2 Thessalonians 1:9

[wwalkeriv]

How do those who hold to universal reconciliation understand 2 Thessalonians 1:9?

"These will pay the penalty of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power"

[steve]

I wonder that too. However, I would point out that the phrase "away from the presence of the Lord" is not a translation, but an interpretation. Paul only wrote "destruction from the presence of the Lord." This means that "the presence of the Lord" is not referring to the place from which people are excluded (after all, Paul does not use any word meaning "exclusion," but rather "destruction"). The presence of the Lord is the place from which the destruction proceeds (as in the only other biblical occurrence of this same phrase, in Acts 3:19—"times of refreshing from the presence of the Lord").

The bottom line is that this passage speaks of a destruction that comes from the presence of God, and is therefore in the same class with many other passages speaking of "death," "perishing," being "destroyed," or "consumed." These passages are used by conditionalists to prove annihilationism—and they may in fact support that position.

The universalist, however, is free to observe that these references to "destruction" may describe the awful manner in which these wicked come to the end of their earthly lives, without reference to their final condition after the resurrection, judgment and punishment (which might include ultimate reconciliation).

For example, in Revelation 19:19, 21, we read of the kings of the earth, with their horses and armies being "killed" by the sword proceeding from the mouth of Him who is seen riding on the white horse at the head of heaven's armies (often taken to be the second coming of Christ). Even so, we later see these "kings of the earth" (who were killed in battle while fighting against Christ) making trips into the New Jerusalem bringing their gifts to God (Rev.21:24, cf. Isa.60:11).

As for the word aionios, referring to this destruction, it has been pointed out that this word has more than one possible meaning—one of which is "pertaining to the age," and meaning little else than "eschatological." Thus the phrase in 2 Thess.1:9 has been thought, by some, to mean, "these shall be punished with eschatological destruction, which comes from the presence of the Lord" (compare the similar concept in the same book, at 2:8).

Thus, it becomes difficult to determine whether eschatological "destruction" is the final word for the lost. There is a horrendous judgment, but what the long-range outcome of the punishment may be remains unclear.

[dwilkins]

How do those who hold to universal reconciliation understand 2 Thessalonians 1:9?

"These will pay the penalty of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power"

One of the topics being kicked around on the "Hell" thread and the one about the role of Israel in history is how much of the destruction predicted in the first century was accounted for in the destruction of Jerusalem in the Roman war. If you keep in mind that in the Thessalonian letters Paul is talking to Christians who are being persecuted by the Jews in around 55AD, and that part of the historical narrative was that the apostate Old Covenant nation was about to be put to the sword for the last time, there is also a potential covanental context of the passage you quote above that we don't usually appreciate. In other words, it's possible that the point is that the nation the Jews in view were members of would be banished from the presence of God (see the end of Isaiah 66) while the New Covenant nation would be embraced. Some passages are more satisfying in this regard than others, but there is a flavor of corporate punishment throughout the New Testament that is otherwise difficult to account for.

Doug

[steve7150]

How do those who hold to universal reconciliation understand 2 Thessalonians 1:9?

"These will pay the penalty of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power"









Again it boils down to what "aionios" destruction means. Is it eternal destruction or destruction pertaining to this age or an age to come? Interestingly the folks who believe in eternal torment normally take "aionios" to mean eternal but here it would mean annihilation forever.

[Singalphile]

Steve wrote:
For example, in Revelation 19:19, 21, we read of the kings of the earth, with their horses and armies being "killed" by the sword proceeding from the mouth of Him who is seen riding on the white horse at the head of heaven's armies (often taken to be the second coming of Christ). Even so, we later see these "kings of the earth" (who were killed in battle while fighting against Christ) making trips into the New Jerusalem bringing their gifts to God (Rev.21:24, cf. Isa.60:11).

Hi Steve,

Quick question (and only tangentially related to the topic):

I see Rev 21:1-8 as the the ongoing vision's conclusion, which describes the future new heaven/earth after the judgement when there will be no more tears/pain/death, and which ends with the Alpha & Omega's closing statement ("It is done."/etc.). That, I think, concludes our glimpse of what the future holds.

Then I see Rev 21:9 introducing a new vision of the bride/new Jerusalem - told in Rev 21:10 up to perhaps Rev 22:5 (link) - which describes the church as it is then and now spiritually.

Your book begins a new major part after Rev 20, and it separates Rev 21:9 from the preceding verses. You wrote on page 497 (hard cover) that "Both [Isaiah 60 and Rev 21:22+] passages then would appear to speak, albeit in symbolic terms, of the realities of the New Covenant age. The coming of the Gentiles into the church and the submission of kings to Christ has been in progress for nearly two thousand years now."

That is all how I think it's best understood. Do you have a different best understanding? This relates, of course, to the "kings of the earth".

Thank you!

[thrombomodulin]

The universalist, however, is free to observe that these references to "destruction" may describe the awful manner in which these wicked come to the end of their earthly lives, without reference to their final condition after the resurrection, judgement and punishment (which might include ultimate reconciliation)

2 Th 1:8 states that this destruction happens "when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels". The observation seems to only work if those afflicting the 1st century church are still alive when Jesus is revealed. The commonly held idea, that the destruction has not yet taken place, appears to be incompatible with this universalist observation. Is there any way that a universalist can resolve this apparent incompatability without resorting to a preterist interpretation of these verses?

[dwilkins]

The universalist, however, is free to observe that these references to "destruction" may describe the awful manner in which these wicked come to the end of their earthly lives, without reference to their final condition after the resurrection, judgement and punishment (which might include ultimate reconciliation)

2 Th 1:8 states that this destruction happens "when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels". The observation seems to only work if those afflicting the 1st century church are still alive when Jesus is revealed. The commonly held idea, that the destruction has not yet taken place, appears to be incompatible with this universalist observation. Is there any way that a universalist can resolve this apparent incompatability without resorting to a preterist interpretation of these verses?

I've asked people about this chapter for quite a while now and haven't seen a persuasive argument against a preterist interpretation from anyone, universalist or otherwise.

Doug

[thrombomodulin]

Doug,

I'm not familiar with how a preterist might understand 2 Th 1:8-10. Can you tell me about the historical circumstances involving the demise of those who were afflicting the Thessalonian church, and how it relates to the descriptions found in this passage?

Thanks
Pete

[dwilkins]

Doug,

I'm not familiar with how a preterist might understand 2 Th 1:8-10. Can you tell me about the historical circumstances involving the demise of those who were afflicting the Thessalonian church, and how it relates to the descriptions found in this passage?

Thanks
Pete

It's a pretty straight forward preterist dynamic. The Jews, which the New Testament clearly describes as behind the persecution of Christians in the time leading up to Nero's persecution (and might have been instrumental in convincing him to begin his persecution) had their religious, ideological, and logistic infrastructure destroyed when the Romans attacked and destroyed their capital, Jerusalem. Even outside of Jerusalem, per Josephus there was widespread slaughter of Jews (so its possible that they were slaughtered in Thessalonika, though such records don't exist to my knowledge). The result was that when the predicted judgment came upon the Jews in Jerusalem the members of the Thessalonian church, the other churches and workers associated with Paul, and other Christians throughout the region were given rest from their persecution by Jews sponsored by Jerusalem. That doesn't mean there was never any more persecution. But, it does fulfill the promise of that passage.

But, I'll bet you already knew that.

Doug

[thrombomodulin]

My concerns with the preterist perspective are as follows:

• The Jews living in Thessalonika would not have been destroyed during what occurred 1500 km away in Jerusalem. But, the Josephus reference you made may resolve this. Can you please cite where Josephus mentions these events?
• Being destroyed by fire which comes "from the presence of the Lord", seems to be quite different than fire which proceeds from the Roman armies. That is to say, it sounds as if God is acting directly here, not through an agent.
• The idea that Jesus and his angels were "revealed" strikes me as eschatological because this implies, to me, that some visible manifestation of their presence occurs. As far as I am aware, no visible manifestation of either Jesus or his angels occurred at that time, especially in Thessalonika.