Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Oh yes. You didn't supply a link to what Augustine himself said.
I provided this, which included the original language words:
"Augustine himself, after rejecting apokatastasis, and Basil attest that still late in the fourth and fifth
centuries this doctrine was upheld by the vast majority of Christians (immo quam plurimi)."
And where you can find the source of this plus a reference to read yourself, although i doubt you, an amateur, could read it in the original language, anyway:
BTW, where are the original language words for your sources, especially key words related to aion/ios?
Or are the words you posted instead aidios or some other Greek words? Ya think it might make a difference? Obviously.
You don't seem to grasp the fact that the church fathers of the second century were closer to the apostles and to the apostolic teachings than the church fathers and others of the 4th and 5th centuries were. Irenaeus states that the church has received from the apostles the unity of the faith, which includes the apostolic teaching of eternal punishment. The church of the second century was closer to the apostolic teaching then the church of the 4th and 5th centuries was.
Do you understand what Irenaeus is saying? The belief of the church throughout the world during his day, the late second century, included the belief in eternal punishment. That doesn't mean that no one believed in Universalism during that time, but it was not the unity of the faith of the church.
Once again, from post #454.
We know from Irenaeus that from the time of the apostles up to his own day (the late second century), the unity of faith in the church included the belief of eternal punishment for the unrighteous. That doesn't mean there weren't some who disagreed, but the early church for the most part accepted eternal punishment as an apostolic teaching. That is, the early church accepted that the apostles taught eternal punishment.
Irenaeus, Against Heresies.
Chapter X.-Unity of the Faith of the Church Throughout the Whole World.
1. The Church, though dispersed through our the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their disciples this faith: [She believes] in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them; and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets the dispensations of God, and the advents, and the birth from a virgin, and the passion, and the resurrection from the dead, and the ascension into heaven in the flesh of the beloved Christ Jesus, our Lord, and His [future] manifestation from heaven in the glory of the Father "to gather all things in one," and to raise up anew all flesh of the whole human race, in order that to Christ Jesus, our Lord, and God, and Saviour, and King, according to the will of the invisible Father, "every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth, and that every tongue should confess" to Him, and that He should execute just judgment towards all; that He may send "spiritual wickednesses," and the angels who transgressed and became apostates, together with the ungodly, and unrighteous, and wicked, and profane among men, into everlasting fire; but may, in the exercise of His grace, confer immortality on the righteous, and holy, and those who have kept His commandments, and have persevered in His love, some from the beginning [of their Christian course], and others from [the date of] their repentance, and may surround them with everlasting glory. [Bolding mine]
What Irenaeus meant by ''everlasting is made clear by comments made elsewhere, such at the following,
thus also the punishment of those who do not believe the Word of God, and despise His advent, and are turned away backwards, is increased; being not merely temporal, but rendered also eternal. For to whomsoever the Lord shall say, "Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire," these shall be damned for ever; and to whomsoever He shall say, "Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you for eternity," these do receive the kingdom for ever, and make constant advance in it; [Bolding mine]
Irenaeus contrasts the eternal with the temporal. He contrasts the unrighteous who he says will be under judgement forever, with the righteous who he says will inherit the kingdom forever.
Irenaeus then continues with this statement.
For those points to which they call attention with regard to the God who then awarded temporal punishments to the unbelieving, and smote the Egyptians, while He saved those that were obedient; these same [facts, I say, ] shall nevertheless repeat themselves in the Lord, who judges for eternity those whom He doth judge, and lets go free for eternity those whom He does let go free: [Bolding mine]
Irenaeus here mentions both temporal judgements (judgements in time) and eternal punishments in which he again contrasts those who will be under judgement for eternity with those who will be free for eternity.
Two different groups of people are in view. One group who will be under judgment forever, and the other group who will be free forever. Unless 'eternity' with regard to those who are 'free' means some finite amount of time, then 'eternity' with regard to those who will be under judgement, has to be unending. If those who are free are free for an unending period, then those who are under judgment will be under judgement for an equally unending period.
Are the righteous to be free only for a limited period? What then once they are no longer free? Do they then come under judgement? No. The group that is free is free for an unending period, and the group who is under judgment is under judgment for an unending period.
And so, again, according to Irenaeus, from the time of the apostles until his own day in the late second century the unity of the faith of the Church throughout the world included the belief in everlasting punishment for the unrighteous.
To be redundant, while after that time there was for a while an increase in the belief of Universalism, up until the late second century Irenaeus states that the unity of the faith of the church throughout the world was the teaching of the apostles which included eternal punishment.
Your taking to repeated calling me an amateur smack of desperation on your part. You also seem to lack basic comprehension ability. Either that or you are deliberately ignoring what has been plainly stated. Well, as I said, you just work yourself up over this. I'm going to bed.
Oh yes. You didn't supply a link to what Augustine himself said.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClementofA
Irrelevant to the topic of 4th/5th century beliefs.
Show me evidence that universalism was not a majority view then or retract your claim.
Thank you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClementofA
I provided this, which included the original language words:
"Augustine himself, after rejecting apokatastasis, and Basil attest that still late in the fourth and fifth
centuries this doctrine was upheld by the vast majority of Christians (immo quam plurimi)."
And where you can find the source of this plus a reference to read yourself, although i doubt you, an amateur, could read it in the original language, anyway:
BTW, where are the original language words for your sources, especially key words related to aion/ios?
Or are the words you posted instead aidios or some other Greek words? Ya think it might make a difference? Obviously.
You still haven't linked to Augustine's own words. So I will. In Enchirdion on Faith, Hope, and Love, in chapter 112, Augustine said the following.
It is in vain, then, that some, indeed very many, make moan over the eternal punishment, and perpetual, unintermitted torments of the lost, and say they do not believe it shall be so; not, indeed, that they directly oppose themselves to Holy Scripture, but, at the suggestion of their own feelings, they soften down everything that seems hard, and give a milder turn to statements which they think are rather designed to terrify than to be received as literally true. [Bolding mine]
What Augustine actually said was that ''some, indeed very many, make moan over the eternal punishment . . .''
The statement ''very many'' has to be understood in connection with his use of the word ''some'' which precedes ''very many.''
Since ''very many'' is preceded by ''some'' that invalidates the claim that he said ''the vast majority.''
''Some, indeed very many'' does not mean ''the vast majority''.
As for the original language words, it was made very clear in post 462 that the Greek word αἰώνιος - aionios is in view and that it has a range of meaning as follows below, which again, was posted in post #462.
The Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, third edition (BDAG), is perhaps the best of the Greek-English Lexicons written in the English languish. With regard to the word αἰώνιος - aionios it states the following.
1.pert. to a long period of time, long ago χρόνοις αἰ. long ages agoRo 16:25; πρὸ χρόνων αἰ. before time began2 Ti 1:9; Tit 1:2 (in these last two pass. the prep. bears the semantic content of priority; on χρόνος αἰ. cp. OGI 248, 54;383,10).
2. pert. to a period of time without beginning or end,eternal of God (Ps.-Pla., Locr. 96c Θεόν τ. αἰώνιον; IBM 894, 2 αἰ. κ. ἀθάνατος τοῦ παντὸς Φύσις; Gen 21:33; Is 26:4; 40:28; Bar 4:8 al.; Philo, Plant. 8; 74; SibOr fgm. 3, 17 and 4; PGM 1, 309; 13, 280) Ro 16:26; of the Holy Spirit in Christ Hb 9:14. Θρόνος αἰ. 1 Cl 65:2 (cp. 1 Macc 2:57).
3. pert. to a period of unending duration, without end (Diod. S. 1. 1, 5; 5, 73, 1; 15, 66, 1 δόξα αἰ. everlasting fame; in Diod. S. 1, 93, 1 the Egyptian dead are said to have passed to their αἰ. οἴκησις; Arrian, Perip1.1, 4 ἐς μνήμην αἰ.; Jos., Bell. 4, 461 αἰ. χάρις=a benediction for all future time;
Skipping over some of the other citations, it continues with
οἰκία, contrasted w. the οἰκία ἐπίγειος, of the glorified body 2 Cor. 5:1.
And there are many more examples given in this section of BDAG with reference to aionios pertaining to a period of unending duration, but it takes too long to list all of them.
The point is that the word aionios and its cognates has a range of meaning which includes a long but limited duration as well as a period of unlimited duration which in English we refer to as 'eternally.'
And you were further shown in post #495 that Philo used the Greek word 'Aion' with reference to 'eternity.'
I have to say it again. You either are very lacking in comprehension ability or you are playing games in order to keep a debate going.
At no time in the church was Universalism ever the belief of the vast majority. Not in the 4th and 5th centuries, and certainly not in the 1st and 2nd centuries which were closer to the time of the apostles.
The words endless torment (adialeipton timorion), eternal imprisonment (aidios eirgmos) and eternal punishment (aidios kalasin) do not appear anywhere in the Greek New Testament, at least not in conjunction. Neither, will you find the term aidios timorion or eternal torment. Therefore, whoever says that there is an eternal time set for punishment beyond this life is sadly mistaken. It's a limited duration of aionion (αἰώνιον - a period of time, as in an age) kalasin (Κόλασιν - punishment, chastisement or correction) which is in view; but the day and hour that it begins and ends is unpredictable. If it were eternal, then the word Aidios would have been used. But not even Jesus used the word for eternal in conjunction with any kind of punishment or correction.
The Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, third edition (BDAG), is perhaps the best of the Greek-English Lexicons written in the English language. With regard to the word αἰώνιος - aionios it states the following.
1.pert. to a long period of time, long ago χρόνοις αἰ. long ages agoRo 16:25; πρὸ χρόνων αἰ. before time began2 Ti 1:9; Tit 1:2 (in these last two pass. the prep. bears the semantic content of priority; on χρόνος αἰ. cp. OGI 248, 54;383,10).
2. pert. to a period of time without beginning or end,eternal of God (Ps.-Pla., Locr. 96c Θεόν τ. αἰώνιον; IBM 894, 2 αἰ. κ. ἀθάνατος τοῦ παντὸς Φύσις; Gen 21:33; Is 26:4; 40:28; Bar 4:8 al.; Philo, Plant. 8; 74; SibOr fgm. 3, 17 and 4; PGM 1, 309; 13, 280) Ro 16:26; of the Holy Spirit in Christ Hb 9:14. Θρόνος αἰ. 1 Cl 65:2 (cp. 1 Macc 2:57).
3. pert. to a period of unending duration, without end (Diod. S. 1. 1, 5; 5, 73, 1; 15, 66, 1 δόξα αἰ. everlasting fame; in Diod. S. 1, 93, 1 the Egyptian dead are said to have passed to their αἰ. οἴκησις; Arrian, Perip1.1, 4 ἐς μνήμην αἰ.; Jos., Bell. 4, 461 αἰ. χάρις=a benediction for all future time;
Skipping over some of the other citations, it continues with
οἰκία, contrasted w. the οἰκία ἐπίγειος, of the glorified body 2 Cor. 5:1.
And there are many more examples given in this section of BDAG with reference to aionios pertaining to a period of unending duration, but it takes too long to list all of them.
The point is that the word aionios and its cognates has a range of meaning which includes a long but limited duration as well as a period of unlimited duration which in English we refer to as 'eternally.'
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerwade
For the readers' of this forum:
The words endless torment (adialeipton timorion), eternal imprisonment (aidios eirgmos) and eternal punishment (aidios kalasin) do not appear anywhere in the Greek New Testament, at least not in conjunction. Neither, will you find the term aidios timorion or eternal torment. Therefore, whoever says that there is an eternal time set for punishment beyond this life is sadly mistaken. It's a limited duration of aionion (αἰώνιον - a period of time, as in an age) kalasin (Κόλασιν - punishment, chastisement or correction) which is in view; but the day and hour that it begins and ends is unpredictable. If it were eternal, then the word Aidios would have been used. But not even Jesus used the word for eternal in conjunction with any kind of punishment or correction.
I call that problematic, even if others do not.
Once again, as was shown in post #462, and is clearly shown in BDAG, the Greek word aionios has a range of meaning which includes endless duration. The Greek has more than one word to express endless duration. Both aidios and aionios can be used which makes the claim that Jesus would have used aidios had He meant endless duration empty speculation.
As has also been shown in post #495, Philo, who was a contemporary of Jesus used the word aion with regard to 'eternity.
Philo also used the word aion with reference to 'eternity.' John Nelson Darby quoted Philo's use of the word aion in his (Philo) De Mundo, 7.
126 As to Philo, the sentence is in De Mundo, 7, en aioni de oute pareleluthen ouden, oute mellei, alla monon iphesteken. Such a definition needs no explanation: in eternity nothing is passed, nothing is about to be, but only subsists. This has the importance of being of the date and Hellenistic Greek of the New Testament, as the others give the regular, and at the same time philosophical force of the word, aion, aionios. Eternity, unchangeable, with no 'was' nor 'will be,' is its proper force, that it can be applied to the whole existence of a thing, so that nothing of its nature was before true or after is true, to telos to periechon. But its meaning is eternity, and eternal. To say that they do not mean it in Greek, as Jukes and Farrar and S. Cox, and those they quote, is a denial of the statements of the very best authorities we can have on the subject. If Plato and Aristotle and Philo knew Greek, what these others say is false. That this is the proper sense of aionios in Scripture, is as certain as it is evident. In 2 Corinthians 4:18, we have ta gar blepomena proskaira, ta de me blepomena aionia. That is, things that are for a time are put in express contrast with aionia, which are not for a time, be it age or ages, but eternal. Nothing can be more decisive of its positive and specific meaning. [Bolding mine]
The bolded is the quote of Philo. In English it translates as ''in eternity nothing is passed, nothing is about to be, but only subsists.''
Now here is that sentence within the context of Philo's thought on eternal creation.
''But God is the creator of time also, for he is the father of his father, and the father of time is the world, which made its own mother the creation of time, so that time stands towards God in the relation of a grandson; for this world is a younger son of God, inasmuch as it is perceptible by the outward sense, for the only son he speaks of as older than the world, is Idea, and this is not perceptible by the intellect, but having thought the other worthy of the rights of primogeniture, he has decided that it should remain with him; therefore, this younger son, perceptible by the external senses being set in motion, has caused the nature of time to shine forth, and to become conspicuous, so that there is nothing future to God, who has the very boundaries of time subject to him; for their life is not time, but the beautiful model of eternity; and in eternity nothing is past and nothing is future, but everything is present only'' (Deus. 31-32).
Since scholars know that the word aionios and its cognates were used outside the Bible during the time of Jesus to indicate endless duration, as well as for expressing periods of limited duration, it is foolish to deny it. The reason people do deny it is because acknowledging that the word aionios was used to express endless duration weakens the argument for Universalism. Unfortunately, the same people who do deny it will continue to do so.
Last edited by Michael Way; 08-14-2016 at 08:24 PM..
Once again, as was shown in post #462, and is clearly shown in BDAG, the Greek word aionios has a range of meaning which includes endless duration. The Greek has more than one word to express endless duration. Both aidios and aionios can be used which makes the claim that Jesus would have used aidios had He meant endless duration empty speculation.
Ask yourself, Mike, if the word is unclear in its meaning, why would it be chosen over the one that is clear??? Why would YOU choose to accept the one meaning that casts the love and character of God in such an evil light? Can you really imagine a just reason for eternally tormenting anyone especially if it is supposed to correct them???How would that work?
You still haven't linked to Augustine's own words. So I will. In Enchirdion on Faith, Hope, and Love, in chapter 112, Augustine said the following.
It is in vain, then, that some, indeed very many, make moan over the eternal punishment, and perpetual, unintermitted torments of the lost, and say they do not believe it shall be so; not, indeed, that they directly oppose themselves to Holy Scripture, but, at the suggestion of their own feelings, they soften down everything that seems hard, and give a milder turn to statements which they think are rather designed to terrify than to be received as literally true. [Bolding mine]
What Augustine actually said was that ''some, indeed very many, make moan over the eternal punishment . . .''
The statement ''very many'' has to be understood in connection with his use of the word ''some'' which precedes ''very many.''
Since ''very many'' is preceded by ''some'' that invalidates the claim that he said ''the vast majority.''
Thank you, Mickey, for that biased translation of the original words, original words which you have failed to provide because you, Mike, are an amateur, not a scholar.
Here is what i posted, from a scholar:
"Augustine himself, after rejecting apokatastasis, and Basil attest that still late in the fourth and fifth
centuries this doctrine was upheld by the vast majority of Christians (immo quam plurimi)."
Thus, you have still not proved your claim that universalism was never a majority view in church history.
Also the fact that Augustine had to add those two words to "eternal" [aionios] implies the word did not necessarily carry the meaning of endlessness at the time.
Re the word "some" what is the Greek meaning for that, a "number", which Augustine goes on to say is a "majority"?
"I know that most persons understand by the story of Nineveh and its king, the ultimate forgiveness of the devil and all rational creatures. --St. Jerome"
"St. Basil the Great (c. 329-379) in his De Asceticis wrote: "The mass of men (Christians) say that there is to be an end of punishment to those who are punished." "
"The great church historian Geisler writes: "The belief in the inalienable capability of improvement in all rational beings, and the limited duration of future punishment was so general, even in the West, and among the opponents of Origen, that it seems entirely independent of his system" (Eccles. Hist., 1-212)."
So, my friend, & brother in Christ, Mickey, you have still not proved your claim that universalism was never a majority view in church history. Where is your evidence for that? And does it matter in view of Sola Scriptura? Does it matter in view of 1000 years of the view of ECT after Origen and of inquisitions, darkness, crusades, burnings of universalist heretics & their writings?
Last edited by ClementofA; 08-15-2016 at 12:12 AM..
The words endless torment (adialeipton timorion), eternal imprisonment (aidios eirgmos) and eternal punishment (aidios kalasin) do not appear anywhere in the Greek New Testament, at least not in conjunction. Neither, will you find the term aidios timorion or eternal torment. Therefore, whoever says that there is an eternal time set for punishment beyond this life is sadly mistaken. It's a limited duration of aionion (αἰώνιον - a period of time, as in an age) kalasin (Κόλασιν - punishment, chastisement or correction) which is in view; but the day and hour that it begins and ends is unpredictable. If it were eternal, then the word Aidios would have been used. But not even Jesus used the word for eternal in conjunction with any kind of punishment or correction.
I call that problematic, even if others do not.
I do too (find it problematic). And it has divided many Christian families and households. And will continue to do so. To believe in eternal torment is, as I have said many times, blasphemous on its very face. To demand others believe it (or otherwise claim they are outside the grace of God) is very problematic. I would not accept this doctrine even in the face of losing my earthly life at the hands of those who would persecute me because it would be like denying Christ.
The Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, third edition (BDAG), is perhaps the best of the Greek-English Lexicons written in the English language. With regard to the word αἰώνιος - aionios it states the following.
1. pert. to a long period of time, long ago χρόνοις αἰ. long ages ago Ro 16:25; πρὸ χρόνων αἰ. before time began 2 Ti 1:9; Tit 1:2 (in these last two pass. the prep. bears the semantic content of priority; on χρόνος αἰ. cp. OGI 248, 54;383,10).
2. pert. to a period of time without beginning or end, eternal of God (Ps.-Pla., Locr. 96c Θεόν τ. αἰώνιον; IBM 894, 2 αἰ. κ. ἀθάνατος τοῦ παντὸς Φύσις; Gen 21:33; Is 26:4; 40:28; Bar 4:8 al.; Philo, Plant. 8; 74; SibOr fgm. 3, 17 and 4; PGM 1, 309; 13, 280) Ro 16:26;
[snip]
Thank you for BDAG who admits the word aionios can refer to a temporary limited period of time that ends. Unlike some other ECT biased lexicons who cannot admit to that & disagree with BDAG. Clearly these lexicons fail to agree with each other. Therefore they are confused and not infallible & should not be considered inerrant like the Scriptures or an allegedly excathedra Pope.
The reader should also note that the above source makes no mention of and totally ignore the early church father, Greek scholar, and universalist, Origen's views on the subject of aion/ios, and all the other many EC universalists, and many modern day universalists, which do not agree with his POV. In light of that, what does that say about the completeness of the work of BDAG, its objectivity and bias? The answer seems obvious. BDAG is not to be trusted.
Of course inbetween these early times universalists and recent century universalists there was about 1000 years of the most dark centuries of church history dominated by ECT beliefs, including inquisitions, crusades, burning of heretics and their writings [includings those of universalists] or interpolations of their writings and centuries of relative ignorance. As Jesus says, by their fruits you shall know them!
Last edited by ClementofA; 08-15-2016 at 12:00 AM..
Ask yourself, Mike, if the word is unclear in its meaning, why would it be chosen over the one that is clear??? Why would YOU choose to accept the one meaning that casts the love and character of God in such an evil light? Can you really imagine a just reason for eternally tormenting anyone especially if it is supposed to correct them???How would that work?
The word (aionios) is not unclear in its meaning. Its meaning has been clearly explained, and it is the word most used in the New Testament to express unending duration. The only people who have a problem with it are people who over emphasize God's love at the expense of His righteousness and justice.
Eternal condemnation does not cast God's character in an evil light. God's perfect character is displayed both in saving those who avail themselves of His plan of salvation, and in leaving under condemnation those who reject His plan of salvation.
The imperfect and relative righteousness of fallen mankind has no compatibility with the perfect and absolute righteousness of God and therefore fallen mankind has no basis for having an eternal relationship with God. While man was created in an unfallen state, sin changed that and caused the fall. Once having fallen, man's righteousness was no longer compatible with God's perfect standard of righteousness. Since fallen mankind can do nothing to change his fallen state he remains under condemnation forever unless God does something to remedy the situation.
And God did do something to remedy the situation. One of the Persons of the Trinity became incarnate as a sinless man and went to the cross where He paid the penalty for our sins, as our substitute, in our place so that anyone who believes on Him is credited with the perfect righteousness of Jesus and receives eternal life.
While Jesus died for the sins of the world (unlimited atonement), no one is automatically saved. God requires an acknowledgement on the part of man that he can do nothing for his salvation and that he must rely on the finished redemptive work of Christ on the cross in order to be credited with Christ's perfect righteousness and receive eternal life.
Anyone who dies without having received Jesus as Savior, will when he appears at the great white throne judgment have only his own imperfect and relative righteousness to stand on, and it won't be good enough. He will be sent to the lake of fire where he will remain in a state of separation from God. And since his imperfect righteousness will always be imperfect, he will remain separated from God forever.
Yes, God's perfect character is displayed to all of creation both in saving those who come to Him through Christ Jesus, and leaving under condemnation all who do not.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
