Is Forgiveness the same as atonement?

[B. W.]

Hi Catherine, I'll answer your comments below

...UR is claiming that you are not penalised for not knowing about Christ or accepting Him, in this life. Christ is still in control behind the scenes, whether you know it or not.

Yes, but what does the bible really say about this?

1 John 5:10, 11, 12, "The one who believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself; the one who does not believe God has made Him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has given concerning His Son. 11 And the testimony is this, that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. 12 He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life."

What did Jesus say about this?

John 5:24, 29, "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life...29 and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment.”

Notice what Jesus states below:

Matthew 7:22, 23, "Many will say to Me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?'23 "And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS."

Then look at the principle being stated by Jesus that there are those that will never believe...

John 6:64, 65, "But there are some of you who do not believe." For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was that would betray Him. 65 And He was saying, "For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father."

There are some who are His sheep and there are those who are not...and if not are not his... How could Jesus make such a statement if he was proclaiming Universal Redemption of all?

John 10:26. 27, 28, "But you do not believe because you are not of My sheep. 27 "My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; 28 and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand."

Look at the principles so cited - only those that believe in Christ will be saved and those that do not will not and the wrath of God remains on them - forever.

John 3:36, "He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him."

Hebrews 10:29, 30, 31, "How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace? 30 For we know Him who said, "VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY." And again, "THE LORD WILL JUDGE HIS PEOPLE." 31 It is a terrifying thing to fall into the hands of the living God."

Mat 25:46, "These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."

It does not matter what Universalism says. Whom do you choose to place your faith in UR or Jesus Christ?

The preaching of the 'good news' is necessary to bring people into the Kingdom now. Those who are 'in Christ' and take part in the first resurrection will be the co rulers with Christ. Also, those who accept Christ in this life will have a better life now (spiritually). Those who don't accept Christ will have to undergo punishment and pain. Surely it's worth warning people so that they don't have to learn the hard way.

This would mean that believing in Christ is not important because all people will make it. According to the brand of Universal Redemption you cited, those that do not believe in Christ will be tortured and suffer dearly until they cry uncle and learn to love God in the afterlife.

Strange, since the doctrines of Universal Redemption (UR), main argument against eternal punishment is that God cannot torture because his great universal redemptive love forbids torture and suffering. How could God possibly torture non-believers to love him and to save them? UR has strange contradictions within its own doctrine...

God's kind of justice grants a person what the desire. If they do not want God — they'll be banished away from his presence forever as 2 Thessalonians 1:8-9 states: "in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 These shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power..."

Jesus saves only those that believe in Him as from the wrath to come...

1 Thessalonians 1:10, “…and to wait for His Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead, even Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come.”

It does not matter what Universalism says. Whom do you choose to place your faith in UR or Jesus Christ?

John 3:36 - He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.

" 'Aionios Zoe' may actually mean 'life pertaining to the age', not really 'everlasting', although we know that eventually, we will have life that doesn't end, because other scriptures tell us we will put on immortality. That 'aionios' life is available now and in the ages to come. Many or most rather, miss out on 'life' the way God intends it: 'this is aionios life that they should know you the only true God and Jesus Christ who you sent' John 17:3. And of course we know that God's wrath does come to an end eventually: See now that I myself am He! There is no god besides me. I put to death and I bring to life, I have wounded and I will heal, and no one can deliver out of my hand.

Another contradiction: How can everlasting not mean everlasting since as you said, “although we know that eventually, we will have life that doesn't end”

Again, UR slaughters Greek grammar and word meaning which is actually in word order and tense struture Zoen Aionion and not Aionios Zoe... and connects to pisteíºon— Those Believing — only those Believing in the Son — hui ón have never ending life. Notice which Greek letter ends in each of these words is v which is N in Greek and this connects and indicates that it is the same life with God given from from the Son is what believers in Christ have. That Life that the Son has is never ending and why Jesus said he has life within himself because of what John 8:58 and John 17:5, Hebrews 1:2, John 1:1-3 points out.

The Life possessed by Christ is not temporary nor does it only last for an age. That Life he has — he shares only to them that believe in Him so that those that do are reconciled back to God are being transformed into new creations in Christ. That is why John 3:36 is translated correctly and the word Everlasting — Aionion- means never ending because it connects to Christ and those believing by the letter it ends in: Everlasting Life with the Lord — not temporary life. -

Is Christ Temporary?

John 5:21, 26 and John 6:40 - This means the life Christ has with God, he only gives to them that believe in Him and that Life with God lasts forever and not lasts, as UR teaches, for a short period of time...

You continue to state in your following comments that those that do not believe will suffer only temporary punishment from a God who cannot torture...and thus they become saved through this torture to love God. Wow — what a bizarre contradictory doctrine UR is!

Mark 3:29 totally refutes Universalism: "but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is subject to eternal condemnation"

It does not matter what Universalism says. Whom do you choose to place your faith in UR or Jesus Christ?

More to follow later....

Bible quotes not otherwise cited are from the NKJV
-
-
-

[catherine]

Hi B.W, I see you are well again. Thanks for coming back to me and I hope you don't mind me continuing to comment in orange so that I don't forget the points I'm referring to.

Hi Catherine, I'll answer your comments below

...UR is claiming that you are not penalised for not knowing about Christ or accepting Him, in this life. Christ is still in control behind the scenes, whether you know it or not.

Yes, but what does the bible really say about this?

1 John 5:10, 11, 12, "The one who believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself; the one who does not believe God has made Him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has given concerning His Son. 11 And the testimony is this, that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. 12 He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life." I agree that without the Son there is no life and while you don't have the Son you haven't got the 'life'. Will this remain the case forever? Maybe not!

What did Jesus say about this?

John 5:24, 29, "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life...29 and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment.” So, Jesus is saying that it's our deeds that determine our eventual outcome, rather than our 'belief system'. So if our deeds were bad we will face judgment (which in no way equates to torture or to it being 'forever'). Incidentally, Paul explains that love is greater than faith. I understand that to mean, how we behave (love is action after all) is more important than what we happen to believe is truth.

Notice what Jesus states below:

Matthew 7:22, 23, "Many will say to Me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?'23 "And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS." Does it follow that this 'departing' is going to be permanent?

Then look at the principle being stated by Jesus that there are those that will never believe...

John 6:64, 65, "But there are some of you who do not believe." For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was that would betray Him. 65 And He was saying, "For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father."
Where is the word 'never' here? Yes, there are going to many if not most people who don't believe in Jesus and don't come to Him in their earthly lives and they will be judged.

There are some who are His sheep and there are those who are not...and if not are not his... How could Jesus make such a statement if he was proclaiming Universal Redemption of all?

John 10:26. 27, 28, "But you do not believe because you are not of My sheep. 27 "My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; 28 and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand." Jesus is talking about perishing here. If I agree that the perishing is 'eternal' then how does 'perishing' become 'eternally kept alive to be tormented'?

Look at the principles so cited - only those that believe in Christ will be saved and those that do not will not and the wrath of God remains on them - forever.

John 3:36, "He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him." Verses like this, if taken with the many UR verses, some of which I've quoted in earlier posts, can surely make the wrath and not having the life a temporary thing? More about the 'forever' in a minute.....

Hebrews 10:29, 30, 31, "How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace? 30 For we know Him who said, "VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY." And again, "THE LORD WILL JUDGE HIS PEOPLE." 31 It is a terrifying thing to fall into the hands of the living God."

Mat 25:46, "These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."
UR is not saying God's punishments are not to be feared and just as the rewards can vary (parable of the talents) so too the punishments. Jesus mentioned a punishment in one of His parables and what is interesting is when He says: 'And in anger his master delivered him to the jailers, until he should pay all his debt'. Matt 18:34. Notice it says 'til' .

It does not matter what Universalism says. Whom do you choose to place your faith in UR or Jesus Christ? Jesus says He will draw (drag) all men to Him'. Do I believe that? Yes, Jesus says He is going to judge people but I don't see how that has to mean 'forever', once we realise 'aionios' doesn't mean forever. I'll say more on that in a minute.

The preaching of the 'good news' is necessary to bring people into the Kingdom now. Those who are 'in Christ' and take part in the first resurrection will be the co rulers with Christ. Also, those who accept Christ in this life will have a better life now (spiritually). Those who don't accept Christ will have to undergo punishment and pain. Surely it's worth warning people so that they don't have to learn the hard way.

This would mean that believing in Christ is not important because all people will make it. No, no more than saying, it's no big deal the ancient Mayans didn't know about Jesus so they're all 'lost' forever. Truth is truth. Some know it, some don't. The truth will out eventually.According to the brand of Universal Redemption you cited, those that do not believe in Christ will be tortured and suffer dearly until they cry uncle and learn to love God in the afterlife. Hmmm. I would never use the word 'torture' because I don't believe 'kolasis' means that. UR believes it means corrective punishment,as opposed to inflicting suffering just for the sake of inflicting suffering. There is a big difference there. e.

Strange, since the doctrines of Universal Redemption (UR), main argument against eternal punishment is that God cannot torture because his great universal redemptive love forbids torture and suffering. How could God possibly torture non-believers to love him and to save them? UR has strange contradictions within its own doctrine...You have misunderstood what I have said earlier. God does not 'torture' in the sense that humans can torture: ie to inflict pain on someone for no reason other than to cause them pain and suffering. God metes out judgment and corrective punishment. Or maybe God metes out punishment that means eternal perishing ie annihilation. He does not cause pain, just for it's own sake.

God's kind of justice grants a person what the desire. If they do not want God — they'll be banished away from his presence forever as 2 Thessalonians 1:8-9 states: "in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 These shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power..." Fire has been literally used in the past to execute God's judgments e.g Sodom and Gomorrah. Fire is also a symbol of destruction (maybe eternal destruction).

Jesus saves only those that believe in Him as from the wrath to come...

1 Thessalonians 1:10, “…and to wait for His Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead, even Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come.”

It does not matter what Universalism says. Whom do you choose to place your faith in UR or Jesus Christ?

John 3:36 - He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.

" 'Aionios Zoe' may actually mean 'life pertaining to the age', not really 'everlasting', although we know that eventually, we will have life that doesn't end, because other scriptures tell us we will put on immortality. That 'aionios' life is available now and in the ages to come. Many or most rather, miss out on 'life' the way God intends it: 'this is aionios life that they should know you the only true God and Jesus Christ who you sent' John 17:3. And of course we know that God's wrath does come to an end eventually: See now that I myself am He! There is no god besides me. I put to death and I bring to life, I have wounded and I will heal, and no one can deliver out of my hand.

Another contradiction: How can everlasting not mean everlasting since as you said, “although we know that eventually, we will have life that doesn't end”

Again, UR slaughters Greek grammar and word meaning which is actually in word order and tense struture Zoen Aionion and not Aionios Zoe... and connects to pisteíºon— Those Believing — only those Believing in the Son — hui ón have never ending life. Notice which Greek letter ends in each of these words is v which is N in Greek and this connects and indicates that it is the same life with God given from from the Son is what believers in Christ have. That Life that the Son has is never ending and why Jesus said he has life within himself because of what John 8:58 and John 17:5, Hebrews 1:2, John 1:1-3 points out. Apologies for mybad Greek grammar, not UR's. I was relying on my memory and have obviously remembered the grammatical endings incorrectly. It's no big deal. I do the same with German (it's adjectives can have many endings, but I'm sure a German would know what I meant). There is a Greek word for 'eternal' or 'everlasting' and that is 'aidios'. This word 'aionios' (or 'aionion' depending on the grammar) is very interesting and I've studied a lot about this little word. It derives from the Greek word 'aion' which means 'age' or 'period of time'. I could recommend some articles on this word for anyone interested. In fact, here is a very good one. See what you make of it: http://www.mercifultruth.com/eternity.htm It explains the ''Greek' and covers some of the points I am trying to convey but much more eloquently and with better scripture references.

The Life possessed by Christ is not temporary nor does it only last for an age. Yes. I agree. The life that Christ promises us is not temporary. It pertains to the age. We know from other verses that when we put off the physcial and put on the spiritual, we will receive immortality. That is not being disputed. I think the distinction here and the interesting use of 'aionion' rather than 'aidios' (or whatever ending that goes with it), is that God works His purposes in Ages. There have been ages past and there are ages to come. The life we receive will be perfect for the age we live in. So too the punishment which is being compared. That too, will pertain to the age. Can you see the distinction here, if we allow for this understanding of the word 'aionios'? If it is true, that 'aionios' doesn't in itself, mean eternal, then we have a better understanding of the natureof the punishment, rather than the duration.That Life he has — he shares only to them that believe in Him so that those that do are reconciled back to God are being transformed into new creations in Christ. That is why John 3:36 is translated correctly and the word Everlasting — Aionion- means never ending because it connects to Christ and those believing by the letter it ends in: Everlasting Life with the Lord — not temporary life. -

Is Christ Temporary?

John 5:21, 26 and John 6:40 - This means the life Christ has with God, he only gives to them that believe in Him and that Life with God lasts forever and not lasts, as UR teaches, for a short period of time... yes, you only receive that life, once you come to Christ and not before and we know from other verses that we will be immortal. UR does not teach that the 'zoen aionion' is temporary. NO. Not at all. There is a distinction here that needs to be grasped: life pertaining to the age, and punishment pertaining to the age.

You continue to state in your following comments that those that do not believe will suffer only temporary punishment from a God who cannot torture...and thus they become saved through this torture to love God. Wow — what a bizarre contradictory doctrine UR is! I don't think I said that. I would avoid the word 'torture' like the plague. We as fallen humans punish our children. We don't like it and it probably hurts us more than the child. But we do it, so that the child learns a lesson. We don't do it, to hurt the child. Punishment is not torture.

Mark 3:29 totally refutes Universalism: "but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is subject to eternal condemnation"
Here is a 'taster' of a good article that goes more into depth on the 'unforgiveable sin':

''Have you ever heard about the "unforgivable sin?" This is what the orthodox church names it, though the actual term "unforgivable sin" is not scriptural. Jesus warned that blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is a sin that is bound to be judged, but here are his actual words:

Mark 3:28-29 Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme: But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost not forgiveness in the age (ou aphesis eis aion), but is in danger of aionios judgment.
The term "ou aphesis aion" was translated "will never have forgiveness." If you look in your Bibles, you will see that the translators conveniently failed, altogether, to translate "eis aion" as "in the age." The term is there, but they opted for "never" instead. Nice, huh? Just as Jesus said that believers have a promise of "aionios-life" "in the aion to come" he also spoke of some who will not have forgiveness "in the age" because they are in danger of the "aionios-judgment" (the judgment of the ages.) That this age-abiding judgment is not infinite agrees with God's statements about the fruit He produces in those judgment. The Scripture informs us:

Isaiah 26:9
When Your judgments come upon the earth, the people of the world will learn righteousness. Let favor be showed to the wicked, yet will he not learn righteousness: in the land of uprightness will he deal unjustly, and will not behold the majesty of the LORD. ''
http://www.mercifultruth.com/eternity.htm

You'd need to read all of it to appreciate the points it brings out. You need to scroll down about three quarters if you just want to read the bit about the 'unforgiveable sin' :

It does not matter what Universalism says. Whom do you choose to place your faith in UR or Jesus Christ? For me, I can only trust in reason because I haven't met Jesus personally so that He can tell me the score. I know the bible is full of dodgy mistranslations and so no wonder there is confusion over such beliefs as eternal conscious torment. All I can do at present, is ask God to reveal His truth to me. He asks us to reason with Him: 'come let us reason together'. Paul tried reasoning with the Greeks. I use my reasoning abilities and yes, they may be malfunctioning to a certain or greater extent, but I don't know if the Spirit is leading me in my 'understandings' or if it's just my own reasonings. I must be true to what I believe to be truth. The same inner belief that drives me to be a better person and not lose my patience with people who are hard work. To love rather than hate. Stuff like that. I 'know' that God is not a torturer, just as I know that He isn't the flying spaghetti monster. There you have it.

More to follow later....

Bible quotes not otherwise cited are from the NKJV
-
-
-

[B. W.]

... No, no more than saying, it's no big deal the ancient Mayans didn't know about Jesus so they're all 'lost' forever. Truth is truth. Some know it, some don't. The truth will out eventually.

... Hmmm. I would never use the word 'torture' because I don't believe 'kolasis' means that. UR believes it means corrective punishment, as opposed to inflicting suffering just for the sake of inflicting suffering. There is a big difference there. e.

...You have misunderstood what I have said earlier. God does not 'torture' in the sense that humans can torture: ie to inflict pain on someone for no reason other than to cause them pain and suffering. God metes out judgment and corrective punishment. Or maybe God metes out punishment that means eternal perishing ie annihilation. He does not cause pain, just for it's own sake.

Interesting in the light that this corrective punishment Universalist tout is meant to be feared more than anything. You said so yourself as does its chief proponents. This does not sound like corrective to me — torture would more appropriate to describe such corrective punishment that it is to be feared! The way Universalism puts it is that one must avoid this dreadful horrible corrective punishment because it is so horrible Jesus came so that people can avoid such corrective horrible punishment.

When you point out that such corrective punishment is in actuality torture then Universalist make it out that it is not really that bad — just corrective, on the lines of a simple spanking. This in and of itself serves to point out the error of Universalism in its own interpretations as contradictive. Jesus' suffering on the cross was only to avoid terrible corrective punishment but not at all necessary other than avoiding a simple spanking. Wow, what disservice to the cross and work of redemption!

Then some branches of Universalism doctrine even goes so far as stating that some of the worst people will be annihilated into non-being. Think on this: Now if such universal salvation really be true then there could be no annihilation into non-being for to do so would negate universalist claim that salvation is universal for all!

Again the twisting of grammar that Universalist do to Mark 3:29 and other scriptures regarding the word translated eternal is simply twisting of scriptures as Peter warns about in 2 Peter 3:16, “...as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.” NKJV

Again, if all people are predestined to be saved, there would be no logical reason for Jesus to come into the world and do any work of redemption because God is so lovingly weak that he can't bear the thought of hurting a fruit fly so he just saves all.

Jesus' work of redemption is reduced to mere avoidance of a good spanking by God is pure nonsense. That is why you need to flee Universalism and place your faith in Christ — not your teachers, not your teachers interpretations, but on Christ work on the cross to that saves a person who places his/her faith in him.

Catharine, we respect you here but all you have written points that your faith is in Universalism — not in Christ. You are more inclined to place your faith in what Universalism says Christ and the bible means — not in what Christ told us to fear more than losing our own limbs...

Mark 9:45, 47, “And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life lame than with two feet to be thrown into hell... 47 And if your eye causes you to sin, tear it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into hell…” NKJV

That does not sound like a mere spanking to me nor corrective either. It is a dire warning of truth spoken by the Lord — hell is not corrective.

Isaiah 45:21, "Declare and present your case; let them take counsel together! Who told this long ago? Who declared it of old? Was it not I, the LORD? And there is no other god besides me, a righteous God and a Savoir; there is none besides me." NKJV

Why do you trust universalism's doctrines and teachers so much over and above what Jesus says to do - believe in him that only He can save?

In your own words here recorded you have shown that the redemptive work of Christ is not important and certainly not necessary by reducing the wrath of God to corrective terrifying spankings, but not torture, and paints that there is no real reason at all for Christ to have come to the cross since God predestined all to be saved before the foundation of the world. Universalism cannot reconcile why Christ needed to come into the world, and to the cross, since the god of universalism has no logical reason or need to do any of this at all.

Let me add one more thing. You seem to base what you believe in how you define what 'Love' means; therefore, how do you define 'Love'?

You would not be here on this forum if God the Father was not drawing you here for a reason and purpose - to discover Christ and find the salvation of the Lord

Keep seeking Cathrine
-
-
-

[B. W.]

Hi Cathrine since you supplied some links - here is an interesting blog to explore as it has several points we are discussing now...

Bill Pratt Blog

Link for word Aion

Link regarding use of aion
-
-
-

[Kurieuo]

Hi Catherine,

I will get to responding more fully as time allows, and also to your PM, but two reasons come to me which I find quite persuasive against the universal salvation position.

Firstly, early Jewish Christians referred to themselves as "The Way". This term implies there is one way we must follow to God. If Christ's work is universally applied to everyone, then "The Way" makes no sense. To put in different words, "The Way" makes no sense for us if everyone is saved regardless of any way they take - whether through Christ here and now, or a period of punishment in the afterlife.

Secondly, we have Jesus' words in Matthew 7:13-14:

• Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide, and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and many are those who enter by it. For the gate is small, and the way is narrow that leads to life, and few are those who find it.

[Kurieuo]

Craig said:

''Thus, in a sense, God doesn't send anybody to hell. His desire is that everyone be saved, and He pleads with people to come to Him. But if we reject Christ's sacrifice for our sin, then God has no choice but to give us what we deserve. God will not send us to hell--but we will send ourselves. Our eternal destiny thus lies in our own hands. It is a matter of our free choice where we shall spend eternity.''

If Hell is real, and God is in control of ALL things and created ALL things, then to say He doesn't actually 'send us' there is illogical in my mind. When God warned Adam and Eve what the consequences of disobeying Him (ie sin), would be, He didn't say 'eternal seperation in a place of torment', but rather 'death' ie you will die. (The wages of sin is death, which is the opposite of life). Now surely if such a fate is awaiting those who refuse to come to Christ, then surely it should have been mentioned right from the start. It's not even in the small print.

God said in the very day they eat from tree that they would die. Spiritual and physical death are both intended. Hence, we need to be born again "spiritually".

I would also add that more and more we are discovering how determined behaviour is. Our wills are not truly 'free'. We have choices that are limited and driven by other factors. I mentioned before how we can't direct our own steps, our hearts are wicked etc. If I had a malfunctioning computer anti-virus programme, I'd not trust it to keep my computer safe. I'd hardly be able to blame it, when things went wrong. Our eternal destiny cannot be entrusted to us because we are not the Creator, or in charge. He gives life and He takes life and He restores life. Rom 11:32:For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.''

Are you then arguing we are entirely determined by our environments and/or genetics? If not, then your argument does not hold for you must argue we are completely determined to not be held accountable.

On the other hand, I believe God has endowed a knowledge of Himself in all of us. As we live life and make decisions, we either move away from or towards Gods. Thus, the malfuntioning computer anti-virus happens because of human decisions, not determination.

Then there is the tricky situation of Scripture, for example Romans 1:18-20 which pass responsibility for our decisions on us:

• 18The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

Craig then goes on further to say:

''Now, of course, nobody commits an infinite number of sins in the earthly life. But what about in the afterlife? Insofar as the inhabitants of hell continue to hate God and reject Him, they continue to sin and so accrue to themselves more guilt and more punishment. In a real sense, then, hell is self-perpetuating. In such a case, every sin has a finite punishment, but because sinning goes on forever, so does the punishment.''

If this is true, then creation has not been reconciled, sin has not been overcome, all tears and pain have not been removed. God is not All in All because the majority of His creation, the ones made in His image, will be festering, suffering, hating for all eternity in a realm God preserves. This is so repugnant and wrong and goes in the face of scripture, whose central message is surely reconciliaiton and restoration. Sin will no longer be in existence. 'Enemies' of God will no longer be in existence. To attribute this wicked idea to God who is love, is surely the imaginings of a malfunctioning mind. 'Sinning goes on for ever'- what a statement. Either Christ reconciles All things or He actually didn't do a great job, seeing as most of His creation is left to sin for ever and ever. What a ludicrous, crazy idea!

Now there are different theologies on hell. Some believe in annihilation, others eternal punishment. I use to lean towards the former, but now lean towards the latter. Now Scripture does not say all of creation will be reconciled, so I don't see a need to embrace that it will. I also believe sin has been overcome by God's forgiveness and mercy, and no tears and pain will exist for those who come to Christ and are reconciled to God. Those who reject Christ, God has no choice but to give into their decision for it is God's will to love and respect our free decisions above His own wants.

You might interject again with your argument that we are not accountable for our decisions and that our beliefs and actions are determined a part from our own free will. Thus, God should and must override our faulty decisions. This only holds if we are not in any way accountable. If what we believe and do is entirely determined, then I agree it doesn't make sense for God to punish or condemn us, let alone judge us. It doesn't make sense for God to cast Adam and Eve out of the garden, or to visit the consequences of their sin (physical and spiritual death) onto all of humanity.

On the other hand, if we do make decisions that we are in fact responsible for, then wouldn't you agree this makes quite a different story?

Finally Craig also said:

''No Christian likes the doctrine of hell. I truly wish with all my heart that universal salvation were true. But to pretend that people are not sinful and in need of salvation would be as cruel and deceptive as pretending that somebody was healthy even though you knew that he had a fatal disease for which you knew the cure.''

This statement is classic of how UR is misrepresented... UR does in no way claim people are not sinful etc. All of us are dying because we all sin. We are all malfunctioning, some worse than others. We all need reconciliation and the only way for reconciliation is through Christ. Now Christ knows the cure for our malfunctioning, and the ones who because of the malfuncitons can't understand or appreciate the cure, can surely be cured, so that they can accept Christ in a 'free' way. If that is not the case and they can't be cured, then they will return to the dust they came from ie they will return to the state prior to their conception, which is non existence. That is eternal punishment. However, I believe the 'evidence' is strong enough to have a real hope that All will be reconciled and not one sheep will be lost in the end because as Romans says, God (against our wills) subjected us to disobedience (by allowing us to be born into a malfunctioning body and nature) but will subject ALL to mercy.

Craig is making a statement towards a particular line of beliefs on universal salvation, not necessarily the UR beliefs you appear to be reading up on. I think the essence of Craig's statement still holds and was similar to what I was trying to state earlier. I would much rather be wrong teaching about the way to God being narrow, than wrong about teaching everyone that they are saved.

Re: not one sheep being lost... what about the goats in Matthew 25:31-46?

• 31"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. 32All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.
  
  34"Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.'
  
  37"Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?'
  
  40"The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'
  
  41"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.'
  
  44"They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?'
  
  45"He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'
  
  46"Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."

Now you might go looking for UR interpretations to try reconcile. I'd much prefer you read the chapters of the many verses being quoted by B.W. and myself on your own, and first come to your own conclusions. It is quite easy to pass rational responsibilty onto others, and then cling to their interpretations as though they were your own. On the other hand, I quite virtue free thought. And I have valued our discussion here, however, and correct me if I am wrong, but I am beginning to notice less of your own thinking on these matters and more what seems to be UR thinking you are seeking out?

Now I can understand why you would pursue and desire UR beliefs to be right. No one likes to think of their loved ones or friends being lost and accountable for rejecting God, particularly the love of their life! But if you're wrong, and URs are wrong...

ONe last thought which I think I mentioned earlier: As God knows the end from the beginning, He knows what will happen etc, He knew that man would fall and most would reject Him, so before He created the universe and Man, He knew Hell would have to exist to 'house' most of His creation. Now why would a God of love want to have a situation where most of His creation will forever be writhing in hatred, agony, suffering or whatever, in a 'prison', whilst the lucky few live in paradise (assuming their memories have been wiped of their loved ones now existing forever alongside them (in the Matrix dimension!) but in agony unimaginable, when of course God looks on at the suffering for ever and ever).

That is correct. God created a world and endowed His creation with the ultimate gift to make free decisions, to choose or reject Him, love or hate. His love is so overflowing, He wanted to share it with free creatures like angels and mankind. In order to have true love, the beloved must be free to respond. Sadly, this means many reject such love. But to those who receive and respond back, the greatest good (love) is made possible. Just because many reject God's love, why should the decisions of these people restrict God from creating a world wherein others do postively respond? The idea that God should not create because many would reject Him, restricts God's sovereignty and power and holds it captive to sinners! I believe an all-loving and sovereign God is quite entitled to create a world wherein many reject Him and only some positively respond in love back.

This goes against every grain of intelligence and feeling I possess: that God knowingly created the inevitability of Hell. This would surely mean the Devil did win. He took so many casualties and 'forced' God to maintain them in the lake of fire (or a place like that represented in 'The Great Divorce'), for ever and ever . My brain is actually 'hurting' at the thought of such a thing.

Certainly I do believe the Devil wins some, but God ultimately determines the fate and wins over all.

I strongly feel universal salvation is built upon a reduced understanding of God's complete holiness and righteousness. God, being righteousness itself, is incompatible entirely incompatible with sin. To accept the tiniest sin or blemish is to divide God against Himself, and God cannot be divided against Himself. So those who sin even the slightest can not be with Him but must be expelled from His presence. To convey even more strongly, God's holiness and righteousness is so much that if the least sinful person entered into God's unrestrained presence, such a person would be obliterated.

To add further, you talk of punishment of those in the afterlife who did not accept Christ. Punishment does not take away sin but is a consequence of it. Can any one of us undo a wrong in our life? The only solution to becoming clean and entering into God's holy presence is through atonement. The only hope I see for myself being with God if God really does exist and is entirely righteous, is through hoping Christ's promise is true and that His life and sacrifice really does atone for our sin. I might be wrong, but if I am, I'm damn sure none of us will be saved from God's righteousness through penance or any other religion on earth.

I am not sure how I can make this clearer... If we are sinful, we can not atone for our own sin. Any atonement must come from an external source. This message is all the way through the Levitical law with the transference of sin and guilt via the laying hands on an innocent animal which was then offered to God. This is embedded in the ancient Jewish custom of kinsman redemption. This is embedded in the message of Christ. Since we can't undo our actions, atonement is the only way our sins can be taken away. And we can not atone for our own sins.

Reflecting on all this has brought me to a very important realisation regarding UR belief as you have here reasoned for. That is, all who don't accept Christ in this life will be punished in the next however ultimately "forced saved" through Christ. However, if we receive atonement then a person no longer needs to be punished. Our sin is done away with. Thus, if a person is being punished in the afterlife, then it is because they don't have Christ! And if they don't have Christ then they will continue being punished for their sin. To say that Christ's atoning sacrifice will be applied to all, and then say that many still need to be punished, is to make of no effect Christ's atoning sacrifice. Thus, either Christ's atoning sacrifice does not apply to those being punished, or it does and there is no need for them to be punished.

Now given God's complete holiness and righteousness, the only possible solution for those of us who reject the atonement and forgiveness offered through Christ's sacrifice is expulsion from God. Expulsion either through annihilation, or through our confinement to a place that God Himself entirely withdraws from. Evil is restrained in our world, because God is still in it, but a world without God would be unimaginable hell. The images of Gehenna, fire and brimstone, eternal darkness, worm that never dies, etc are all used in Scripture is used to convey in human understanding what the horror of such a place would be like.

[B. W.]

Hi Catherine,

Here also is a quote from the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia concerning the words translated eternal, age, forever, etc and etc…

Please note that Universalism applies only one definition to a word in all cases it is used without taking into account grammar, syntax, or context which refines and narrows the meanings. In the majority of cases the words translated everlasting, eternal, etc & etc refer to never ending — enduring through all ages continuously with cease.

International Standard Bible Encyclopedia

Eternal

ē̇-tûr´nal (עולם, ‛ōlām; αἰώνιος, aiō̇nios, from αἰών, aiō̇n): The word “eternal” is of very varying import, both in the Scriptures and out of them.

1. ‛Ōlām

In the Old Testament, the Hebrew word ‛ōlām is used for “eternity,” sometimes in the sense of unlimited duration, sometimes in the sense of a cycle or an age, and sometimes, in later Hebrew, in the signification of world. The Hebrew ‛ōlām has, for its proper New Testament equivalent, aiōn, as signifying either time of particular duration, or the unending duration of time in general. Only, the Hebrew term primarily signified unlimited time, and only in a secondary sense represented a definite or specific period. Both the Hebrew and the Greek terms signify the world itself, as it moves in time.

2. Aiōn, Aiōnios

In the New Testament, aiōn and aiōnios are often used with the meaning “eternal,” in the predominant sense of futurity. The word aiōn primarily signifies time, in the sense of age or generation; it also comes to denote all that exists under time-conditions; and, finally, superimposed upon the temporal is an ethical use, relative to the world's course. Thus aiōn may be said to mean the subtle informing spirit of the world or cosmos - the totality of things. By Plato, in his Timaeus, aiōn was used of the eternal Being, whose counterpart, in the sense-world, is Time. To Aristotle, in speaking of the world, aiōn is the ultimate principle which, in itself, sums up all existence. In the New Testament, aiōn is found combined with prepositions in nearly three score and ten instances, where the idea of unlimited duration appears to be meant. This is the usual method of expressing eternity in the Septuagint also. The aiōnios of 2 Co 4:18 must be eternal, in a temporal use or reference, else the antithesis would be gone.

3. Aı́dios

In Romams 1:20 the word aı́dios is used of Divine action and rendered in the King James Version “eternal” (the Revised Version (British and American) “everlasting”), the only other place in the New Testament where the word occurs being Jude 1:6, where the rendering is “everlasting,” which accords with classical usage. But the presence of the idea of eternal in these passages does not impair the fact that aiōn and aiōnios are, in their natural and obvious connotation, the usual New Testament words for expressing the idea of eternal, and this holds strikingly true of the Septuagint usage also. For, from the idea of aeonian life, there is no reason to suppose the notion of duration excluded. The word aiōnios is sometimes used in the futurist signification, but often also, in the New Testament, it is concerned rather with the quality, than with the quantity or duration, of life. By the continual attachment of aiōnios to life, in this conception of the spiritual or Divine life in man, the aeonian conception was saved from becoming sterile.

4. Enlargement of Idea

In the use of aiōn and aiōnios there is evidenced a certain enlarging or advancing import till they come so to express the high and complex fact of the Divine life in man. In Greek, aiō̇nes signifies ages, or periods or dispensations. The aiōnes of Hebrews 1:2, and Hebrews 11:3, is, however, to be taken as used in the concrete sense of “the worlds,” and not “the ages,” the world so taken meaning the totality of things in their course or flow.

5. Eternal Life

Our Lord decisively set the element of time in abeyance, and took His stand upon the fact and quality of life - life endless by its own nature. Of that eternal life He is Himself the guarantee - “Because I live, ye shall live also” (John 14:19). Therefore said Augustine, “Join thyself to the eternal God, and thou wilt be eternal.” See ETERNITY.

-
-
-

[catherine]

In your own words here recorded you have shown that the redemptive work of Christ is not important and certainly not necessary by reducing the wrath of God to corrective terrifying spankings, but not torture, and paints that there is no real reason at all for Christ to have come to the cross since God predestined all to be saved before the foundation of the world. Universalism cannot reconcile why Christ needed to come into the world, and to the cross, since the god of universalism has no logical reason or need to do any of this at all.

Let me add one more thing. You seem to base what you believe in how you define what 'Love' means; therefore, how do you define 'Love'?

You would not be here on this forum if God the Father was not drawing you here for a reason and purpose - to discover Christ and find the salvation of the Lord

Keep seeking Cathrine
-
-
-

'My own words' are obviously not very good in conveying what UR 'claims' (hence why I recommend certain articles and websites): only through Christ will man be reconciled to God for eternity, and just as Adam's fall effected All men, so the second Adam's 'work' affects ALL men too. It is upholding the atoning sacrifice of Christ, it's upholding that there is only ONE way to God, which is through Christ. It is most definately not teaching that there is such a thing as eternal conscious torment, wherever or whatever that might entail. (Many mainstream 'christians' share this view too). I'm not fully convinced that everyone without exception, will eventually be saved, but I am fully convinced that the Bible does not teach a literal place we now call hell, or that people will be consciously tormented forever. I've debated hell with you before, and we've both covered the main lines of arguments. You have had an experience of hell and I respect your position as regards 'hell'. I have not had an experience and so I can only 'go' on the data available and I know you think I'm reading the data incorrectly, but I don't think I am.

I will definately read the links for 'aionios' that you've kindly provided. This word is one of the main lynch pins on which UR rests. If it doesn't necessarily or always mean 'eternal', then there is hope the punishment isn't eternal. If is most definately does mean 'eternal' then UR is false and I hope God forgives those who believe it, as belief in it, is not born out of any evil desires.

I can only define love from my human perspective and I see love as 'action' e.g giving your last pound to a homeless person, turning the other cheek, helping people, coming to die for your creation. Love isn't just about how we feel. God is always working, as Jesus told us; love is action that results in good. I'm sure I don't fully understand what 'love' really is, because God is love and I don't understand many things about Him.

[catherine]

Hi Catherine,

Here also is a quote from the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia concerning the words translated eternal, age, forever, etc and etc…

-

Thanks for this information too B.W. I will be checking out your links and this reference too. I'll let you know what I 'find'.

[catherine]

Reflecting on all this has brought me to a very important realisation regarding UR belief as you have here reasoned for. That is, all who don't accept Christ in this life will be punished in the next however ultimately "forced saved" through Christ. However, if we receive atonement then a person no longer needs to be punished. Our sin is done away with. Thus, if a person is being punished in the afterlife, then it is because they don't have Christ! And if they don't have Christ then they will continue being punished for their sin. To say that Christ's atoning sacrifice will be applied to all, and then say that many still need to be punished, is to make of no effect Christ's atoning sacrifice. Thus, either Christ's atoning sacrifice does not apply to those being punished, or it does and there is no need for them to be punished.

Now given God's complete holiness and righteousness, the only possible solution for those of us who reject the atonement and forgiveness offered through Christ's sacrifice is expulsion from God. Expulsion either through annihilation, or through our confinement to a place that God Himself entirely withdraws from. Evil is restrained in our world, because God is still in it, but a world without God would be unimaginable hell. The images of Gehenna, fire and brimstone, eternal darkness, worm that never dies, etc are all used in Scripture is used to convey in human understanding what the horror of such a place would be like.

I must admit that the appeal of UR, draws me to it: I'm hoping it's true because it is such good news. However, I am not convinced of it. I've argued for UR because I've needed to 'test' it and see if it stands up. I acknowledge there are valid points you and B.W have made, that further 'unconvince me' of UR. I don't rely on other people's 'teachings'. I question everything (too much probably) and am skeptical of most things. You certainly have provided a 'new' perspective as regards 'universal forgiveness' that does seem to negate UR, whilst upholding the scriptures that seem to suggest UR. I'm still pondering these things. You have now pinpointed another possible 'nail in the coffin' for UR, ie your statement above regarding punishment and atonement. Again, I will ponder this point. I would just say that the 'punishment' is not to be viewed like 'pergatory' or a person's working towards being acceptable. The punishment is to be viewed as God working His reconciliation in that person, which is possible through the atoning work of Christ. Paul acknowledges that people can still suffer loss: 1 Cor 3:15. But I may be wrong here. I'll look into this point you've made.

Oh yes, I'm not sure at all about 'free will' and determinism. Again, you've made some good points. I 'think' we have a limited 'free will'. At the end of the day, God knows what 'determines' our actions e.g did I kill the person because I'm a phsychopath ie I was hard wired to most likely do that, or because I hated them and lost my temper with them? (then again, maybe my temper was down to hormones, the genes I inherited....and so on.... God knows the ins and outs.

[B. W.]

I can only define love from my human perspective and I see love as 'action' e.g giving your last pound to a homeless person, turning the other cheek, helping people, coming to die for your creation. Love isn't just about how we feel. God is always working, as Jesus told us; love is action that results in good. I'm sure I don't fully understand what 'love' really is, because God is love and I don't understand many things about Him.

Good answers but there is more that helps describes what 'Love' is and means.

The Greek language used in the bible text used four words for the one word we use for love. The Wikipedia quote below only gives a brief overview of these words. The one we are looking into is one used in 1 John 4:16 which is the agape type. There is more to this word than meets the eye...

Link for Wikipedia reference quote below

Agápe (αγάπη agápē) means "love" in modern day Greek, such as in the term s'agapo (Σ'αγαπώ), which means "I love you". In Ancient Greek, it often refers to a general affection or deeper sense of "true love" rather than the attraction suggested by "eros". Agape is used in the biblical passage known as the "love chapter", 1 Corinthians 13, and is described there and throughout the New Testament as sacrificial love. Agape is also used in ancient texts to denote feelings for a good meal, one's children, and the feelings for a spouse. It can be described as the feeling of being content or holding one in high regard.

Éros (ݏρως érōs) is passionate love, with sensual desire and longing. The Modern Greek word "erotas" means "(romantic) love;" however, eros does not have to be sexual in nature. Eros can be interpreted as a love for someone whom you love more than the philia, love of friendship. It can also apply to dating relationships as well as marriage. Plato refined his own definition: Although eros is initially felt for a person, with contemplation it becomes an appreciation of the beauty within that person, or even becomes appreciation of beauty itself. It should be noted Plato does not talk of physical attraction as a necessary part of love, hence the use of the word platonic to mean, "without physical attraction." Plato also said eros helps the soul recall knowledge of beauty, and contributes to an understanding of spiritual truth. Lovers and philosophers are all inspired to seek truth by eros. The most famous ancient work on the subject of eros is Plato's Symposium, which is a discussion among the students of Socrates on the nature of eros.

Philia (φιλία philí­a) means friendship in modern Greek. It is a dispassionate virtuous love, a concept developed by Aristotle. It includes loyalty to friends, family, and community, and requires virtue, equality and familiarity. In ancient texts, philos denoted a general type of love, used for love between family, between friends, a desire or enjoyment of an activity, as well as between lovers.

Storge (στοργή storgē) means "affection" in ancient and modern Greek. It is natural affection, like that felt by parents for offspring. Rarely used in ancient works, and then almost exclusively as a descriptor of relationships within the family. It is also known to express mere acceptance or putting up with situations, as in "loving" the tyrant.

-
-
-

[catherine]

B.W, I'm checking out the links you provided. I'm going to find out all there is to know about 'aionios' and 'olam', as I think it's fair to say, the meaning of these words can prove or disprove UR.

Incidentally, I'm glad to see my memory had served me right: 'aionios zoe' is a grammatically correct declension (is that the right term?) of 'eternal life':

http://biblelexicon.org/john/17-3.htm

Your example ending in 'n' is found in the preceding verse.

What is also interesting to note on the Biblos site, is that it's giving these two meanings for aionios: 'agelong' and 'eternal'. I'm wondering why it gives the first meaning as 'agelong'?

Any way, I'll continue to check your links and I'll come back to you in due course.

[B. W.]

B.W, I'm checking out the links you provided. I'm going to find out all there is to know about 'aionios' and 'olam', as I think it's fair to say, the meaning of these words can prove or disprove UR.

Incidentally, I'm glad to see my memory had served me right: 'aionios zoe' is a grammatically correct declension (is that the right term?) of 'eternal life':

http://biblelexicon.org/john/17-3.htm

Your example ending in 'n' is found in the preceding verse.

What is also interesting to note on the Biblos site, is that it's giving these two meanings for aionios: 'agelong' and 'eternal'. I'm wondering why it gives the first meaning as 'agelong'?

Any way, I'll continue to check your links and I'll come back to you in due course.

Youngs Lit Transaltion often translates these words as Age Enduring meaning Enduring Ages.

This points out that Age enduring Life (zoe) or punishment means Life or punishment as enduring ages and ages forever and ever. That is why these words are transleted Foverever and eternal as that is the context in which they are used to indicate - foreverness.

Who long is enduring ages even remotely suggest?
-
-
-

[catherine]

Youngs Lit Transaltion often translates these words as Age Enduring meaning Enduring Ages.

This points out that Age enduring Life (zoe) or punishment means Life or punishment as enduring ages and ages forever and ever. That is why these words are transleted Foverever and eternal as that is the context in which they are used to indicate - foreverness.

Who long is enduring ages even remotely suggest?
-
-
-

I think it suggests 'periods of time' measured in 'ages'. I don't see how it necessarily follows that 'periods of time' MUST equate to 'forever' or 'eternal' but I may be wrong.

Having come across the 'age enduring' meaning before, I've read many articles (I'm trying to determine the scholarly support for the claims in these articles) and the meaning 'pertaining to the age' for 'aionios' seems to be a more suitable translation or even another possible meaning. The fact God deals in ages, doesn't restrict God in any way. God deals in finite things, but isn't Himself finite. So God can be 'the age-pertaining God' - (the God who deals in ages) Rom 16:26, but again, I may be wrong and jumping the gun. I'll continue to check these things out.

[B. W.]

Youngs Lit Transaltion often translates these words as Age Enduring meaning Enduring Ages.

This points out that Age enduring Life (zoe) or punishment means Life or punishment as enduring ages and ages forever and ever. That is why these words are transleted Foverever and eternal as that is the context in which they are used to indicate - foreverness.

Who long is enduring ages even remotely suggest?
-
-
-

I think it suggests 'periods of time' measured in 'ages'. I don't see how it necessarily follows that 'periods of time' MUST equate to 'forever' or 'eternal' but I may be wrong.

Having come across the 'age enduring' meaning before, I've read many articles (I'm trying to determine the scholarly support for the claims in these articles) and the meaning 'pertaining to the age' for 'aionios' seems to be a more suitable translation or even another possible meaning. The fact God deals in ages, doesn't restrict God in any way. God deals in finite things, but isn't Himself finite. So God can be 'the age-pertaining God' - (the God who deals in ages) Rom 16:26, but again, I may be wrong and jumping the gun. I'll continue to check these things out.

It could be rendered age enduringness - enduring throught all ages never-ending in John 3:16

Same with Matt 25:46

http://biblelexicon.org/matthew/25-46.htm

And in Romans 16:26 when refering to God himself as eternal -age enduringness, never ending never ceasing God - Praise be to God that he, himself, does not endure for but a mere age -- Glory!

http://biblelexicon.org/romans/16-26.htm

Quotefrom above Link

αιωνιου adjective - genitive singular masculine
aionios ahee-o'-nee-os: perpetual (also used of past time, or past and future as well) -- eternal, for ever, everlasting, world (began).

-
-
-
-