, and there is none else, there is no God beside Me. I girded thee (Cyrus —see verse 1), though thou hast NOT known Me, that they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside Me. I am the Lord, and there is none else. I form the light and create darkness: I MAKE PEACE AND CREATE EVIL. I THE LORD DO ALL THESE THINGS."

The following is a quote from the below cited author:

"I create evil." What does this mean?
The Hebrew word here translated "evil" is "ra." Dr Schofield states that the word is also translated "sorrow," "wretchedness," "adversity," "afflictions," "calamities," but is never translated "sin." He adds, "God created evil only in the sense that He made sorrow, wretchedness, etc, to be the sure fruits of sin." But the word "ra" is translated "evil" no less than 445 times in our Authorized (King James) Version. Therefore, it surely means evil. And Isaiah tells us plainly that God created evil……. What we are really saying is this. God is a God with a purpose which He conceived in the beginning and planned through to the end. This purpose required the evil as well as the good, and God provided for the evil just as surely as He provided for the good. Had this not been so, then God's purpose would have been all good, but none of us would ever have been able to realize the greatness of His goodness, for there would have been no evil to set it against.
Yes, the same God Who made the lamb also made the tiger. The God Who made the lovely flowers also made the nettles with their stings. The God Who made the harmless worm also made the poisonous serpent. The God Who made the good, made the evil, too. (THE PROBLEM OF EVIL By John H. Essex.)

You wrote: It is funny (or really, sad) to see the Universalists dance around or ignore evidence to the contrary of their theology.

I reply: Not sad at all, brother. I’d be happy to discuss this with you anytime – though I do NOT have all the answers. There’s only ONE Who does.

You wrote: If you answer yes to any of these, why then? After all, everyone will be okay, won't they? To me, it would just be a huge waste of time to do any of these things if it really doesn't matter one bit in the end.

I reply: Why do you think I post here and elsewhere? I’ve told everyone I know personally that I believe in the reconciliation of all through Jesus Christ’s finished work on the cross. It really is the Good News. I do this so that they may come to know HIM and His love.

I suggest an independent study of the early Church. You may be surprised to find out that the prevailing belief was that all mankind will be restored.

Blessings to you in Jesus.

Peace, GH

PS: If I’ve not answered all your questions, please feel free to discuss.

 

[neal4christ]

The Bible doesn't teach that He is potentially the Savior of the whole world, but that He is the Savior of the whole world.

I agree that He is the Savior of the world, but He will not force people.

You know, the Bible also teaches something else, but I guess you ignore this one since it doesn't fit with your idea.

"Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you; and to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; when he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day." 2 Thessalonians 1:6-10, KJV

And I won't post all of the passage, but look at Matthew 25:31-46. Here are just a couple of the verses that would really concern you:

"Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels." Matthew 25:41, KJV

"And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal." Matthew 25:46, KJV

And:

"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." John 3:36, KJV

"Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire." Matthew 18:8, KJV

"And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and whall be tormented day and night for ever and ever." Revelation 20:10

And regarding this lake of fire, please note who else will go there:

" And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire." Revelation 20:15

There is no mention that any of these people will have a chance to believe the gospel when they are in the lake of fire, nor is there any mention that any will come out of the lake of fire into eternal life. That is an idea that you have come up with.

So you are telling me that everlasting fire and torment are ideas that came about in the "Dark Ages"? Seems Jesus, John, and Paul disagree with you.

Neal

 

[neal4christ]

God created good and evil (remember that tree?) He put A & E in the Garden and told them not to eat of that tree.

Actually, it was the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

"And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil." Genesis 2:9, KJV

Neal

 

[neal4christ]

For your consideration: Isaiah, chapter 45, we read, from verse 5, "I am the Lord, and there is none else, there is no God beside Me. I girded thee (Cyrus —see verse 1), though thou hast NOT known Me, that they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside Me. I am the Lord, and there is none else. I form the light and create darkness: I MAKE PEACE AND CREATE EVIL. I THE LORD DO ALL THESE THINGS."

First off, notice the contrast the Lord is giving. What is the opposite of peace? Confusion and calamity. I feel that the context in this passage has to dictate that it is not evil in the sense of sin, but confusion. I am taking Hebrew now and many Hebrew words have more than one meaning depending on context. We also remember we are mere humans trying to describe God with words.

And for your consideration:

"Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man: but every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth for death." James 1:13-15, KJV

God is not the source of evil in the sense of sin. It is clear from here. Yet, are you willing to attribute sin to God? Is He the source of it? I submit to you, that if you say yes, the God you believe in is no longer the God revealed in Scripture. Also, for God to be the source of sin, He would no longer be God, because how can God punish anyone for sin if He is the source of it? Your theology seems to make God a liar and a joke who is cruel and mean spirited. How can God possibly be holy and yet be the source of sin? How could He ever tell us to be holy if He truly is not? Plus, this would make Him a liar if He is not holy as He claims He is (Lev. 11:44-45; 1 Peter 1:16).

Neal

 

[neal4christ]

And before anyone accuses me of not believing in God's omiscience, omnipotence, and sovereignty, I would like to say I am fully persuaded that He is all of these. Why He let things go this way even though He knew it would happen is not something I can answer. Only the Lord can. However, I feel it is blasphemous to attribute sin to God and say He is the source of it. To say God created Adam and Eve and wanted them to sin and He wanted death and suffering to reign is ridiculous. But I do not believe that God is sitting back wringing His hands not know what is going to happen either. He has a plan and a purpose. He will only strive with us for so long, and as in the days of Noah, He will eventually bring judgement and put an end to all of this.

Neal

 

[Smoky]

I particularly like this quote from William Barclay, whose Daily Study Bible Commentary can be found in most any Christian bookstore across the country:


I AM A CONVINCED UNIVERSALIST
by William Barclay
I am a convinced universalist. I believe that in the end all men will be gathered into the love of God. In the early days Origen was the great name connected with universalism. I would believe with Origen that universalism is no easy thing. Origen believed that after death there were many who would need prolonged instruction, the sternest discipline, even the severest punishment before they were fit for the presence of God. Origen did not eliminate hell; he believed that some people would have to go to heaven via hell. He believed that even at the end of the day there would be some on whom the scars remained. He did not believe in eternal punishment, but he did see the possibility of eternal penalty. And so the choice is whether we accept God's offer and invitation willingly, or take the long and terrible way round through ages of purification.

Gregory of Nyssa offered three reasons why he believed in universalism. First, he believed in it because of the character of God. "Being good, God entertains pity for fallen man; being wise, he is not ignorant of the means for his recovery." Second, he believed in it because of the nature of evil. Evil must in the end be moved out of existence, "so that the absolutely non-existent should cease to be at all." Evil is essentially negative and doomed to non-existence. Third, he believed in it because of the purpose of punishment. The purpose of punishment is always remedial. Its aim is "to get the good separated from the evil and to attract it into the communion of blessedness." Punishment will hurt, but it is like the fire which separates the alloy from the gold; it is like the surgery which removes the diseased thing; it is like the cautery which burns out that which cannot be removed any other way.

But I want to set down not the arguments of others but the thoughts which have persuaded me personally of universal salvation.

First, there is the fact that there are things in the New Testament which more than justify this belief. Jesus said: "I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself" (John 12:32). Paul writes to the Romans: "God has consigned all men to disobedience that he may have mercy on all" (Rom. 11:32). He writes to the Corinthians: "As in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive" (1 Cor. 15:22); and he looks to the final total triumph when God will be everything to everyone (1 Cor. 15:28). In the First Letter to Timothy we read of God "who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth," and of Christ Jesus "who gave himself as a ransom for all" (1 Tim 2:4-6). The New Testament itself is not in the least afraid of the word all.

Second, one of the key passages is Matthew 25:46 where it is said that the rejected go away to eternal punishment, and the righteous to eternal life. The Greek word for punishment is kolasis, which was not originally an ethical word at all. It originally meant the pruning of trees to make them grow better. I think it is true to say that in all Greek secular literature kolasis is never used of anything but remedial punishment. The word for eternal is aionios. It means more than everlasting, for Plato - who may have invented the word - plainly says that a thing may be everlasting and still not be aionios. The simplest way to out it is that aionios cannot be used properly of anyone but God; it is the word uniquely, as Plato saw it, of God. Eternal punishment is then literally that kind of remedial punishment which it befits God to give and which only God can give.

Third, I believe that it is impossible to set limits to the grace of God. I believe that not only in this world, but in any other world there may be, the grace of God is still effective, still operative, still at work. I do not believe that the operation of the grace of God is limited to this world. I believe that the grace of God is as wide as the universe.

Fourth, I believe implicitly in the ultimate and complete triumph of God, the time when all things will be subject to him, and when God will be everything to everyone (1 Cor. 15:24-28). For me this has certain consequences. If one man remains outside the love of God at the end of time, it means that that one man has defeated the love of God - and that is impossible. Further, there is only one way in which we can think of the triumph of God. If God was no more than a King or Judge, then it would be possible to speak of his triumph, if his enemies were agonizing in hell or were totally and completely obliterated and wiped out. But God is not only King and Judge, God is Father - he is indeed Father more than anything else. No father could be happy while there were members of his family for ever in agony. No father would count it a triumph to obliterate the disobedient members of his family. The only triumph a father can know is to have all his family back home. The only victory love can enjoy is the day when its offer of love is answered by the return of love. The only possible final triumph is a universe loved by and in love with God.

[Quoted from William Barclay: A Spiritual Autobiography, pg 65-67, William B Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids, 1977.]