Eternal Punishment is Against The Law

[messianicdruid]

We had a nice long discussion several years ago on this topic on the old goldismoneyforum, and I can see it is time to revisit this topic. So join in.

"Whenever our English versions use the term "everlasting" or "eternal" in the Old Testament, it is normally from the original Hebrew word, olam. This word means "to hide, keep secret, obscure." It is best expressed by the English word, "obscurity." In actual usage, the word refers to an INDEFINITE period of time, but NOT eternal. It is simply AN AGE. The end of that age is obscure and generally unknown, but not endless.

For example, in Jonah 2:6, the prophet prays for deliverance out of the belly of the great fish. He says:

6 I descended to the roots of the mountains. The earth with its bars was around me forever [olam], But Thou hast brought up my life from the pit, O LORD my God.

Did Jonah remain in the belly of the fish for eternity? Obviously not, or he would have been recycled fish bait many times over. In the darkness he had no concept of time, and so those three days and nights are described as being olam, an obscure amount of time.

Another example where olam is clearly a limited period of time, or an age, is found in Exodus 21:6. It specifies that a servant may serve his master "for ever" (olam). This is not for eternity, but only for the remaining life time of the servant. No one could know how long the servant would remain alive, so the amount of time was indefinite, or obscure.

One very interesting verse is Psalm 45:6. It shows that there is time AFTER olam. This proves beyond doubt that olam itself cannot refer to eternity, because when the Psalmist wished to express eternity, he had to say "olam va ad," or "the age and beyond."

6 Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever [olam va ad, "the age and beyond"]; A scepter of uprightness is the scepter of Thy kingdom.

There are many other examples where olam is obviously a limited period of time, but we do not wish to bore the reader unduly. We shall simply list a few from the Psalms in the event that some readers may wish to study this further: Psalm 78:66; 79:13; 86:12; 89:1; 110:4; 112:6; 115:18.

The New Testament books were written in Greek or, in some cases, in Aramaic and then immediately translated by the authors into Greek. The New Testament authors often quote verses from the Old Testament, and when they do, they usually quote from the Septuagint. This was the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament that was used widely during the time of Christ and the Apostles.

In Hebrews 1:8 the author quotes from Psalm 45:6. In this verse, olam is rendered by the Greek word aion. Compare also Hebrews 5:6 and Psalm 110:4. This is the closest Greek equivalent and therefore was used in the Septuagint. And so we can safely say that aion is meant to convey the same meaning as the Hebrew concept of olam.

But what about the Greek word itself? Does aion really mean an age, or a limited period of time? Yes, it does. It does not really carry the idea of "obscurity," but like olam, means an age, or eon.

One of the most obvious New Testament passages where aion refers to an age is found in Matthew 13, where Jesus interprets His own parables. In order to show the contrast between aion and kosmos, we will begin with verse 38.

38 And the field is the world [kosmos]; and as for the good seed, these are the sons of the kingdom; and the tares are the sons of the evil one; 39 and the enemy who sowed them is the devil, and the harvest is the end of the age [aion]; and the reapers are angels. 40 "Therefore just as the tares are gathered up and burned with fire, so shall it be at the end of the age [aion].

The King James Version says "the end of the WORLD," but most reference Bibles have a marginal reference to explain that verses 39 and 40 should read "AGE," rather than "world." How do they know? Simply because the Greek word is aion, rather than kosmos. All translators know that aion refers to an age, including the New American Standard Bible, which we quoted above. It is a reference to a limited period of TIME.

Ages have both a beginning and an end. Hebrews 11:3 tells us that ages have beginning points:

3 By faith we understand that the worlds [aionas, "ages"] were prepared by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things which are visible.

The NASB above mistranslated aionas in this instance. Aionas is simply the plural of aion in the Greek. It says God "framed" the ages; therefore, ages had a beginning. This is witnessed also by Hebrews 1:2.

2 In these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world [aionas, "ages"].

We know that Jesus Christ (the Logos of John 1:1) did indeed create the world, but this is not what the author of Hebrews was telling us. He was informing us that Jesus created the ages of time. Time simply did not exist before creation. Time is a created thing, just like space. In fact, Paul makes reference to a promise of God that He made BEFORE time began. It is found in Titus 1:2.

2 In the hope of eternal [aionian] life, which God, who cannot lie, promised long ages ago [pro chronon aionion, "before the ages began"].

It is truly unfortunate that the NASB translators did not understand the doctrine of the ages. If they had rendered the passage as it reads, rather than trying to interpret it by their own understanding, it would be easier for the average reader to see how God created time and divided it into various ages. Here is where a more literal translation would be helpful. For example, Young's Literal Translation of Titus 1:2 reads,

2 upon hope of life age-enduring, which God, who doth not lie, did promise before times of ages.

Rotherham's Emphasized Bible renders this verse,

2 In hope of life age-abiding; which God who cannot lie promised before age-during times.

These renderings are more accurate, even though they are a little more difficult to read because they are so literal. Easy-reading versions such as the NASB certainly have their place in modern society, but the serious Bible student should also have a literal translation at his or her disposal in order to filter out the translator's bias.

Titus 1:2 (above) also makes reference to God's promise to us, which is the hope of aionian life. Many have assumed that this is a reference to immortality itself, and this is why it is so often rendered "eternal life." But strictly speaking, this is not so. Aionian life is a specific promise of immortality IN THE TABERNACLES AGE, given to those who inherit Life in the first resurrection. As we saw in Chapter One, a few believers will inherit life at the first resurrection; but most believers will have to wait for the general resurrection. Paul makes reference to the first resurrection in Phil. 3:10-14.

10 That I may know Him, and the power of His resurrection and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death; 11 in order that I may attain to the resurrection [exanastasis] from the dead. 12 Not that I have already obtained it, or have already become perfect, but I press on in order that I may lay hold of that for which also I was laid hold of by Christ Jesus. 13 Brethren, I do not regard myself as having laid hold of it yet; but one thing I do: forgetting what lies behind and reaching forward to what lies ahead, 14 I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus.

The "upward call of God" that Paul speaks of in Philippians 3:14 is to receive Life in the first resurrection at the beginning of the Tabernacles, NOT at the general resurrection, at the end of the thousand years.

How do we know this? Because in Philippians 3:11 Paul describes this higher calling as being the "out-resurrection" (exanastasis). It is the only time in the entire New Testament that Paul puts an "ex" in front of the usual word for resurrection (anastasis). It is his way of differentiating this greater resurrection from the general resurrection.

The Greek word translated "upward" in the NASV above is ano. It means high, upward, or above. When the word is used of countries, it means inland, or up from the coast. When the word is used of time, it means FORMER, or formerly. And so, when Paul uses the term to describe the prize of the UPWARD (high) calling of God, he is most likely telling us that there are two resurrections: the former and the latter, or the first and the general resurrection. The prize is to attain to the former, or first resurrection.

All through the New Testament we find countless references to "eternal life." Yes, of course we will inherit eternal life, or immortality. But the thrust of this phrase is to show us a better resurrection, wherein we may inherit life during the Tabernacles Age PRIOR TO the time of the new heavens and the new earth.

We should understand the Scriptures through Hebrew eyes, not through our modern English eyes. In the Hebrew concept, it was correctly believed that we would be resurrected at the beginning of the Tabernacles Age. The Messiah would come to rule that Kingdom, and His people would rule with Him. In other words, they would be given aionian life, "Age-abiding life," or life pertaining specifically to the Tabernacles Age.

I have found no evidence that the prophets knew clearly of more than one resurrection back in the Old Testament era, any more than they knew there would be a Pentecostal Age before the Tabernacles Age. This was something that was to be revealed with Jesus and the Apostles. And when they did reveal it, they made it clear (as we saw in Chapter One) that those who attain to that high calling would be given life 1,000 years BEFORE the rest of the believers.

Consequently, we find references like Luke 12:46 which appears to teach that believers ("servants") who do not watch for His coming will not inherit "eternal life." In reality, it merely says that such people will not inherit the first resurrection. They will not have the privilege of ruling with Christ in immortality and incorruption during the Tabernacles Age. And so we are everywhere exhorted to strive to inherit aionian life, which is the real prize (Phil. 3:14).

In Luke 1:33 we find that "OF His kingdom there shall be NO END." If Luke had used the term aionian here, he would have been incorrect. The things OF the kingdom shall truly be everlasting, not age-lasting. But Jesus' reign lasts only until all enemies are subdued, including death itself (1 Cor. 15:25-28). At that point the Kingdom is turned over to the Father, and the perfected universe enters a timeless realm of which we know little."

[crimethink]

I don't know the specifics of what the final state of the unsaved are, but, I know that eternal separation from God is not something to be longed for, nor even "settled for." I do tend towards the annihilationist position, knowing God's nature of perfect justice and perfect mercy.

[messianicdruid]

I don't know the specifics of what the final state of the unsaved are, but, I know that eternal separation from God is not something to be longed for, nor even "settled for." I do tend towards the annihilationist position, knowing God's nature of perfect justice and perfect mercy.

If God could save everyone, would He do it?

http://gods-kingdom-ministries.net/teachings/books/if-god-could-save-everyone-would-he/

[ximmy]

Here you go messianicdruid,

(1 Tim 2:1-6)
I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men;
2 For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.
3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;
4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

[crimethink]

If God could save everyone, would He do it?


Yes, He would, but most men (and women) don't want to be saved. And God honors that choice.

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. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 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. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

[palani]

http://i64.tinypic.com/2wfinme.png

[StreetsOfGold]

The King James Version says "the end of the WORLD," but most reference Bibles have a marginal reference to explain that verses 39 and 40 should read "AGE," rather than "world."

The KING JAMES BIBLE is a PERFECT English translation!!
Why?
God DIRECTED and ORDAINED IT with the men HE had do the translation!

Bible critics (like this one) ALWAYS, with NO exception end up in heresy of some kind, NO exceptions!!
These arm chair "scholar" wannabes always think (in their puny mind) they know more about translation of Hebrew, Koine Greek and aramic into English than the King James Translators which GOD PUT IN PLACE for this VERY JOB!!
Hello?!?!
Here's their bio which absolutely TROUNCES on the BEST "scholars" living today!!
In fact, there is just NO COMPARISON, it's not even FAIR to compare!!

https://www.scionofzion.com/kjvtransqual.htm


If you believe the King James Bible has even ONE error, not YOUR opinion of what you think is an error but a VIABLE PROVABLE ERROR

Post it!!

Not a copy and paste of some list of so called errors which have been already answered ad nauseum by Bible believers but ONE which YOU FOUND!
I have had this offer open for over 30 years and not ONE person has EVER shown one!

[messianicdruid]

The KING JAMES BIBLE is a PERFECT English translation!!
Why?
God DIRECTED and ORDAINED IT with the men HE had do the translation!
Are you saying King James was GOD? It was a government-issue bible. Was every translation before it wrong?

[crimethink]

The KING JAMES BIBLE is a PERFECT English translation!!

The statement of an idolator.

The King James is the most perfect - it not "perfect." If it were, it would proclaim the Name of Yahweh at every opportunity. Yet, instead, it follows the Talmud's guideline, and uses "LORD" in place of the Name of Yahweh in almost all circumstances.

The Bible is NOT "the Word of God." It tells us about the Word of God - who is Jesus Christ Himself (John 1:1).

After 406 years, however, the King James remains the most reliable in English, since it was not subjected to the active and Hell-bent anti-Christ Bolshevist political bias we have witnessed in the last century or so.

[crimethink]

Are you saying King James was GOD? It was a government-issue bible. Was every translation before it wrong?

Those who worship printed works fail to understand the most essential aspects of the Word of God have been fully-accessible in universal language to every man who is open to God and His Word...via the Holy Spirit and that intrinsic programming God placed there from the beginning (Romans 1:20).

Books are extra tools for the glorification of God and edification of man. The vast majority of folks in the almost 2000 years since Christ never read the Bible...because they didn't have access to it.

[messianicdruid]

The Bible is NOT "the Word of God." It tells us about the Word of God - who is Jesus Christ Himself (John 1:1).

Thank You for this.

The question is "Does "all" mean all and does "every" mean every.

"Every knee shall bend and every tounge shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of the Father."

You can ignore the mistranslations of "olam" and "aion" but unending punishment/torment does not jibe with "all shall be made alive" and "every tounge shall confess". But it's not just me:

Ellicott's Commentary on the Whole Bible

Matt. 25:46: Everlasting punishment--life eternal. The two adjectives represent the same Greek word (aionion) aionios -- it must be admitted (1) that the Greek word which is rendered "eternal" does not, in itself, involve endlessness, but rather, duration, whether through an age or succession of ages, and that it is therefore applied in the N.T. to periods of time that have had both a beginning and an ending (Rom. 16:25), where the Greek is "from aeonian times;" our version giving "since the world began." (Comp. 2 Tim. 1:9; Tit. 1:3)--strictly speaking, therefore, the word, as such, apart from its association with any qualifying substantive, implies a vast undefined duration, rather than one in the full sense of the word "infinite."

The Encyclopedia Dictionary of the Bible (Catholic Bible Dictionary), p. 693

ETERNITY: The Bible hardly speaks of eternity in the philosophical sense of infinite duration without beginning or end. The Hebrew word olam, which is used alone (Ps. 61:8; etc.) or with various prepositions (Gn. 3:22; etc.) in contexts where it is traditionally translated as "forever," means in itself no more than "for an indefinitely long period." Thus, me olam does not mean "from eternity" but "of old" (Gn. 6:4, etc.). In the N.T. aion is used as the equivalent of olam.

Dr. F.W. Farrar, The Eternal Hope, p. 198

That the adjective is applied to some things which are "endless" does not, of course, for one moment prove that the word itself meant "endless," and to introduce this rendering into many passages would be utterly impossible and absurd.

Dr. F.W. Farrar, Mercy and Judgment, p. 378

Since aion meant "age," aionios means, properly, "belonging to an age," or "age-long," and anyone who asserts that it must mean "endless" defends a position which even Augustine practically abandoned twelve centuries ago. Even if aion always meant "eternity," which is not the case in classic or Hellenistic Greek-- aionios could still mean only "belonging to eternity" and not "lasting through it."

Hasting's Dictionary of the New Testament, Vol. 1, p. 542, art. Christ and the Gospels

There is no word either in the O.T. Hebrew or in the N.T. Greek to express the abstract idea of eternity.

(Vol. III, p. 369) Eternal, everlasting--nonetheless "eternal" is misleading, inasmuch as it has come into the English to connote the idea of "endlessly existing," and thus to be practically a synonym for "everlasting." But this is not an adequate rendering of aionios which varies in meaning with the variations of the noun aion from which it comes.

The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, Vol. IV, p. 643

Time: The O.T. and the N.T. are not acquainted with the conception of eternity as timelessness. The O.T. has not developed a special term for "eternity." The word aion originally meant "vital force," "life;" then "age," "lifetime." It is, however, also used generally of a (limited or unlimited long space of time. The use of the word aion is determined very much by the O.T. and the LXX. Aion means "long distant uninterrupted time" in the past (Luke 1:10), as well as in the future (John 4:14).

Lange's Commentary American Edition, Vol. V, p. 48

On Ecclesiastes 1:4. The preacher, in contending with the universalist, or restorationist, would commit an error, and, it may be, suffer a failure in his argument, should he lay the whole stress of it on the etymological or historical significance of the words, aion, aionios, and attempt to prove that, of themselves, they necessarily carry the meaning of endless duration.

Dr. MacKnight

I must be so candid as to acknowledge that the use of these terms, "forever," "eternal," "everlasting," shows that they who understand these words in a limited sense when applied to punishment put no forced interpretation upon them.

The Parkhurst Lexicon

Olam (aeon) seems to be used much more for an indefinite than for an infinite time.

G. Campbell Morgan, God's Methods With Men, pp. 185-186

Let me say to Bible students that we must be very careful how we use the word "eternity." We have fallen into great error in our constant usage of that word. There is no word in the whole Book of God corresponding with our "eternal," which as commonly used among us, means absolutely without end.

The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, Vol. XII, p. 96

Under the instruction of those great teachers, many other theologians believed in universal salvation; and indeed the whole Eastern Church until after 500 A.D. was inclined to it. Doederlein says that "In proportion as any man was eminent in learning in Christian antiquity, the more did he cherish and defend the hope of the termination of future torments." Many more church historians could be quoted with similar observations.

Philippson, Israel Religionslehre (11:255)

The Rabbi teach no eternity of hell torments; even the greatest sinners were punished for generations.

Dr. Alford Plumer, An Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew, pp. 351-352

It is often pointed out that "eternal" (aionios) in "eternal punishment" must have the same meaning as in "eternal life." No doubt, but that does not give us the right to say that "eternal" in both cases means "endless."

Dr. Edward Plumptre (Eschatologist)

I fail to find, as is used by the Greek Fathers, any instance in which the idea of time duration is unlimited.

The Pulpit Commentary, Vol. 15, p. 485

It is possible that "aeonian" may denote merely indefinite duration without the connotation of never ending.

G. T. Stevenson, Time and Eternity

(Page 63) Since, as we have seen, the noun aion refers to a period of time, it appears very improbable that the derived adjective aionios would indicate infinite duration, nor have we found any evidence in Greek writing to show that such a concept was expressed by this term.

(Page 72) In 1 Cor. 15:22-29 the inspired apostle to the Gentiles transports his readers' thoughts far into the future, beyond the furthest point envisaged elsewhere in holy writ. After outlining the triumph of the Son of God in bringing all creation under His benign control, Paul sets forth the consummation of the divine plan of the ages in four simple, yet infinitely profound words, "God all in all." This is our God, purposeful, wise, loving, and almighty, His Son our Lord a triumphant Savior, Who destroys His enemies by making them friends.

Jeremy Taylor, author of Systematic Hellology, which advocates the common belief in eternal torment, later writes a modified view in Jeremy Taylor's Works, Vol. III, p. 43.

Though the fire is everlasting, not all that enters it is everlasting . . . . "The word everlasting signifies only to the end of its period.

Dr. Nigel Turner, Christian Words, p. 457

All the way through, it is never feasible to understand aionios as everlasting.

Dr. (Prof.) Marvin Vincent, Word Studies of the New Testament, Vol. IV

(Page 59) The adjective aionios in like manner carries the idea of time. Neither the noun nor the adjective in themselves carries the sense of "endless" or "everlasting." aionios means enduring through or pertaining to a period of time. Out of the 150 instances in the LXX (Septuagint), four-fifths imply limited duration.

(Page 291, about 2 Tim. 1:9) "Before the world began" (pro chronon aionion) Lit. Before eternal times. If it is insisted that aionion means everlasting, this statement is absurd. It is impossible that anything should take place before everlasting times.

Charles H. Welch, editor of The Berean Expositor, wrote in An Alphabetical Analysis, Vol. I

(Page 52) What we have to learn is that the Bible does not speak of eternity. It is not written to tell us of eternity. Such a consideration is entirely outside the scope of revelation.

(Page 279) Eternity is not a Biblical theme.

Dr. R.F. Weymouth, The New Testament in Modern Speech, p. 657

Eternal: Greek: "aeonion," i.e., "of the ages." Etymologically this adjective, like others similarly formed, does not signify "during," but "belonging to" the aeons or ages."

And what of the early church leaders who taught that reconciliation would become universal?

[Joshua01]

:rolleyes:

[messianicdruid]

If you believe the King James Bible has even ONE error, not YOUR opinion of what you think is an error but a VIABLE PROVABLE ERROR

Post it!!

I have had this offer open for over 30 years and not ONE person has EVER shown one!
How do you differentiate between an error and my opinion of an error?

What I have posted is not a "list". The proof is here, and your wait is officially over.

The Geneva Bible is a fair translation but it had copious marginal notes which explained the government's responsibilities toward God and His people. This is the reason for a government-issue bible [ to replace it ] that would de-emphasize the king's responsibilities and make him look like a good guy.

The kingdom of God is not a religion, but a form of government. The sooner we get that, the better.

My earlier questions were not rhetorical. No drive-by posting allowed.

[Neuro]

How do you differentiate between an error and my opinion of an error?

What I have posted is not a "list". The proof is here, and your wait is officially over.

The Geneva Bible is a fair translation but it had copious marginal notes which explained the government's responsibilities toward God and His people. This is the reason for a government-issue bible [ to replace it ] that would de-emphasize the king's responsibilities and make him look like a good guy.

The kingdom of God is not a religion, but a form of government. The sooner we get that, the better.

My earlier questions were not rhetorical. No drive-by posting allowed.

He demonstrates circular logic, whereby the error you suggested is impossible since KJV bible is PERFECT, therefore the error is yours to question it. Thus you failed.

It really is impossible to point out an error in something that is perfect. LOL

[palani]

It really is impossible to point out an error in something that is perfect. LOL
Your logic is PERFECT. Ergo it cannot be in error. But as we say in ingineering "GARBAGE IN GARBAGE OUT". Hence while the logic might be perfect the facts being allowed in might be flawed.

Have you considered Kalman filtering to pre-qualify the facts in question? If you filter enough there are no facts and the output of the logic will reflect that fact (flat line is boring though). Or you might apply a dirac delta function (all frequencies/all facts) and convolute (flip it in the frequency domain) the output to check for eigenvalues (location of poles and/or zeros) to see which facts line up precisely with which logic.

[crimethink]

The question is "Does "all" mean all and does "every" mean every.

"Every knee shall bend and every tounge shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of the Father."


Yes, every knee shall bow, and every tongue shall confess the Christ, even the ones who were supremely haughty in this life and in rabid denial that God exists. But it will ("probably") be too late for those who let the offer of everlasting salvation expire - at their death. Standing before Him, at Judgment, will convince even the most hardened autotheist.

The concept of "all" is variable in the Bible. The verse "all the world should be taxed" is a tool I use to (try to) educate those who worship the Bible, and blindly insist it is "perfect" while applying modern perspectives. Caesar never taxed the Incas. :)




And what of the early church leaders who taught that reconciliation would become universal?

We simply don't know - nor does it matter for our work - if the unrepentant and God-denying are eventually reconciled to God. We must assume they will not be, and act accordingly in this life, teaching them the Gospel, in hope they will accept it. If God does give them a second chance, Hallelujah! But that's a gamble with potential consequences too terrible to conceive of.

As for early church teachings, please remember that Mary worship was included. Error entered doctrine the day after Christ's ascension.

[messianicdruid]

The concept of "all" is variable in the Bible. The verse "all the world should be taxed" is a tool I use to (try to) educate those who worship the Bible, and blindly insist it is "perfect" while applying modern perspectives. Caesar never taxed the Incas.

True, but the Incas were not part of the world system. They were part of the planet, but "world" does not entail planet-wide effect.


We simply don't know - nor does it matter for our work - if the unrepentant and God-denying are eventually reconciled to God. We must assume they will not be, and act accordingly in this life, teaching them the Gospel, in hope they will accept it. If God does give them a second chance, Hallelujah! But that's a gamble with potential consequences too terrible to conceive of.

Well, I'm "all-in" on the Love of God overcoming all opposition. Whether or not 'it matters' depends on what "our work" entails.

"The restoration of all things was taught by the Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:22-28.

22 For as in Adam all die, so also in [the] Christ all shall be made alive. 23 But each in his own order [tagma, "squadron"]: Christ the first fruits [or, "anointed firstfruits"], after that those who are [the] Christ's at His coming [parousia, "presence"], 24 then comes the end, when He delivers up the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power. 25 For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. 26 The last enemy that will be abolished is death. 27 For He has put all things in subjection under His feet. But when He says, "All things are put in subjection," it is evident that He is excepted who put all things in subjection to Him. 28 And when all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, that God may be all in all.

Verse 22: It is evident that all mankind died in Adam-with no exceptions. In the same manner also shall all be made alive in Christ-with no exceptions. The "all" in both cases parallel each other and are equal in scope. However, they will NOT all be raised and saved at the same time.

Verse 23: Each class shall be raised in its own order (tagma, "squadron"), for there is more than one resurrection ahead. Keep in mind that Paul is here dealing with the various resurrections of mankind. He has already dealt with Jesus' resurrection in verses 1-21. That is the foundation of the resurrections that follow.

The first "squadron" to be raised, according to most translations, is "Christ the firstfruits." This rendering hardly makes sense, since Christ is not a "squadron," but a single Person. This could have been "anointed firstfruits" (see above). The word "Christ" in the Greek is the word for "anointed." When speaking of Jesus, it is preceded by the definite article the, making it "THE Anointed (One)," or "THE Christ."

For example, in verse 22 (above) the original Greek has the definite article before "Christ," because Paul is referring to Jesus, "the Christ" in whom all shall be made alive. At the end of verse 23 the same is true when Paul says, "afterward those that are (the) Christ's at His coming." Between these two examples, however, we find a case where the definite article is NOT used: "Christ the firstfruits." It is therefore likely that "Christ" is NOT referring to "the Christ" (Jesus), but rather to a more general squadron of anointed ones.

And so, verse 22 is better understood to mean, "anointed firstfruits." This is the first squadron of believers; those who are to inherit the first resurrection. Paul carefully chose this phrase to describe the firstfruits of the barley harvest, which was to be anointed with oil, as we read in Leviticus 23:13.

13 'Its grain offering shall then be two-tenths of an ephah of fine flour mixed with oil, an offering by fire to the LORD for a soothing aroma, with its libation, a fourth of a hin of wine.

This was in direct contrast with the firstfruits of the wheat harvest, the figure of the second resurrection of the Church in general. Those firstfruits were to be baked with leaven, rather than anointed with oil, as we read in Leviticus 23:17.

17 You shall bring in from your dwelling places two loaves of bread for a wave offering, made of two-tenths of an ephah; they shall be of a fine flour, baked with leaven as first fruits to the LORD.

We will discuss the firstfruits in more detail in our next chapter on the three harvest festivals.

The second squadron of resurrected ones are "those who are Christ's at His coming," or presence. Christ's "presence" here is when He comes as Judge at the Great White Throne. This is most clearly portrayed in Daniel 7, where the prophet saw "the Ancient of Days" coming to sit upon the throne of judgment (Daniel 7:9 and 22). We have already shown that this is the second resurrection and includes both believers and unbelievers.

Verse 24: "Then comes the end" refers to the end of all things, i.e., after the Ages of Ages. This is the third and final time where a squadron of people will enter into God's rest. It is not quite accurate to call this occasion a resurrection, because it appears that the sinners being judged during that final age will be kept alive to serve out their sentence. We read about this in Revelation 20 where "death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire." If death itself, and hades with it, are cast into the lake of fire, it appears that the first death will be abolished at the Great White Throne Judgment to make way for the second death, or the lake of fire.

The second death is a second TYPE of death. It is defined simply as the lake of fire, which, as we have seen, is the judgment of the law. This second death is the final enemy that must be abolished at the Creation's Jubilee of the earth at the end of the final age. Paul says clearly in 1 Corinthians 15:26 that "the last enemy that will be abolished is death."

Only then, Paul says, will all earthly authorities have been made subject to His authority. Only then will all enemies have been subdued. Once all enemies are fully under His feet, then will come the abolition of death itself. This can only be accomplished by giving life in Creation's Jubilee.

Even as the first squadron represents the barley harvest [ the "higher calling" ], and the second the wheat harvest [ the called-out - ie: church ], so also this third squadron represents the grape harvest [ appolumi - the lost ]. In order for God to obtain the wine, He must tread out the grapes, that is, He must "put all enemies under His feet." Paul again has chosen His words carefully with the harvest theme in mind."

The KJV translators may have done their best with the revelation they had. But as more people are offended at the false doctrines brought in by Augustine and Jerome [ former pagans ] the ministry of Reconciliation [ that saves to the uttermost" ] must be taught.

[messianicdruid]

The kingdom of God is not a religion, but a form of government.

"For one will hardly die for a righteous man; though perhaps for the good man someone would dare even to die. But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him. For if while we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through them​ death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.

There are many who would love their neighbors, but not their enemies. The love of God is demonstrated by the fact that Jesus Christ was willing to die for His enemies—not after they became His friends. He died for unbelievers as well as for believers. Such love is the basis for the latter part of Romans 5:18, where Paul contrasts the first Adam with Christ:

18 So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men.

In other words, Christ was willing to die, knowing that his “one act of righteousness” would result in “justification of life to all men.” His righteous act on the cross did not merely give men the potential of justification. No, justification to all men was the actual result, even as the sin of Adam resulted in condemnation to all men.

For this reason, too, we read in 1 John 2:2,

2 and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.

Hence, the promise of God to bless all nations (Genesis 12:3) and to make everyone His people (Deuteronomy 29:10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15) was fulfilled by the righteous act of Jesus Christ. It is an accomplished fact, and only the timing of each person’s individual salvation is yet to be determined.

This is the love of God, which forms the basis of Paul’s teaching in 1 Corinthians 13."

[C.Martel]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOMofDqTa4A

[messianicdruid]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOMofDqTa4A
This fellow tells you plainly that he is expressing "my opinion". As a follower of those who "think to change times and laws" it hardly seems safe to heed them. The argument that "all that matters to you is your present condition" and that this is the single determining factor of your future is arguing that man's will can override God's Will permanently and completely is ridiculous.

[messianicdruid]

They also cleverly invented purgatory to hide their inconsistencies, and of course raise some revenue.

[Neuro]

Your logic is PERFECT. Ergo it cannot be in error. But as we say in ingineering "GARBAGE IN GARBAGE OUT". Hence while the logic might be perfect the facts being allowed in might be flawed.

Are you an ingineer? ;D

[crimethink]

"Eternal" or "permanent"?

[messianicdruid]

"Eternal" or "permanent"?
Neither, God's actions towards sinners ( 1 John 3:4 ) are redemptive not vindictive. Man's laws are based on.punishment and mostly monetary oppression whereas God's punishment is designed to restore man to his inheritance.

[crimethink]

Neither, God's actions towards sinners ( 1 John 3:4 ) are redemptive not vindictive. Man's laws are based on.punishment and mostly monetary oppression whereas God's punishment is designed to restore man to his inheritance.

Permanent "punishment" - that is, extinguishment of existence (annihilation) - is not truly "punishment." If a spirit doesn't want to love and be with God, why should God impose His will, and force that spirit to do so?

I have the same problem with permanent torment for similar reasons as you do. Would God allow the torture of spirits in unimaginably gruesome ways for infinity, for finite crimes? It makes the same (non-)sense as torturing animals slowly and painfully for being born defective (a sane, merciful person would simply put them down, quickly). Further, if Satan is overseeing this eternal torture, who oversees it after Satan is destroyed in the Lake of Fire?


And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

Jesus Christ

[messianicdruid]

Permanent "punishment" - that is, extinguishment of existence (annihilation) - is not truly "punishment." If a spirit doesn't want to love and be with God, why should God impose His will, and force that spirit to do so?

I have the same problem with permanent torment for similar reasons as you do. Would God allow the torture of spirits in unimaginably gruesome ways for infinity, for finite crimes? It makes the same (non-)sense as torturing animals slowly and painfully for being born defective (a sane, merciful person would simply put them down, quickly). Further, if Satan is overseeing this eternal torture, who oversees it after Satan is destroyed in the Lake of Fire?


And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

Jesus Christ

Would you allow your 4 year old to go his own way and reject being around you because of his ignorance?

The overcomers are going to be judging angels. When the Law is in the earth the people will learn righteousness. God's Law is like a consuming fire. It is the lake of fire that the ungodly will be thrown into ( suddenly - without their acceptance ). Satan will be bound.

Our spirits are not our souls. Our bodies and souls ( lives ) can be destroyed in the grave ( hell ) but our spirits will be resurrected, some to age-abiding life and some to judgement ( further training ) because we refused to judge ourselves.

God is not willing that any should perish. This is a time of self-judgement with the standards freely available. No one can claim ignorance. Just as in the conversion of Saul, He can save anyone ANY time He wants to.

[crimethink]

Would you allow your 4 year old to go his own way and reject being around you because of his ignorance?

The overcomers are going to be judging angels. When the Law is in the earth the people will learn righteousness. God's Law is like a consuming fire. It is the lake of fire that the ungodly will be thrown into ( suddenly - without their acceptance ). Satan will be bound.

Our spirits are not our souls. Our bodies and souls ( lives ) can be destroyed in the grave ( hell ) but our spirits will be resurrected, some to age-abiding life and some to judgement ( further training ) because we refused to judge ourselves.

God is not willing that any should perish. This is a time of self-judgement with the standards freely available. No one can claim ignorance. Just as in the conversion of Saul, He can save anyone ANY time He wants to.

I hope, for the sake of the billions who do not know Jesus Christ, that you are right. Said with sincerity and humility, not smarminess.

I do warn, and will continue to do so, that people must know Jesus Christ if they "know of" Him in this life, and there are no second chances once you pass into the next phase of existence.

[messianicdruid]

I do warn, and will continue to do so, that people must know Jesus Christ if they "know of" Him in this life, and there are no second chances once you pass into the next phase of existence.

We must warn others of the consequences of sin [ law-less-ness 1 John 3:4 ]. If christians are following other gods [ rule makers ] it is hard to convince others to abstain from iniquity.

Misrepresenting the Creator as a tyrant wishing to torture people is not leading to conversions. Preaching the ministry of Reconciliation with One who is worthy of our trust will.

[messianicdruid]

We must warn others of the consequences of sin [ law-less-ness 1 John 3:4 ]. If christians are following other gods [ rule makers ] it is hard to convince others to abstain from iniquity.

http://messianicdruid.blogspot.com/2005/01/following-spirit.html

[messianicdruid]

https://gods-kingdom-ministries.net/daily-weblogs/2017/09-2017/first-corinthians-15-my-personal-journey/

This wasn't my journey, but it seems pertinent:

"With all of this in mind, let me say again that both soul and spirit have consciousness. It requires a conscious identity to take the lead in anyone’s life. The spirit has the advantage of spiritually appraising, or discerning, all things (1 Corinthians 2:14, 15), whereas the soul’s capacity to discern is very limited. The spirit is the “inner man” in Romans 7:22, where Paul says, “I joyfully concur with the law of God in the inner man.” Hence, Paul’s spiritual man has the ability to feel joy while it agrees with the law of God. Only a conscious being can agree with anything!

The question, then, is whether the spirit is mortal or immortal. Paul says in Romans 8:10, 11,

10 And if Christ is in you, though the body is dead [mortal] because of sin, yet the spirit is alive [immortal] because of righteousness. 11 But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who indwells you.

Paul says that the body is mortal on account of Adam’s sin. Romans 5:12 says that because of Adam’s sin, death (mortality) was passed down to all men. But Paul also says, “yet the spirit is alive,” or immortal. The question, of course, is if every man’s spirit is inherently immortal, or if it becomes immortal at the time that a person has faith in Christ. In other words, is the spirit’s immortality inherent by nature or conditional upon one’s expression of faith in Christ?

Paul is not as clear on this issue as I might wish. But in my view, the New Covenant promise of God is to all men to be His people and for God to be the God of all (Deuteronomy 29:12, 13, 14, 15). Not all are believers at the present time, of course, and most people die without having faith in Jesus Christ. But the failure of men cannot cause the promise of God to fail. In fact, “God has shut up all in disobedience that He might show mercy to all” (Romans 11:32).

Hence, from the divine perspective, where God sees the end from the beginning, every man’s spirit is immortal. God accomplished this long before we were even born. It is a reality in His eyes—or, as we might say, it is a legal reality, that is, a spiritual reality. However, insofar as history and time is concerned, “we do not yet see all things subjected to Him” (Hebrews 2:8).

So from the perspective of earthly time, the spirits of most men are not yet alive, at least in some sense. Each answer only raises more questions, and it is hardly possible to get to the bottom of anything or to plumb the depths of any single truth. It appears that life and consciousness are two different things. A nonbeliever may not have an immortal spirit, but his spirit remains conscious even after his body dies. That, of course, raises questions: Where does his spirit go? What is its condition prior to the Great White Throne judgment?"

[Neuro]

Your logic is PERFECT. Ergo it cannot be in error. But as we say in ingineering "GARBAGE IN GARBAGE OUT". Hence while the logic might be perfect the facts being allowed in might be flawed.

Have you considered Kalman filtering to pre-qualify the facts in question? If you filter enough there are no facts and the output of the logic will reflect that fact (flat line is boring though). Or you might apply a dirac delta function (all frequencies/all facts) and convolute (flip it in the frequency domain) the output to check for eigenvalues (location of poles and/or zeros) to see which facts line up precisely with which logic.

This was Palanis last post, he hasn't been back here since 30th of June. Perhaps he is busy ingineering something?

[Harryjalk]

@Eternal_Awesome Murder, by definition, is killing against the law. That's why war or capital punishment aren't seen as 'murder'. I know. i already said. goobnight. but the human. made. a night sandwich. and forgot to drop. a piece of cheese. that. is against. Today it is against the law to deny someone coverage for a pre-existing condition. We can't go back. California is suing Trump Admin. over DACA. They say it is against the law to stop it! People have NO clue about the law. Sad! ILLEGAL MEXICANS chanting "BROWN POWER" are finally going after the real enemy! DEMOCRATS who made empty promises that were against the law! 9,000 cases of FGM which is against the law
This is 9,000 cases of child abuse by the parents
Why have they not been charged ?

[messianicdruid]

Is man’s “free will” an impediment to the salvation of all? Of course not. If God could overrule man’s “free will” by summoning them to the Great White Throne against their will, and if He could sentence them to live under authority of those ruling over them, then could He not also override their “free will”? The fact is, God is sovereign enough to cause them to bow their knees and confess their allegiance to Christ. Really, who would do anything different, once they see the glory of God and understand the truth? God’s will is greater than man’s will, and He has His ways of making us willing to bow the knee!


We have already seen that “love never fails” (1 Corinthians 13:8), and yet we often fail to believe that Christ’s love is more powerful than the will of man. We often attribute more power to man’s will than to Christ’s love. Neither do we understand the legal rights of the Creator or even the rights of a redeemer, having had so little training in biblical law.

The law of God defines the rights of God and men, and the restoration of all things is rooted in the rights of God. God’s right to rule His creation is greater than man’s temporary privilege to refuse His rule. In man’s relationship with God, man has only privileges, for no man created himself. Privileges are always subordinate to rights, even as authority is always subordinate to the higher power that authorized it.

[Twisted Titan]

It's a lively debate

But here are The facts.



Everybody is going to find out for them self personally.

Yeshua warned over 50 plus times about Hell, so extreme were His warnings it was better to go into The Kingdom maimed or a amputee .

I'm going to do my personal best to side with The Creator and avoid that place.



Case Closed for me.

I'm simple like that.

[messianicdruid]

“The truth is that there is indeed a “hell,” but the Roman Church has misrepresented it as a place of torture, because they have not understood the law of God or divine justice. I myself would not have stated “there is no hell.” I would have said, “Hell must be redefined according to Scripture and not according to church traditions that developed among the Latin fathers in later centuries.”

https://gods-kingdom-ministries.net/daily-weblogs/2018/04-2018/the-end-is-near/