Elhanan

The designation as goats occurs at the end of the tribulation period They’re judged at the end of this period but aren’t sent to the LOF until after the 1000 years which is demonstrated by Matthew 25 in parallel to Revelation 20/21. All non-believers receive the execution of the judgement at this time. ( aside from the beast and false prophet see below) Once again you’re attempting to use a hyper literal approach to scripture in the same way you do to misinterpret “all Israel”, reconciliation, and preaching to the dead. Mat 25:38-41 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? (39) Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? (40) And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. (41) Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: The “departure “ into the LOF is after the GWT judgement. Assessments have been made concerning what these people did during the tribulation period but they aren’t sent to the LOF ( depart into ) until after the GWT. It’s no different than the assessment made on all people that isn’t executed until after the GWT judgement. Rev 20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. We can see the books contain what these people did during their lifetime but the judgement isn't executed until after the opening; the actions of the non-believers had already condemned them. Joh_3:18 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. You’re putting the cart before the horse. Also note when Jesus uses aionios to describe the fate of he sheep it is "inheriting the Kingdom". Mat 25:34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: This inheritance of the Kingdom is eternal ( never ending ) and it's obvious the juxtaposition of this against the fate of the goats means eternal also. ( never ending ). Ah yes you are correct that the beast and false prophet are thrown into the LOF prior to the Millennial Reign thank you for the correction. ( I have followed my advice ) Of course; since you are pointing out the timeline given in Revelation 19 I assume you will also accept the timeline given in Revelation 20. Rev 20:7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, Rev 20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever. Rev 20:14-15 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. (15) And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire. Now I suggest you abandon this manipulation of the timeline given by Jesus. I’m still waiting on scripture showing anyone exiting the LOF and considering your hyper literal approach to interpretation I assume you have it ? Your argument is so full of holes, I don't know where to start; I would characterize your interpretation of scripture as the non-literal approach. I already showed you how the kings of the earth who are always depicted as God's enemies in Revelation and enter the gates of the New Jerusalem but you don't believe in the plain reading of scripture so I can't help your unbelief. As for the goats - you claim they are judged at the end of the tribulation period - that point we agree on. However, it then begs the question of what are the goats doing during the millenium? I have repeatedly asked you this question and you steadfastly refuse to answer. The sheep who helped the brethren are judged at the end of the tribulation and they are rewarded by being allowed to inhabit the earth during the millenium. The beast and the false prophet are also judged at the end of the tribulation and they are punished and thrown alive into the LOF. The goats are also judged at the end of the tribulation and also commanded to enter the LOF (Matt 25:41) along with the beast and false prophet. So what you are claiming is that somehow an exception has to be made for the goats. The sheep and the beast and false prophet all obey God's commands to their rewards and punishments. But in your view, somehow the goats thumb their noses at Christ's commands and get a 1,000 year reprieve from their punishment. If the sheep & the beast & false prophet have to obey Jesus' commands to them respectively, why do the goats get to disobey? Moreover, tell me how justice is served when the sheep are rewarded for their service to the brethren by being allowed to populate the millenial kingdom - yet if the goats don't enter the LOF until after the 1,000 years as you claim, then in effect they receive the same reward as the sheep by remaining on the earth for 1,000 years. In essence the sheep and goats effectively receive the same judgment during the millenium - that scenario clearly does not make sense. Finally, your attempt to merge the events of Matt 25 with Rev 20/21 is wholly without merit. The judgment of the sheep/goats occurs after the tribulation. The GWT judgment occur after the millennium. The sheep/goats are judged when they are still alive. The GWT judgment involves the judging of the ressurected dead only. Huge difference don't you think? - therefore I cannot concur with your view.

In post #153 I articulated in point fashion how the judgment of the nations in Matt 25 differs from the GWT judgment in Revelation. Can you offer your counterpoint instead of making a generalized claim that they are the same event? Moreover are you saying that those who inhabit the earth during the millennial reign of Christ on the earth are not the sheep referred to in Matt 25? Lastly, I believe ninhao and I have disputed the meaning of the "kings of the earth" entering the gates of the New Jerusalem in Rev 21:24 so refer to those previous posts for my point about evidence for second chances in the LOF.

Revelation 20 provides the clear progression, and timing of when the LOF is first, and only used. It's following the Millennial reign that Jesus judges the living and the dead. Rev 20:7 When the thousand years are over, Satan will be released from his prison Rev 20:10-15 And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever. (11) Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. The earth and the heavens fled from his presence, and there was no place for them. (12) And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. (13) The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done. (14) Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. (15) Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire. Revelation 20&21 are in agreement with Matthew 25:46 concerning the wicked. Mat 25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal. Rev 21:8 But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars--they will be consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death." Revelation 20&21 are in agreement with Matthew 25:46 concerning the righteous. The sheep not only participate in the the Millennial Reign but continue into the Kingdom as shown in revelation 21. Mat 25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal. Rev 20:6 Blessed and holy are those who share in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years. Rev 21:1-3 Then I saw "a new heaven and a new earth," for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. (2) I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. (3) And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, "Look! God's dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. Rev 21:7 Those who are victorious will inherit all this, and I will be their God and they will be my children. This is what Jesus said and considering the lack of substantial argument you have provided, and the blatant disregard for context and clear meaning of Jesus' words, it's obvious this Evangelical Universalism is false doctrine. It's so full of holes I'm wondering if you are serious in presenting it or are playing a game. I am not here to play games but unfortunately you like to play hide and seek when it comes to Matt 25:41 and somehow avoid answering my question I posed to you.. You stated my argument is a "fallacy" based upon your notion that no one enters the Lake of Fire until after the millennium. I'll re-quote your words to help jog your memory: "No one is sent to the LOF until after the Millennial Reign when satan is released, gathers followers, and is defeated/judged." Instead of answering my question and addressing Jesus' command to the goats to depart into the fire which takes place before the millennium, you instead turn to Revelation for your argument and only quote from there when it's obvious that the text you quoted in Revelation takes place after the millennium. You have still failed to account for what happens to the goats before the white throne judgment. We know the sheep enter the millennium on the earth. The goats enter the lake of fire. But according to your view please explain what happens to the goats during the millennial kingdom if they are not in the lake of fire? I suppose they are just twiddling their thumbs just waiting for the 1,000 years to expire instead of obeying Christ's command to enter the fire. So how do you explain this? In addition your claim that no one enters the LOF until after the millennium is demonstrably false as the beast and false prophet are sent there by Jesus after his victory at his second coming. "And the beast was seized, and with him the false prophet who performed the signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who had received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image; these two were thrown alive into the lake of fire which burns with brimstone. Rev 19:20. You should really follow your own advice and not blatantly ignore scripture.

I will only address the conclusion of this premise considering it reveals it's fallacy. No one is sent to the LOF until after the Millennial Reign when satan is released, gathers followers, and is defeated/judged. Rev 20:2-3 He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years. (3) He threw him into the Abyss, and locked and sealed it over him, to keep him from deceiving the nations anymore until the thousand years were ended. After that, he must be set free for a short time. Rev 20:7 When the thousand years are over, Satan will be released from his prison Rev 20:13-15 The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done. (14) Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. (15) Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire. The LOF is the final resting place of the wicked and isn't used until after the Millennial Reign. This is why Jesus uses aionios with the intention of eternal consequences for both the wicked and the righteous. We are still waiting upon scripture which shows anyone exiting the LOF. Considering this is quite a vital piece of information, and you prefer a hyper literal approach to interpreting scripture, can you present this scripture please. There is no wiggle room here. There is no fallacy. You claim: "No one is sent to the LOF until after the Millennial Reign when satan is released, gathers followers, and is defeated/judged." That simply is not true as you have ignored Matt 25:41 where Jesus commands the goats on his left to depart into the fire prepared for the Devil and demons. Is that not apparent to you? The sheep enter the millennial kingdom on earth. When Jesus commands the goats into the fire I really doubt if they have the luxury of not immediately obeying Jesus' command and waiting 1,000 years before they feel like doing so. I ask you is that what you really believe?

And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life. Matt 25:46 This is probably the most single used verse in Scripture to attempt to disprove universalism and ninhao and asper have both cited it paying particular attention to the parallel structure of this verse’s two clauses. The argument goes something like this: Since believers are said to reap “eternal” life in the second half of the verse, then in order to be grammatically consistent one must conclude that unbelievers also reap “eternal” punishment. Therefore unbelievers are condemned to hell/lake of fire forever and not all are eventually saved which disproves universalism. At first glance this appears logically consistent and a foolproof argument. However this argument fails to take into account the context of this verse. It assumes that the sheep are believers and the goats are unbelievers at the great white throne which is incorrect. Different Time: The judgment of the nations occurs at the second coming of Christ (Matthew 5:31); the great white throne judgment occurs following the millennial kingdom (Revelation 20:11-12). Different Scene: The judgment of the nations occurs on earth (Matthew 25:31); the great white throne judgment occurs at the great white throne (Revelation 20:11). Different Subjects: At the judgment of the nations, three groups of people are mentioned: the sheep, the goats, and the brothers (Matthew 25:32,40). The great white throne judgment involves the unsaved dead (Revelation 20:12). Different Basis: The basis of judgment at the judgment of the nations is how Christ’s “brothers” were treated (Matthew 25:40); the basis of judgment at the great white throne is their works (Revelation 20:12). Different Result: The result of the judgment of the nations is twofold: the righteous enter into the kingdom; the unrighteous are cast into the lake of fire. The result of the great white throne judgment is that the wicked dead are cast into the lake of fire (the righteous are not mentioned). Resurrection: No resurrection is mentioned in connection with the judgment of the nations. A resurrection does take place in connection with the great white throne judgment (Revelation 20:13). The goats are those who go into the lake of fire for an age of time. The sheep are those who go on to inhabit the earth also for an age of time - during the millennium age. And these shall go away to punishment age-during, but the righteous to life age-during. (YLT) Aionios life as applied to the sheep cannot mean eternal life since obviously the millenial age only lasts for 1,000 years. Since aionios life cannot mean eternal life for the sheep then it does not stand to reason that it must automatically mean eternal damnation for the goats either.

I got your point but evidently you avoid my point as you refuse to deal with the context of Jn 3:16,18 and how you interpret it. As for Matt 25:46 refer to my next post.

You assume it is the wrong position and believe what you hold to be "true" yet you concede that the meaning of the verse is contested. Grammar is not as complicated as you believe. In many cases the meaning of a contested verse can be drawn from its immediate context. Examine the context two verses later in Jn 3:18. This verse is especially pertinent not only due to its contextual proximity to Jn 3:16 but because the word "believe" occurs 3 times in both negative and positive form and in the present and perfect tense. It demonstrates that one does not come under judgment as long as ongoing belief is present. If you want to continue this discussion, it would make for a good topic to start in another thread so as not to go off topic here. “The one who continues trusting [pisteuon, present participle] in him is not condemned; the one who does not continue trusting [same construction but with negative particle] is already condemned [perfect passive, is in a state of condemnation] because he has not believed with abiding results [pepisteuken, perfect tense, indicating permanent attitude of unbelief] in the name of the Son of God” (Light From the Greek New Testament, Anderson Press: Warner, IN, 1959, p. 105). Hi ehanan, That’s pretty funny. The one way that those who are wrong try to make themselves appear right is to use treachery. Basically they lie. Depending on how far gone they are they either reconcile their lying as necessary because they believe that they are right and evidently the end justifies the means or they don’t recognize that they are lying because they think that whatever they think is right because they think it. Of course there is varying degrees between the two extremes. A few days ago you believed that you could correctly translate John 3:16. I brought up some information that you were not aware of. Last night you still had not realized this so when I explained it to you became the expert again. You still do not get it. I will write it in simpler terms, First what does the verse say to you. Second what does the verse say to translators and grammarians. Third what does the verse say to those who have written commentaries. Forth what does the verse to everyone else. You have this obligation to do when you decide to teach others. Certainly you don’t want to lead people astray. Or do you? God bless, Tony What's the big problem Asper? I have offered Jn 3:18 as context for Jn 3:16. Yet in your reply you don't deal with the text but insist your view is correct. I guess I'm supposed to take your take your word for it huh? If by chance you choose to address Jn 3:18 start your own thread so we don't have to go off topic here.

Ask yourself this question, Brother. If everyone was given a second chance, to be refined, why did God send Jesus to be our final Sacrifice? There would be no need at all. Once they stood before Jesus, before entering the Lake of Fire, they would know the truth which they wold be contemplating until they got it correct. Not sure if I understand your entire question. From a scriptural standpoint, God has decreed that he will reconcile all things to himself: "and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross." Col 1:20 One question to ask is how is it possible to bring reconciliation to all when most human beings are "eternally" estranged from God in the lake of fire. Estrangement and separation from God is not reconciliation. Moreover, those who are separated from God will have to endure never-ending punishment. Eternal punishment at the very least seems far removed from the idea of God reconciling all to himself. In terms of second chances, would it be inconsistent with God's character to allow a second chance in the LOF? I submit not. Perhaps God is more loving and merciful than we have been taught or can imagine? If people do not submit to his Lordship in this life then they will have to submit to his righteous judgment in the LOF which is the subject of controversy in this thread. From a theological perspective, I think universalism encompasses all of the attributes of God without having to compromise on one or the other. In the end, God's mercy prevails and he remains omnipotent because his desire to save all will one day be accomplished. Hope that answers your question.

You assume it is the wrong position and believe what you hold to be "true" yet you concede that the meaning of the verse is contested. Grammar is not as complicated as you believe. In many cases the meaning of a contested verse can be drawn from its immediate context. Examine the context two verses later in Jn 3:18. This verse is especially pertinent not only due to its contextual proximity to Jn 3:16 but because the word "believe" occurs 3 times in both negative and positive form and in the present and perfect tense. It demonstrates that one does not come under judgment as long as ongoing belief is present. If you want to continue this discussion, it would make for a good topic to start in another thread so as not to go off topic here. “The one who continues trusting [pisteuon, present participle] in him is not condemned; the one who does not continue trusting [same construction but with negative particle] is already condemned [perfect passive, is in a state of condemnation] because he has not believed with abiding results [pepisteuken, perfect tense, indicating permanent attitude of unbelief] in the name of the Son of God” (Light From the Greek New Testament, Anderson Press: Warner, IN, 1959, p. 105).

My dividing of the passage is correct and in line with the intention of the Author. The section under discussion is parenthesised by Peter telling believers to be happy when they suffer for the sake of righteousness; and that they have the Holy Spirit as support in the same way Noah did. The pre-deluvian non-believers are “in prison” to this day and this is precisely what Peter meant. We can also see, if you like, from other scriptures that all people are considered “dead in sin” until they believe and receive the Holy Spirit. Rom 8:10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness. Jas 2:26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also. We can confidently say all non- believers are “in prison” while they remain in unbelief. Either way, the preaching Jesus undertook by His Spirit was in Noah’s day and this is supported by the context given. I guess that we will remain in disagreement over this because despite my multiple requests asking you explain why you insert the word "now" in prison into the text, you have remained silent in your response. Instead what you have done is rephrased your wording to "in prison to this day" which is essentially the same thing. It is a risky thing to add to the biblical text in order to support your view therefore I cannot support it. As shown above the context tells us when the preaching took place to the pre-deluvians and, in 1Peter 4:6 to people who died in faith. It is impossible to correctly interpret scripture without understanding the intention of the Author and discerning the context. Actually we don’t need discernment in this instance because the context is clearly given. 1Pe 3:14 But and if ye suffer for righteousness' sake, happy are ye: and be not afraid of their terror, neither be troubled; 1Pe 4:14 If ye be reproached for the name of Christ, happy are ye; for the spirit of glory and of God resteth upon you: on their part he is evil spoken of, but on your part he is glorified. Denying the correct context will often lead to erroneous interpretation and often is the platform needed to embrace incorrect doctrine. The correct context means dealing with the text as it is written and not interpreting it through the addition of your own words. With all due respect, the Jehovah Witnesses do this and I'm sure you do not condone it, so why do you do it? I’ll present the original Creed and show why it doesn’t support your premise , or the modern Catholic view. ( R = original T= edited sorry about the formatting) R. T. (1) I believe in God the Father Almighty; (1) I believe in God the Father Almighty Creator of Heaven and earth (2) And in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord; (2) And in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord; (3) Who was born of (de) the Holy Ghost and of (ex) the Virgin Mary; (3) Who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary, (4) Crucified under Pontius Pilate and buried; (4) Suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried; (5) The third day He rose again from the dead, (5) He descended into hell; the third day He rose again from the dead; (6) He ascended into Heaven, (6) He ascended into Heaven, sitteth at the right hand of God the Father Almighty; (7) Sitteth at the right hand of the Father, (7) From thence He shall come to judge the living and the dead. (8) Whence He shall come to judge the living and the dead. (8) I believe in the Holy Ghost, (9) And in the Holy Ghost, (9) The Holy Catholic Church, the communion of saints (10) The Holy Church, (10) The forgiveness of sins, (11) The forgiveness of sins; (11) The resurrection of the body, and (12) The resurrection of the body. (12) life everlasting. Notice originally #5 contains no mention of Jesus descending into hell. This was added later to support this erroneous interpretation of preaching to the dead and likely also is used to support the false purgatory doctrine. You’ll also find many Churches which use the Creed revert to the original, unadulterated, version. You are correct that the Old Roman Creed does not have that phrase and frankly we don't know why it was added to the Apostles' Creed. The fact that it is was added later could just as well be to confirm what they believed Scripture taught. As shown above it is clear the Creed was manipulated. 1 Peter 4:6 is amid the passages in which Peter goes to length in encouraging his audience. Until you accept the clear context of these verses you will not be able to rightly interpret them. The passages state that Jesus, Noah, and all believers living and dead had/have the Holy Spirit for support and that they should rejoice and not be dismayed. My same argument as above; we're riding the merry-go-round here and we've beaten these ponies into the ground. Jesus said the gate that the wicked enter “leadeth” ( carries away ) them to destruction. Many enter this gate and are destroyed is the clear meaning. Again we need to rightly divide this passage. We can see Jesus intention is to show that entering the wide gate will cause destruction. Mat 7:19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. The message is clear. I’m interpreting destroyed as having eternal consequence and this can be corroborated with n Matthew 25: 46 where Jesus juxtaposes the fate of the wicked against the righteous when we know the righteous live eternally. It’s clear the wicked also receive an eternal consequence whether that’s destruction ( annihilation ) or never ending punishment. You have yet to present any scripture which shows anyone exiting the LOF. When we correctly interpret Jesus intention it’s clear He contrasts 2 eternal consequences for people. Do you agree Jesus intention using aionios when referring to the righteous is to illustrate eternal life ? I believe that it is best practice to translate aionios as age-biding or something similar as eternal is not an acceptable translation and I'll use Matt 25:46 as an example to thus address your concerns in my next post to you.

The key is to allow God's word to speak for itself as we all know it is profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; (2 Tim 3:16). Since her belief system falsely causes her to think that she is still saved and allows her to engage in willful sin with immunity, you can point her to Heb 5:9. "And being made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation to all who obey him," In this verse salvation is promised only to those who obey. A believer is one who obeys God. A diobedient believer is an oxymoron. Does this mean that we lose our salvation every time we sin? No because 1 Jn 1:9 states "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." However, willful and habitual sin is another matter for which we are given stern warning in 1 Cor 6:9-10 "Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality,nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God." If a Christian's lifestyle is marked by the practice of habitual sin, there is no guarantee of salvation and she remains lost. Hopefully, you & your wife can minister to her so that she can get a sobering wake-up call.

The context provided by the Author shows us why the people in Noah’s day are introduced. It is encouragement to the people being addressed ( the elect/ believers ) to not be discouraged in the face of adversity. We know Jesus preaching to the pre-deluvians was during the time the Ark was being built from this context because it shows how Noah was able to endure with the help of Spirit of Jesus. Elhanan replied: I think your interpretation is very weak as you are straining the text to no end. The text doesn’t say Jesus preached to the predeluvians when the ark was being built. 1 Pet 3:19 plainly states that Jesus preached to them while they were IN PRISON. Clearly, the predeluvians were not in prison during the construction of the ark. The context of the passages is provided by the passages themselves. Let’s look again at the progression from 1Peter 3:14- 1Peter 4 1Pe 3:14 But and if ye suffer for righteousness' sake, happy are ye: and be not afraid of their terror, neither be troubled; 1Pe 4:14 If ye be reproached for the name of Christ, happy are ye; for the spirit of glory and of God resteth upon you: on their part he is evil spoken of, but on your part he is glorified. It’s obvious this section of scripture is to encourage believers not to be dismayed in the face of adversity. Amid these scriptures are some difficult to understand passages which some people interpret to imply Jesus preached to dead people. The context explains quite clearly that this isn’t the case. Elhanan replied: 1 Pet 4:6 For this is why the gospel was preached even to those who are dead, that though judged in the flesh the way people are, they might live in the spirit the way God does. Scripture does not imply that Jesus preached to the dead; it asserts it. I’ll take the plain reading of Scripture any day. If they are difficult for you to understand, it's because you must force an inteepretation upon the text that contradicts its plain statement. It’s interesting you cite, and support, the Apostles’ Creed considering it’s origins and fundamental basis to the Catholic Church’s eternal punishment in hell. They use this interpretation of 1Peter 3 to show how Jesus released believers from hell and unbelievers are doomed in hell and await eternal damnation. Maybe you should find a different corroboration. Elhanan replied: No need to as the Apostles’ Creed stands on its own. It is an ecumenical creed – not solely Roman Catholic - because it was decided upon in church councils that represented the entire church at the time before the church permanently spilt into Eastern (Orthodox) and Western (Roman) factions in AD 1054. Protestant denominations such as the Lutherans still cite the Apostles’Creed as part of their statement of beliefs. How the Catholic Church chooses to manipulate Scripture is of no significance to me. I suppose that you don't heed to all of the doctrines of the Catholic Church either. Also notice, from this Creed, that it only states that Jesus descended to the grave/dead. It only later was manipulated to imply preaching to the dead. Elhanan replied: Please be accurate in your claims. The Apostles’Creed was never manipulated to state that Jesus preached to the dead. It only states that he descended into hell/Hades – nothing more – nothing less. But as I referenced earlier, 1 Pet 4:6 plainly states; not implies, that Jesus proclaimed the gospel to the dead, therefore I think your point is moot. Ok now I see your point. You are missing that Jesus states that many go through the wide gate that leads to destruction. Mat 7:13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: If Jesus intention is that all people will eventually go through the narrow gate why does He say many go through the wide gate and are destroyed ? Elhanan replied: Yes Jesus is saying that at the present time many are going through wide gate and are being destroyed; i.e., they are headed for hell/lake of fire, no doubt. But I don’t think I need to remind you that we are debating evangelical universalism here which holds that all will eventually be saved as the lake of fire is for the purpose of temporary chastisement not eternal punishment. Unless - you are referring to “destroyed” meaning annihilation which is a whole other topic in itself. Jesus was presenting the New Covenant from the time He began to preach. You are really grasping at staws here. Elhanan replied: Your argument is irrelevant. Although Jesus began his preaching, the people are still under the dispensation of the Old Covenant. The majority of them are still perishing under the Law, because the blood of Christ has obviously not yet been shed and made efficacious. I agree that there are only the two options above. Jesus is saying that presently many are headed to “destruction” while presently few are headed to life – that we agree on. However we disagree on whether those headed for destruction are eternally doomed or temporarily chastised in the lake of fire. That’s why so much attention has been focused on the translation/meaning of “eternal.” Furthermore, the sheep & goats are not the same as believers & unbelievers.

I read the links but quite frankly the reason I asked you to explain in your own words is although these references distinguish between different tenses, voices etc., how is one supposed to know which ones to apply in order to correctly parse pisteuon in John 3:16? Do you know how as I am always open learning new things? If I understand you correctly, you are claiming that pisteuon cannot be translated as believing so please elaborate why not, as you have quoted scripture and parsing references but have not personally applied them specifically to Jn 3:16 in order to complete your argument. The link you provided to onelight is a good article but even that article cites a difference of opinion amongst scholars.

No, that would certainly be an overly broad generalization. I'll give you an example using a well-known verse - John 3:16. This verse contains the word pisteuon which most Bibles translate as "believe." However the verb pisteuon is a present active participle and should be properly translated as "believing." Therefore the relevant part of this verse should read everyone believing in Him may not perish but may have eternal [age-abiding] life. Thus, what this means for us is that ongoing, continuous belief is necessary for salvation - not just a one-time moment of belief in the past. Here is a prime example where a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing. While it is a good thing to help in the understanding of certain passages, in some people it serves to distort the meanings of others. Likewise, parse the verse for yourself floatingaxe and tell me what you come up with. Your generalizations are otherwise useless.

No, that would certainly be an overly broad generalization. I'll give you an example using a well-known verse - John 3:16. This verse contains the word pisteuon which most Bibles translate as "believe." However the verb pisteuon is a present active participle and should be properly translated as "believing." Therefore the relevant part of this verse should read everyone believing in Him may not perish but may have eternal [age-abiding] life. Thus, what this means for us is that ongoing, continuous belief is necessary for salvation - not just a one-time moment of belief in the past. Hi elanan, So let me recap what you have said, When it’s a present, active, participle it means a continuous action which is right here and now in relation to when it was said. When it’s a present, active, participle it means a continued action which also applies to those in the future. Ok then… I think you are bluffing your way through this. Maybe this will help you in the future to not pivot a point on something you know nothing about but just repeating what someone else has said. Present, http://www.bcbsr.com/greek/gtense.html#Present Active, http://www.bcbsr.com/greek/gvoice.html#Active Particple, http://www.bcbsr.com/greek/gvbls.html#Participle God bless, Tony Instead of casting aspersions, why don't you carefully read what I wrote instead of attributing your own meaning to what I wrote. What you have cited has nothing to do with what I parsed. If it does, explain to me in your own words how it applies to this verse and I will gladly consider it. What you have done is offer references without any explanation of your own as to how I am mistaken, so please enlighten me. 4100 [e] pisteuōn πιστεύων believes V-PPA-NMS In Jn 3:16, the verb pisteuon is in the form of a present participle active as indicated by the V-PPA parsing guide. Therefore the verse should read: for God did so love the world, that His Son -- the only begotten -- He gave, that every one who is believing in him may not perish, but may have life age-during. (YLT) Do you deny the meaning of this verse and if so how?

No, that would certainly be an overly broad generalization. I'll give you an example using a well-known verse - John 3:16. This verse contains the word pisteuon which most Bibles translate as "believe." However the verb pisteuon is a present active participle and should be properly translated as "believing." Therefore the relevant part of this verse should read everyone believing in Him may not perish but may have eternal [age-abiding] life. Thus, what this means for us is that ongoing, continuous belief is necessary for salvation - not just a one-time moment of belief in the past.

The pre-deluvian non-believers are of course "now in prison" because judgement is at the GWT after the Millennial Reign of Jesus. All dead non-believers are in prison. Again in 1 Peter4:6 the subjects are "now dead". The gospel was preached to people who believed and they suffered in the flesh, died, but have inherited eternal life. ( live according to God ) The passage again is about suffering in the flesh with the hope of resurrection and salvation as encouragement. We see this theme begin in 1 Peter 3 1Pe 3:13-14 And who is he that will harm you, if ye be followers of that which is good? (14) But and if ye suffer for righteousness' sake, happy are ye: and be not afraid of their terror, neither be troubled; And continues to the end of 1 Peter 4 1Pe 4:12-13 Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened unto you: (13) But rejoice, inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christ's sufferings; that, when his glory shall be revealed, ye may be glad also with exceeding joy. None of the content is about Jesus preaching to dead people but is solely encouragement for believers who suffer in the flesh. Yes I did make a mistake sorry about that. It doesn't change the intention of Jesus words if we translate "that find" as "are finding" ? It still places an emphasis upon finding the narrow gate to the reader and is valid for us. I don't understand what your point is here. Whether people are finding the narrow way in Jesus time or now the intention is the same. The “context provided by the Author” does not include the word “now” so it is very questionable to claim that you are interpreting according to the Author’s intent. Instead what you have done is insert the word now in order to support your view – not the Author’s. I still ask you why have you inserted “now” into the text? The context has to do with what Jesus did when he descended into hell. If you contest the notion that Jesus preached to the spirits in hell according to 1 Pet 3:19 then you are at odds with the earliest known written creed with its tenets of the Christian faith: Apostles' Creed I believe in God, the Father almighty, creator of heaven and earth. I believe in Jesus Christ, God's only Son, our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died and was buried; he descended into hell. On the third day he rose again; he ascended into heaven, he is seated at the right hand of the Father, and he will come to judge the living and the dead. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting. Amen. What message did Jesus preach? 1 Pet 4:6 declares that Jesus preached the gospel. In terms of Matt 7, you are the one who made a big deal out of the word “find” and when I pointed out to you that the word “find” is incorrect, you now minimize your own argument. Your intention may be clear to yourself but it is certainly obscure to me. In Matt 7:13-14 Jesus is simply saying that in his day, many are going through the broad way that is leading to destruction and contrastingly only a few are finding the narrow way which leads to life. He makes no reference whatsoever as to what happens in the future. If Jesus wanted to reference what would happen in the future, the verb construction of the verse would reflect a future action - which it does not. In addition you neglect the context of this passage as Jesus in his Sermon on the Mount is addressing those under still under the Old Covenant. The New Covenant has not yet been established. The Old Covenant proved that man was unable to abide by it, thus Jesus is simply saying that under the OC only a few are finding the narrow way while many are going down the broad way.

YLT is one of the few Bible translations that pays attention to rendering verb tenses accurately.

The pre-deluvian non-believers are of course "now in prison" because judgement is at the GWT after the Millennial Reign of Jesus. All dead non-believers are in prison. Again in 1 Peter4:6 the subjects are "now dead". The gospel was preached to people who believed and they suffered in the flesh, died, but have inherited eternal life. ( live according to God ) The passage again is about suffering in the flesh with the hope of resurrection and salvation as encouragement. We see this theme begin in 1 Peter 3 1Pe 3:13-14 And who is he that will harm you, if ye be followers of that which is good? (14) But and if ye suffer for righteousness' sake, happy are ye: and be not afraid of their terror, neither be troubled; And continues to the end of 1 Peter 4 1Pe 4:12-13 Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened unto you: (13) But rejoice, inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christ's sufferings; that, when his glory shall be revealed, ye may be glad also with exceeding joy. None of the content is about Jesus preaching to dead people but is solely encouragement for believers who suffer in the flesh. May I ask you why you insist on basing your argument on the word "now" when that word is not present in the Greek text? If you would just reference a Greek interlinear you will find that the Greek word for now is absent from 1 Pet 3:19 as well as 1 Pet 4:6. You are adding to the text in order to support your view which is not a good thing to do. Yes I did make a mistake sorry about that. It doesn't change the intention of Jesus words if we translate "that find" as "are finding" ? It still places an emphasis upon finding the narrow gate to the reader and is valid for us. I don't understand what your point is here. Whether people are finding the narrow way in Jesus time or now the intention is the same. I don't understand why you are asking me to explain your own argument back to you? Nevertheless, you first proposed that Matt 7:13-14 proves universalism to be wrong. Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it. At first glance this verse appears to contradict the premise of universalism that ALL will eventually be saved since it states that only a FEW FIND the narrow way. However as I pointed out the word find is more accurately translated as finding. Therefore, Jesus is saying to his audience that only a few are finding the narrow way at that time. Jesus did not say that only a few will ever find it.

This reference to Augustine’s inadequacy is ironic considering your words to Onelight. “I think my approach to studying the scriptures is quite fine thank you. While it is commendable that you have been studying the Bible for over 30 years – your experience nor mine for that matter – are germane to this discussion. If it were, then I would also claim that I’ve studied the Bible since first becoming a believer over 30 years ago in addition to having graduated from seminary with honors. But all of that is irrelevant as rightly dividing the word is what matters – not our personal qualifications.” I don't find it ironic at all as Augustine doubted his own proficiency with the Greek language. Since Augustine in his writings admits to his lack of fluency with the Greek language, why should I or anyone else for that matter have confidence that he has "rightly divided the word" especially in regards to aion/aionios. That the Holy Spirit ( Spirit of Jesus ) preached to the pre-deluvians through Noah is rightly dividing the word as I have demonstrated in post #95. God was patient in Noah’s day to the value of 120 years as we know. Let’s look at the verses concerning the imprisoned. 1Pe 3:19-20 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; (20) Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. The Spirits ( unbelievers in Noah’s day )are in the company of all unbelievers. They are currently “in prison” and this is how Paul describes them. Paul is saying Jesus preached to the pre-deluvians who are now “in prison”. ( Ironically according to the harrowing of hell no post-deluvians are presented as being in prison ) Let’s look at why the death of Jesus is mentioned. 1Pe 3:18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: As from post #95 we see the context of the passage regards persecution of the righteous by non-believers. Jesus suffered as just and was killed ( presented as example for us to persevere in the face of injustice ) but was brought back to life ( quickened ) by the Holy Spirit. The passage then moves on to how this same Holy Spirit of Jesus preached during Noah’s time. There is no mention of Jesus preaching “after” He was put to death; and also note Jesus was quickened at the resurrection ( brought back from the dead ). The intention of the passage is to illustrate to the audience how they can stand against injustice with the aid of the Holy Spirit of Jesus in the same way Jesus did and Noah. I’ll ask again this question. Why did Jesus only preach to pre-deluvians ( according to the harrowing of hell ) when millions will have died since the flood ? Your claim that Jesus preached to the disobedient during Noah's day rests upon the assumption that the predulivians are "now in prison." However that is a forced assumption since the word now is absent from the Greek text. To me the flow is clear and in order of occurence - Jesus was put to death, made alive in the spirit, and went to preach to the spirits in prison. I don't believe that Jesus only preached to the prediluveans as 1 Pet 4:6 declares that the gospel was preached to the "dead" which includes both preduluvians and postdiluvians up until Christ's death. Incorrect. Your parsing of Greek seems to contradict every source I’ve found aside from Universalist websites. We can debunk your assessment of Jesus intention in using heuriskō in Matthew 7”13-14 by looking at all other times this word is used in the NT. It is used 175 times and without exception they never imply a present imperfect action. . Mat 1:18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found (heuriskō)with child of the Holy Ghost. Mat 8:10 When Jesus heard it, he marvelled, and said to them that followed, Verily I say unto you, I have not found (heuriskō ) so great faith, no, not in Israel. I have returned to add an etymology note concerning heurisko which also contradicts your claim. http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?strongs=G2147 You have made a serious mistake here. You have confused the root word heurisko with its participle form heuriskontes - they are two different words. The root means "/found" but its participle form does indeed mean "finding." I don't know where you learned or got your parsing information from but if you doubt what I say I refer you to the same source that you provided. http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Mat&c=7&v=14&t=KJV#s=t_conc_936014 Click on the parse button for heurisko and you will find: εὑρίσκω heuriskō Tense: Present Voice: Active Mood: Participle

I notice here Elhanan you have provided, as evidence, the Strong’s Greek definition for aion but have neglected to provide the strong’s Greek definition of the adjective aionios. Why is that ? Let me provide it for you. G166 αἰώνιοςaiōnios ahee-o'-nee-os From G165; perpetual (also used of past time, or past and future as well): - eternal, for ever, everlasting, world (began). The sense of both the root and the adjective are dependent upon the context. When we see the fate of the wicked juxtaposed against the fate of the righteous it is clear the definition is eternal or never ending. If you insist on translating aionios as eternal by all means go ahead and do so. Trouble is sooner or later you run into difficulty maintaining “eternal” as a consistent translation. After all, isn’t consistency in translating what we are looking for? Please keep in mind that all a Strong’s Concordance does in this case is to document for us all the occurrences where aionios is used in the NT and how the translators rendered the word in the KJV Bible. It doesn’t mean that they were always correct in their translation. Like I said if you insist that it must always mean eternal then go ahead and ponder these verses: Rom 16:25 “Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the [aionios] world began,” 2 Tim 1:9 “ Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the [aionion] world began, Tit 1:2 “ In hope of [aionion] eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the [aionion] world began; It is apparent that the KJV translators had to substitute the word “world” instead of “eternal” otherwise the Romans verse would read “secret since eternal began.” How can this possibly be since by definition eternal has no beginning or ending? Same thing with the 2 Tim verse – “given us in Christ Jesus before the eternal began.” How strange? Moreover, in the Titus verse we see the translators translating the exact same word in the same verse in two different ways. In the first instance aionion is translated as “eternal” but just a few words later they manage to translate it as “world.” It is easy to see why because eternal fits with the first part of the verse but it doesn’t fit with the last part lest it read “promised before the eternal began.” Again, eternal has no beginning. On the other hand if one translates aionios/aionion as related to "age" since an adjective always modifies the noun to which it refers – in this case aion or age from which we get the English word eon – then there is no need to manipulate the meaning of the word to fit these verses as can be seen in Young’s Literal Version: Rom 16:25 “And to Him who is able to establish you, according to my good news, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the secret, in the times of the ages having been kept silent,” 2 Tim 1:9 “who did save us, and did call with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace, that was given to us in Christ Jesus, before the times of the ages,” Tit 1:2 “ upon hope of life age-during, which God, who doth not lie, did promise before times of ages,”

OneLight - I apologize since you feel I have questioned your qualification for studying scripture. That was certainly not my intent as I was referring to your citing of a single scripture verse and a word dictionary to support your view. My reference to more study (not your experience or qualification) was related to the need to look up more occurrences of the word which I think you agree with since I believe that you also hold to the view that scripture interprets scripture. This is particularly the case regarding aion as this word is translated both as eternity and an age of time. This should immediately raise a red flag as one must question how a word can possibly have totally contradictory meanings. According to Strong's Greek 165, aion is defined as: aión: a space of time, an age Original Word: αἰών, ῶνος, ὁ Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine Transliteration: aión Phonetic Spelling: (ahee-ohn') Short Definition: an age, a cycle of time Definition: an age, a cycle (of time), especially of the present age as contrasted with the future age, and of one of a series of ages stretching to infinity. A straw man argument is one that has no basis in fact. This is certainly not the case for aion as demonstrated by the fact that it is translated as "age" and not "eternity" in numerous scriptural examples as cited above. I submit that we have had the words "eternity" or "eternal" so inculcated as part of our Christian vocabulary that the possibility that the noun aion and its adjectival forms such as aionios/aionion as possibly meaning anything else is difficult to comprehend much less accept. However as Dr. Marvin Vincent in his Word Studies of the New Testament states there are good reasons to think otherwise as he writes: 'Aion, transliterated aeon, is a period of longer or shorter duration, having a beginning and an end, and complete in itself. Aristotle (periouravou, i. 9,15) says: "The period which includes the whole time of one's life is called the aeon of each one." Hence it often means the life of a man, as in Homer, where one's life (aion) is said to leave him or to consume away (Iliad v. 685; Odyssey v. 160). It is not, however, limited to human life; it signifies any period in the course of events, as the period or age before Christ; the period of the millenium; the mythological period before the beginnings of history. The word has not "a stationary and mechanical value" (De Quincey). It does not mean a period of a fixed length for all cases. There are as many aeons as entities, the respective durations of which are fixed by the normal conditions of the several entities. There is one aeon of a human life, another of the life of a nation, another of a crow's life, another of an oak's life. The length of the aeon depends on the subject to which it is attached. It is sometimes translated world; world represents a period or a series of periods of time. See Matt 12:32; 13:40,49; Luke 1:70; 1 Cor 1:20; 2:6; Eph 1:21. Similarly oi aiones, the worlds, the universe, the aggregate of the ages or periods, and their contents which are included in the duration of the world. 1 Cor 2:7; 10:11; Heb 1:2; 9:26; 11:3. The word always carries the notion of time, and not of eternity. It always means a period of time. Otherwise it would be impossible to account for the plural, or for such qualifying expressions as this age, or the age to come. It does not mean something endless or everlasting. To deduce that meaning from its relation to aei is absurd; for, apart from the fact that the meaning of a word is not definitely fixed by its derivation, aei does not signify endless duration. When the writer of the Pastoral Epistles quotes the saying that the Cretans are always (aei) liars (Tit. 1:12), he surely does not mean that the Cretans will go on lying to all eternity. See also Acts 7:51; 2 Cor. 4:11; 6:10; Heb 3:10; 1 Pet. 3:15. Aei means habitually or continually within the limit of the subject's life. In our colloquial dialect everlastingly is used in the same way. "The boy is everlastingly tormenting me to buy him a drum." In the New Testament the history of the world is conceived as developed through a succession of aeons. A series of such aeons precedes the introduction of a new series inaugurated by the Christian dispensation, and the end of the world and the second coming of Christ are to mark the beginning of another series. Eph. 1:21; 2:7; 3:9,21; 1 Cor 10:11; compare Heb. 9:26. He includes the series of aeons in one great aeon, 'o aion ton aionon, the aeon of the aeons (Eph. 3:21); and the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews describe the throne of God as enduring unto the aeon of the aeons (Heb 1:8). The plural is also used, aeons of the aeons, signifying all the successive periods which make up the sum total of the ages collectively. Rom. 16:27; Gal. 1:5; Philip. 4:20, etc. This plural phrase is applied by Paul to God only. The adjective aionios in like manner carries the idea of time. Neither the noun nor the adjective, in themselves, carry the sense of endless or everlasting. They may acquire that sense by their connotation, as, on the other hand, aidios, which means everlasting, has its meaning limited to a given point of time in Jude 6. Aionios means enduring through or pertaining to a period of time. Both the noun and the adjective are applied to limited periods. Thus the phrase eis ton aiona, habitually rendered forever, is often used of duration which is limited in the very nature of the case. See, for a few out of many instances, LXX, Exod 21:6; 29:9; 32:13; Josh. 14:9 1 Sam 8:13; Lev. 25:46; Deut. 15:17; 1 Chron. 28:4;. See also Matt. 21:19; John 13:8 1 Cor. 8:13. The same is true of aionios. Out of 150 instances in LXX, four-fifths imply limited duration. For a few instances see Gen. 48:4; Num. 10:8; 15:15; Prov. 22:28; Jonah 2:6; Hab. 3:6; Isa. 61:17.

I explained the meaning at the end of my post by how it was used., but I see you do not accept the meaning of scripture, plainly stated, because yo don't want it to mean what it does, not that is means what you say. It is say when anyone refuses to accept scripture for what scripture means, but tries to make scripture fit their doctrine. We all do this from time to time, but those who are growing in Him are acceptable to correction. There are so many places in scripture where it tells us it will be forever. Because you refuse to accept what it does say, you try to reject the true meaning by saying the argument is from science, which weakens the argument? That is not true and only weakens your argument. I have studied scripture for well over 30 years. I began with your understanding of life after death, but allowed the truth to form my understand from scripture and did not waste my time trying to make scripture fit my understanding. I submit you check on how you approach your studies. I think my approach to studying the scriptures is quite fine thank you. While it is commendable that you have been studying the Bible for over 30 years – your experience nor mine for that matter – are germane to this discussion. If it were, then I would also claim that I’ve studied the Bible since first becoming a believer over 30 years ago in addition to having graduated from seminary with honors. But all of that is irrelevant as rightly dividing the word is what matters – not our personal qualifications. I don’t know whether you read my reply or correctly understood it. Am I to assume that your idea of doing a word study is to simply accept at face value what a Bible dictionary states and believe what it says without doing any additional study on your own? Since you are a self-described Bible student of over 30 years I can only assume that is not the case. As I stated earlier, using a lexicon or a word study dictionary is only the beginning. It is incumbent upon you to investigate those instances where the word and its equivalent, if applicable occurs in both Testaments in order to determine its contextual usage so as to correctly determine the meaning of a word. You have certainly not done undertaken that task and essentially all you have done is tell me what your Greek word dictionary says which is unconvincing to say the least. Also you say I make an argument from “science.” Again I give you the benefit of doubt and assume you meant “silence” which is what I actually wrote. I also assume you know what an argument from silence implies so please elaborate and tell me how an argument from silence does not apply in this situation. The basic problem with your argument is that you take an a priori position assuming from the outset that “there are so many places in scripture where it tells us it will be forever.” If this is the case, why does your word study dictionary give an alternative translation as “Age, an indefinitely long period of time or lapse of time?” I submit that you have somehow overlooked that outstanding detail so allow me to supply the details for you. Consider if you will the New Testament use of aion. Does “eternity” make any sense in the following passages? ♦ What will be the sign…of the end of [eternity] (Mt. 24:3)? ♦ I am with you…to the end of the [eternity] (Mt. 28:20). ♦ The sons of this [eternity] are more shrewd (Lu. 16:8). ♦ The sons of this [eternity] marry (Lu. 20:34). ♦ Worthy to attain that [eternity] (Lu. 20:35). ♦ Since the [eternity] began (Jn. 9:32; Ac. 3:21). ♦ Conformed to this [eternity] (Ro. 12:2). ♦ Mystery kept secret since the [eternity] began but now made manifest (Ro. 16:25-26). ♦ Where is the disputer of this [eternity] (1Co. 1:20)? ♦ Wisdom of this [eternity], nor of the rulers of this [eternity]… ordained before the [eternities]…which none of the rulers of this [eternity]… (1Co. 2:6-8). ♦ Wise in this [eternity] (1Co. 3:18). ♦ Upon whom the ends of the [eternities] have come (1Co. 10:11). ♦ God of this [eternity] has blinded (2Co. 4:4). ♦ Deliver us from this present evil [eternity] (Ga. 1:4). ♦ Not only in this [eternity] but also in that which is to come (Ep. 1:21). ♦ Walked according to the [eternity] of this world (Ep. 2:2). ♦ In the [eternities] to come (Ep. 2:7). ♦ From the beginnings of the [eternities] (Ep. 3:9). ♦ Hidden from [eternities]…but now…revealed (Col. 1:26). ♦ Loved this present [eternity] (2Ti. 4:10). ♦ Receive him [for eternity] (Phil. 1:15). Forever or until Onesimus, Philemon’s former slave, dies? ♦ Powers of the [eternity] to come (He. 6:5). ♦ At the end of the [eternities] (He. 9:26). ♦ We understand the [eternities] have been prepared by a saying of God (He. 11:3)."

I accept you insist aionios may have different applications that isn't the issue. In Matthew 25:46 Jesus applied aionios in the same sentence to both the righteous and the wicked. I'd like to hear your explanation for this. Also you haven't yet explained the juxtaposition of destruction of the wicked with eternal life of the righteous in Matthew 7:13-14 Mat 7:13-14 "Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. (14) But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it. I addressed the long falsified harrowing of hell doctrine in post #55 but I'll elaborate. It has been presented that in 1 Peter 3 Jesus, while in the Tomb, went and preached to dead people in "prison". ( unbelievers in hell etc ). Let's look at the entire passage to be clear of the context. 1Pe 3:12-17 For the eyes of the Lord are over the righteous, and his ears are open unto their prayers: but the face of the Lord is against them that do evil. (13) And who is he that will harm you, if ye be followers of that which is good? (14) But and if ye suffer for righteousness' sake, happy are ye: and be not afraid of their terror, neither be troubled; (15) But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear: (16) Having a good conscience; that, whereas they speak evil of you, as of evildoers, they may be ashamed that falsely accuse your good conversation in Christ. (17) For it is better, if the will of God be so, that ye suffer for well doing, than for evil doing. We can see initially the issue is suffering for Christ and standing strong in the face of adversity. 1Pe 3:18-20 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: (19) By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; (20) Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. Now we see this suffering for righteousness presented in Noah's day. Noah had the same persecution as we do and God was longsuffering in allowing Noah 120 years to preach by the Spirit. The Holy spirit preached to the pre-deluvians through Noah. Gen 6:3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. Notice when the preaching took place "..when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing,.." We can see from 1Peter 1 the Spirit of Jesus was in Noah. 1Pe 1:10-11 Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you: (11) Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. When accepting the harrowing of hell doctrine don't you wonder why only those in Noah's day are mentioned ? Your claim that Jesus through the Spirit preached the need for repentance to those who disobeyed while the ark was still being built is a view that first originated with Augustine. This is not surprising since it was Augustine who also popularized the idea of eternal punishment which cosequently became an established doctrine within the church. This happened despite Augustine’s own self-admitted dislike of the Greek language, lack of fluency with it and his need to rely on Latin translations to aid his understanding. How ironic then that we get our present day understanding of aionios as eternal from someone who was not even well versed in his comprehension of the Greek language. In terms of your understanding of when Jesus’ preaching took place, you claim it occurred during the days of Noah as the ark was being built. However you neglected to cite the whole verse and context. “18For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive in the Spirit. 19 After being made alive, he went and made proclamation to the imprisoned spirits— 20 to those who were disobedient long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built.” The word “when” does not reference Jesus’ preaching but it refers to when God was patient to those who were disobedient in Noah’s day. This is confirmed by the plain statement of the verse that he preached to those who were “imprisoned” and made proclamation AFTER he was put to death. Thus your view is contradicted by the text itself. As far as Matt 7:13-14 is concerned, I recall that several months ago you asked me for some references on how to parse the Greek language. I referred you to a few reference materials and this is a case where those materials would have benefitted you in understanding these particular verses. The key to this passage is the word “find” which comes from the Greek word euriskontes in v.14. This verb is written in the present tense. Therefore the word “find” as found in most Bible translations should actually be “finding.” Young’s Literal Translation accurately renders these verses as: 13 `Go ye in through the strait gate, because wide [is] the gate, and broad the way that is leading to the destruction, and many are those going in through it; 14 how strait [is] the gate, and compressed the way that is leading to the life, and few are those finding it! Jesus is describing a present tense action – not an action that will occur in the future. Hence Jesus was saying to his listeners that few are FINDING the narrow way at that time (Present tense) and not that few would EVER FIND the narrow way (future tense). As for Matt 25:46, I’ll tackle that in my next post to you.

I'm still confused why you are diverting to a word study of aionios when Jesus used the word to describe the fate of the righteous ( eternal life ) and the wicked in the same sentence. Whether aionios has several applications maybe relevant in other verses but in Matthew 25:46 it is undeniable that the meaning is eternal My questions stand awaiting your reply ( using etymology of aionios if you choose ) Do you accept aionios in Matthew 25:46 when referring to the righteous means eternal ?If so; why don’t you accept aionios, in the same sentence, when referring to the wicked means eternal ?At this stage I can only assume you believe Jesus used the same word but meant 2 different things in Matthew 25:46. I haven't seen anything you've presented in support of Universalism as plausible thus far which includes the long time falsified "harrowing of hell" and blatant misunderstanding of "all Israel. If you wish to present why the etymology of aionios allows for this word to be applied differently to the righteous and the wicked in Matthew 25:46 I will assess this premise. If you haven't gotten it by now despite my lengthy explanation, I rather doubt that you will ever get it. I just pointed out to you that it is shoddy homework to determine the meaning of a word based on a single scripture verse yet you persist in doing just that. As far as the harrowing of hell is concerned it is not convincing at all to make the "long time falsified " harrowing of hell as your claim. Who falsified it? Was it you? How long ago did it get "falsified." If you want to make your case against by all means do so instead of resorting to unreferenced and unsubstantiated generalizations. As for the meaning of aionios stay tuned and I'll get to it as my time permits.