Why not Universal Reconciliation?

User avatar
Homer
Posts: 2995
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: Why not Universal Reconciliation?

Post by Homer » Sat Aug 02, 2014 9:40 pm

Backwoodsman wrote:
Since 'aionios' has been mentioned, it'll make a convenient example. There's the Heleen Keizer article, which would have to be refuted, or at least given a run for its money, if 'eternal' is to stand as the best (or maybe even a valid) translation.


I'm not interested in reigniting the logomachy regarding the meaning of aionios. However I'm not much interested in what Keizer thinks Homer meant by aion/aionios. And I can probably find any number of "experts" in Greek who will disagree with her on Philo's use of the word. What is, I believe, far more relevant to our understanding is what information those who wrote the scriptures intended when they used the word.

Considering the use made of the word in the New Testament we find the word used some 41 times out of 71 as an adjective for "life". Now whether they meant "eternal life" or some such idea as "age abiding life" or even Paidion's idea of "lasting life" the reader can make their choice. If anything could lower and degrade the Christian's hope of eternal life more than these odd sounding translations, I do not know what it might be.

And there is a symmetry, I believe, in the contrast we find when aionios is used numerous times in the scriptures as an adjective for the judgment or future of the lost. Much of Jesus' teaching was in the form of poetry and without the antithesis tho poetry is lost.

In addition to this, we have aionios as an adjective for God, the Spirit, and God's dominion. I do not understand these to be temporal.

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: Why not Universal Reconciliation?

Post by Paidion » Sat Aug 02, 2014 10:24 pm

The word “αἰωνιος”(lasting) does not necessarily refer to the temporal, if by "temporal" one means "temporary" or coming to an end at some point.

“αἰωνιος”(lasting) can be applied to that which comes to an end:

Josephus in “The Wars of the Jews” book 6, states that Jonathan was condemned to “αἰωνιος”(lasting) imprisonment. It is said that that prison sentence lasted only three years.

But “αἰωνιος”(lasting) can also be applied to that which has no end, such as the “αἰωνιος”(lasting) God, or the “αἰωνιος”(lasting) life which Christians have. Thus the word doesn't MEAN a length of time at all, either a limited length of time or an everlasting length of time.

This has been said many times in these discussions, though Homer seems to have forgotten, or else ignores, or else pretends, that it has never been said. He seems to insist that if “αἰωνιος” does not mean "eternal" or "everlasting", then there is only one other possibility—that it means "temporal" or "temporary".
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

Singalphile
Posts: 903
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:46 pm

Re: Why not Universal Reconciliation?

Post by Singalphile » Sun Aug 03, 2014 1:48 am

Paidion wrote:Josephus in “The Wars of the Jews” book 6, states that Jonathan was condemned to “αἰωνιος”(lasting) imprisonment. It is said that that prison sentence lasted only three years.
That reference can be read at the very bottom of the page here.

I looked it up now (I've asked before w/o response), and according to this Jewish Encyclopedia (very last sentence), "Condemned to lifelong fetters, [John of Giscala] was reserved for the Roman triumph of Titus, and he probably died in a prison at Rome (ib. vii. 5, § 3)."

So I don't understand what three years has to do with the meaning of the word in question. Was he not sentenced to perpetual, lifelong imprisonment?

Incidentally, this would be similar to the OT use of olam in Exodus 21:6, where it means and emphasizes the complete scope of time that can possibly be viewed in the given context.
... that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. John 5:23

User avatar
backwoodsman
Posts: 536
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:32 am
Location: Not quite at the ends of the earth, but you can see it from here.

Re: Why not Universal Reconciliation?

Post by backwoodsman » Sun Aug 03, 2014 10:01 am

Homer wrote:What is, I believe, far more relevant to our understanding is what information those who wrote the scriptures intended when they used the word.
True, certainly; that's the whole point of studying these things. But if one were determined to stick by a position at any cost, regardless of evidence, while appearing to have considered the evidence, I can think of no better way than simply to pretend the evidence doesn't exist.

Thank you for your reply; you did a great job of illustrating the points in my last post.

User avatar
Homer
Posts: 2995
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: Why not Universal Reconciliation?

Post by Homer » Mon Aug 04, 2014 11:35 am

Hi Paidion,

You wrote:
The word “αἰωνιος”(lasting) does not necessarily refer to the temporal, if by "temporal" one means "temporary" or coming to an end at some point.

“αἰωνιος”(lasting) can be applied to that which comes to an end:
You have made my point. We've been studying through 1 John where we find:

1 John 2:25 New King James Version (NKJV)

25. And this is the promise that He has promised us—eternal life.

When I read this I have a clear idea of the promise, but as you say, your translation results in a nebulous promise.

User avatar
steve
Posts: 3392
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:45 pm

Re: Why not Universal Reconciliation?

Post by steve » Mon Aug 04, 2014 1:47 pm

When I read this I have a clear idea of the promise, but as you say, your translation results in a nebulous promise.
Nebulous only with reference to exact duration, but what if the term is not intended to address duration? As has been pointed out by many scholars, the term probably means "life of the messianic age." The term thus would not be intended to address the length of the life, but the species of the life. For the length, we would look to passages using other terms, like "immortality."

dwilkins
Posts: 647
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2012 2:54 pm

Re: Why not Universal Reconciliation?

Post by dwilkins » Wed Jan 07, 2015 3:38 am

I recently ran across a book that I think some of you might find interesting. You can pick it up for free as a PDF if you want, or buy one of the various inexpensive formats such as Kindle. It's a look at the history of the doctrine in the early church.

http://www.amazon.com/Universalism-Prev ... dred+years

Doug

User avatar
backwoodsman
Posts: 536
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:32 am
Location: Not quite at the ends of the earth, but you can see it from here.

Re: Why not Universal Reconciliation?

Post by backwoodsman » Wed Jan 07, 2015 10:57 am

dwilkins wrote:I recently ran across a book that I think some of you might find interesting. You can pick it up for free as a PDF if you want, or buy one of the various inexpensive formats such as Kindle. It's a look at the history of the doctrine in the early church.
That's an excellent book for those researching the topic. It's been mentioned a number of times before (search the forum for 'hanson'). It can be read online or downloaded here:
https://archive.org/details/universalismpre00hansgoog

User avatar
robbyyoung
Posts: 811
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 2:23 am

Re: Why not Universal Reconciliation?

Post by robbyyoung » Sun Mar 29, 2015 12:18 pm

Hello All and God Bless,

Gal 6:10 (YLT) "therefore, then, as we have opportunity, may we work the good to all, and especially unto those of the household of the faith."

Please note: μάλιστα (malista) = especially, chiefly, most of all, above all

Here's one example concerning "a distinction" between non-believers and believers. The context mentions benefits to "The Believers" in their respected time period, at the proper "Time".

vs.8-9 "because he who is sowing to his own flesh, of the flesh shall reap corruption; and he who is sowing to the Spirit, of the Spirit shall reap life age-during; and in the doing good we may not be faint-hearted, for at the proper time we shall reap -- not desponding;

Please Note: The "current age" and it's inhabitants are in view. However, Gal 6:10 sets up UR quite nicely in the next scripture.

1 Tim 4:10 (YLT) "for for this we both labour and are reproached, because we hope on the living God, who is Saviour of all men -- especially of those believing."

Please note once again: μάλιστα (malista) = especially, chiefly, most of all, above all

Timothy gives us "The Distinction", but inclusive nature of God's salvation. Basically, everyone gets a FREE ticket to God's salvation concert, but only Believers get "The Early Meet and Greet / The Back-Stage Pass".

So is there a benefit to being "A Believer"? Absolutely. Is God, as The Savior of all men, a statement of fact without fruition? Only reserved for The Household of Faith? Does not "age-during" represent a finite period of time?

I'm still pondering the validity/hope of UR.

God Bless.

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: Why not Universal Reconciliation?

Post by Paidion » Sun Mar 29, 2015 1:59 pm

Thanks for the link to the book, Backwoodsman! I have dowloaded it both as a pdf file, and as a mobi file (for my kindle reader).
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

Post Reply

Return to “Views of Hell”