A QUESTION or two TO UNIVERSALISTS

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

Re: A QUESTION or two TO UNIVERSALISTS

Post by Paidion » Mon Feb 09, 2009 4:13 pm

quote wrote:I have noticed that this claim [the claim of the gospel being proclaimed in the early church without warning against conscious eternal torment] is often made, but do you think a dire fate for the wicked was not generally understood? A fate that was at least implied?
I wouldn't call it a "fate", but I do think a dire punishment for the wicked WAS implied. Also, retributive punishment is only one of several theories of punishment. Another is reformatory punishment, and I believe that is the only one in which God is interested. He wants to bring ALL to a state of submission to Him. He knows that that will be the highest good for them.
So that dire punishment could continue for ages, and that would be very serious indeed! Warning against such punishment seems not only to have been implied, but actually stated by the apostle Paul, even though he didn't specifically mention Gehenna.
Why preach remission of sins if there were no consequences?
Why are you asking this question? Who says there are no consequences to sin? Even many ultra-universalists believe there are consequences, even though these consequences are limited to our earthly life. Even if that were true, it would be worth preaching ἀφεσις of sins (that is, deliverance from sins) since life is of a much higher quality when one is not bound by sin.

However most believers in UR believe that there are post mortem consequences which God imposes upon sinners for the PURPOSE of their reconciliation to Him, and that these are very serious consequences, as they are permanent in the sense of requiring ages to complete. If the gospel preacher believes it important to warn the sinner against the post mortem consequences, do you not think these ages of suffering would sufficient to deter him from continuing in sin? Do you think he would be more likely to repent if he could be convinced that the suffering is eternal?

I have heard non-Christians say that if God assigns most people to useless eternal torment that serves no purpose whatever except that of retribution, then they would never serve such a God!The non-Christians I know do not believe that such a God exists! So to preach such a doctrine would accomplish nothing except to turn them away from God.
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.

User avatar
Todd
Posts: 257
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2008 7:09 pm

Re: A QUESTION or two TO UNIVERSALISTS

Post by Todd » Mon Feb 09, 2009 4:48 pm

Paidion wrote:If the gospel preacher believes it important to warn the sinner against the post mortem consequences, do you not think these ages of suffering would sufficient to deter him from continuing in sin?
Paidion,

I am curious why you would think that anyone would be tempted to continue sinning in the resurrection. The lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life would have been left behind in the grave, right? Won't our new bodies be glorified spriritual bodies? We have little data on this, but it seems that we would not be tempted to sin as we are now in the flesh. Your thoughts?

Todd

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

Re: A QUESTION or two TO UNIVERSALISTS

Post by Paidion » Mon Feb 09, 2009 10:06 pm

Todd wrote:I am curious why you would think that anyone would be tempted to continue sinning in the resurrection. The lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life would have been left behind in the grave, right? Won't our new bodies be glorified spriritual bodies? We have little data on this, but it seems that we would not be tempted to sin as we are now in the flesh. Your thoughts?
My thoughts are as follows:

Resurrected people are still in the "flesh", even as Jesus was. Albeit, in His case it was immortal flesh. Yet it was flesh. He said, "A spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have."

A person will be raised with the same nature with which he died. Those who are walking the narrow path which leads to light will be in the process of being conformed to the image of Christ while here on earth. When Jesus returns, they will be raised in the resurrection of the righteous, and Christ will need only to put the finishing touches on them, and they will be perfected (complete). On the other hand, those who are on the broad road which leads to destruction, will still be in that state when they are raised in the resurrection of the unrighteous.

There is nothing in the Bible which states that the unrighteous will be raised immortal. I am not sure that their bodies will not have the same desires they have now. But even if they don't, their minds will be the same. Someone said that this is one of the torments of Gehenna. They lust in their minds, but don't have the bodies to fulfill that lust.

Sin has a much wider scope than "the lust of flesh and the lust of the eyes and the pride of life" ---- though I'm sure they'll retain every whit of their pride, too. All of these things must go. Gehenna and all it entails will do it. That may well include the ministry of the perfected saints to those who will be corrected there.
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.

RV
Posts: 197
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2008 12:33 am

Re: A QUESTION or two TO UNIVERSALISTS

Post by RV » Mon Feb 09, 2009 10:56 pm

No doubt this is interesting stuff.

To me, burning in fire forever doesn't fit the crime, if you know what I mean. But... who am I.

The other thing, the motivation to live a holy life would/is simply motivated by fear. Now, I know a lot of Christian go around talking about relationship, but I doubt that is the motivation for most. Honestly!

User avatar
Todd
Posts: 257
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2008 7:09 pm

Re: A QUESTION or two TO UNIVERSALISTS

Post by Todd » Wed Feb 11, 2009 9:05 am

Paidion wrote:Resurrected people are still in the "flesh", even as Jesus was. Albeit, in His case it was immortal flesh. Yet it was flesh. He said, "A spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have."
Paidion, do you believe that Jesus is still in the flesh at this very moment? If so, then he must reside in a physical location, right? How would you explain Paul's statements in this regard?

1 Cor 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.

1 Cor 15:50
Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does corruption inherit incorruption.
Paidion wrote:There is nothing in the Bible which states that the unrighteous will be raised immortal.
I am not aware of any scriptures which state that the resurrected bodies of the unrighteous will be any different than the righteous, do you? What about this passage in Romans Chapter 8 which is referring to "the redemption of the body" (v.23).

Rom 8:18-21
18 For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. 19 For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God. 20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; 21 because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.

This passage makes it sound as if the unrighteous (the creation) will be resurrected with the same uncorruptible, glorious bodies as the children of God. Do you see this a different way?

Todd

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

Re: A QUESTION or two TO UNIVERSALISTS

Post by Paidion » Wed Feb 11, 2009 4:05 pm

Todd wrote:Paidion, do you believe that Jesus is still in the flesh at this very moment?
Yes, I do. He was raised in the flesh. His body didn't stay in the tomb. He ate fish with his disciples (Fish is pretty physical). When the disciples were frightened and thought they saw a ghost, He replied:

See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Touch me, and see. For a ghost does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have. Luke 24:39

Jesus said that the disciples saw that He had FLESH AND BONES. Flesh and bones are quite physical, are they not? Yet His body was not mortal as is ours. He also had the ability to walk through closed doors. Perhaps His physical body was such that the molecules could pass through the molecules of the door. Also, immortal bodies would not be affected by passing into the upper atmosphere as will happen when those who are alive and remain (I Thess 4) are "changed" and "caught up together" with the raised saints who were previously dead.
If so, then he must reside in a physical location, right?
With regards to His resurrected, immortal body, He is in a particular location. It is written that He is in Heaven seated at the right hand of the Father. I really don't know how "physical" Heaven is. The Father is also particularly located there. But by their spirit, they can extend their personal consciousness to any location in the Universe, especially in the minds and hearts of the faithful. Thus Jesus was able to say that the Father and He would come and make their dwelling with the disciples after His departure.

How would you explain Paul's statements in this regard?
1 Cor 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.
The Greek word for "natural" is not used here. It is the Greek word for "soulish". I do admit that the English word "physical" is derived from this word. So, yes. Paul is contrasting the mortal physical body with immortal "spiritual" body. But this doesn't mean that the immortal body is "spirtual" in the sense of being a spirit. It is spiritual when compared to the mortal physical body, but is not a spirit.
1 Cor 15:50
Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does corruption inherit incorruption.
I concur with Irenaeus who said that it was the heretics (gnostics) who claimed that our bodies are not raised but only our spirits. Irenaeus explained the passage by saying that Paul meant that mere flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God. Flesh and blood must also possess the Spirit of God through regeneration in order to be fit for the Kingdom.

See Against Heresies Book 5 Chapter 9 Sections 1,2,3
I am not aware of any scriptures which state that the resurrected bodies of the unrighteous will be any different than the righteous, do you?
No, I don't know of any which specifically state so. Yet it is strongly implied by the many statements that only some will rise immortal. We are to actually seek immortality. (Romans 2:7). If everyone is going to be raised immortal, what is there to seek?
What about this passage in Romans Chapter 8 which is referring to "the redemption of the body" (v.23).

Romans 8:23 indeed refers to sonship as the redemption of our body. For when our walk in the narrow path is complete, we shall be fully mature sons, and will be resurrected. Jesus Himself will put the finishing touches upon us to complete our perfection. I don't see how this relates in any way to the resurrection of the others, whose resurrection does not even take place until after the millenium (yes, I'm a pre-millenialist who understand that "the rest of the dead" do not live again until after the 1000 years)

Rom 8:18-21
18 For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. 19 For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God. 20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; 21 because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.

This passage makes it sound as if the unrighteous (the creation) will be resurrected with the same uncorruptible, glorious bodies as the children of God. Do you see this a different way?
Yes. The creation itself, all of it, will "be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God." The second law of thermodynamics will be defeated. However, this is a process which will take a long time to complete. When it does, even the wicked, after their repentance and change of character which will occur in the Lake of Fire, will have achieved immortality too.

A valid question at this point: "How can the wicked live for ages in Gehenna if they have mortal bodies?" I am guessing that their mortal bodies will be preserved from death. This is not so far out, for the early Christian belief was that Enoch and Elijah have been preserved from death and still live in their mortal bodies today, at some location which God has chosen. They will return to earth some day as the "two witnesses" described in Revelation 11. Then the beast (the personal antichrist) will kill them, and after three days they will experience resurrection.
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.

User avatar
Todd
Posts: 257
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2008 7:09 pm

Re: A QUESTION or two TO UNIVERSALISTS

Post by Todd » Wed Feb 11, 2009 4:48 pm

Paidion,

Thank you for your thoughtful answers to my questions. Here is another that I would like your response to...

What did Paul mean by this statement?

1 Cor 15:26
26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death.

I have thought that this was another way of saying, "all of the dead will be resurrected and will never die again." Noting also that death is an enemy of God. It seems to me that if death is destroyed then no one is dead anymore - if someone is still dead, then death still exists and has not been destroyed. And also, if no one will die anymore, then all are immortal. What are your thoughts on this?

Todd

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

Re: A QUESTION or two TO UNIVERSALISTS

Post by Paidion » Wed Feb 11, 2009 10:09 pm

As I see it, Todd, ages after the first and second resurrection, when all of Christ's enemies have been put under His feet and all are reconciled to God, then the very last enemy will be destroyed --- death itself, and there will be no more death. All will then be be under the authority of Christ, and thus will be given immortality.

Origen understood death as the last enemy in a figurative sense. He understood Satan as being "the last enemy" and as being "death". Origen thought Satan would be the very last one to be reconciled to God. He believed his being destroyed did not entail His very essence being destroyed but his hostile nature, so that he would no longer be an enemy and would cease to be "death". God destroys His enemies by winning them to Himself.
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.

Jill
Posts: 582
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 6:16 pm

Post by Jill » Sat Feb 14, 2009 5:33 pm

.
Last edited by Jill on Thu Feb 17, 2011 4:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Suzana
Posts: 503
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 3:09 am
Location: Australia

Re: conditional immortality

Post by Suzana » Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:47 pm

Todd wrote: Conditional Immortality
This view has more merit than ET. However, the common understanding is that the unjust will be raised from death (at the resurrection), then punished porportionally according to their sin, then annihilated. This makes no sense to me. There is no purpose to raising the dead only to destroy them again. Also, there is no purpose in punishment without an opportunity to correct oneself and repent.

The only form of CI that would make sense is if God chooses to raise only those who He deems worthy (the just), and the leaves the unjust to remain dead forever. This would be much more merciful than the former. There are a couple of scriptures which might support this.
(bold mine)

I was reminded of this discussion point again (I know it has been raised before elsewhere), when watching the news recently. It was about the trial in Cambodia of some leaders in Pol Pot’s regime (where “up to two million people were killed or starved to death under Khmer Rouge rule in the 1970s”, some of them tortured).

Khmer Rouge leaders facing trial

One person is already on trial (reportedly he has become a born-again believer), but the comments I found interesting were about the other four that have been arrested. Apparently some are really worried that these may die before they are brought to court – “Survivors of the Khmer Rouge regime hope that the process of bringing the remaining leaders to justice will move on swiftly, before they become too old or ill to appear in the dock.

It would appear that there is something in our sense of justice that would be violated if there was no chance of criminals actually being confronted with their crime, and made to face the truth of their actions and judgement made with a verdict handed out officially – even if they are already in prison and even if they will shortly die anyway.

I think it would be the same with unbelievers at the end of the world (if CI was the way things turned out to be); I also think this sense of justice may be derived from being made in the image of God, and I don’t agree it would be pointless to have them raised just to be annihilated; it would be only just and fitting to have everyone face reality, and acknowledge truth and the justice of God (also, there's the bit about 'every knee shall bow…').

To me I think there would almost be a sense of anti-climax if all those people alive throughout the ages just disappeared with no mention or acknowledgement; a case of non-closure in a big way.
Of course, God may think quite differently to what I imagine; that's just some of my musing on this.
Suzana
_________________________
If a man cannot be a Christian in the place he is, he cannot be a Christian anywhere. - Henry Ward Beecher

Post Reply

Return to “Views of Hell”