Evidence for God from Science

I'm about to embark on a debate with a proponent of Universalism. But I want to get straight in this one area before I do. I may need a little help from someone proficient in the Greek, as there is a lot of hair-splitting with this one.

Matthew 25:46 (KJV)

And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

Matthew 25:46 (NASB)

These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.

Matthew 25:46 (NIV)

Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

Matthew 25:46 (YLT)

And these shall go away to punishment age-during, but the righteous to life age-during.

Spot the difference?
____________________________________________________________________________

Universalism's contention

The entire concept of eternal or everlasting punishment hinges primarily on a single verse of Scripture--Matthew 25:46. This is the only place in the entire Bible where we find these two words together AND only in some Bibles. There are over a dozen English translations which do NOT contain the concept of "eternal punishment" on ANY of their pages, NOR the pagan concept of Hell.

The Greek form for "everlasting punishment" in Matthew 25:46 is "kolasin aionion." Kolasin is a noun in the accusative form, singular voice, feminine gender and means "punishment, chastening, correction, to cut-off as in pruning a tree to bare more fruit." "Aionion" is the adjective form of "aion," in the singular form and means "pertaining to an eon or age, an indeterminate period of time." (Note: the two words in many, not all translations become reversed changing the Greek into English.)

http://www.tentmaker.org/articles/Etern ... Greek.html

An opposing view

Once it is acknowledged that the greek phrase: "zoen aioonion" does indeed refer to eternal life, it becomes impossible to deny eternal punishment. For the bible teaches the wicked do not receive eternal life (zoen aioonion).

John 3:36
36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. (KJV)

I Jn 5:11-12
11 And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.
12 He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life. (KJV)

The loss of a eternal reality is logically in itself of eternal duration. For this reason many universalist's deny both eternal life (zoen aioonion) and eternal punishment (kolasin aioonion) are of eternal duration and claim aionios is never capable of denoting eternal duration.

Such a claim flies in the face of greek writings both ancient and modern, greek lexicons and the vast majority of greek scholars who all admit the term aionios is capable of denoting eternal duration this would even include a number of universalists as well.

http://www.1john57.com/matthew25.htm

Any thoughts?

Well Danny,

Been there done that...

Both Greek words used in same sentence for the word eternal are in the same grammar and tense format, therefore, if punishment is not eternal, neither can eternal life be.

God would be forced to renege of his promise of eternal life as well deny aspects of his own nature and moral character.

Also the YLT uses Age-During - this means forever - eternal not lasting a few ages.

Universalism also makes out God as an actual torturer – torturing people until they Love God – this also defies what Universalist claim love means. Show the inconstancies…
-
-
-

B. W. wrote:Well Danny,

Been there done that...

Both Greek words used in same sentence for the word eternal are in the same grammar and tense format, therefore, if punishment is not eternal, neither can eternal life be.

God would be forced to renege of his promise of eternal life as well deny aspects of his own nature and moral character.

And what of the claim kolasin is a remedial punishment?

Strong's gives me: kolasin: punishment

Short Definition: chastisement, punishment
Definition: chastisement, punishment, torment, perhaps with the idea of deprivation.

Bryan, where are they getting this idea of only remedial punishment?

The word translated as "eternal" is aionios and it means:
1) without beginning and end, that which always has been and always will be

2) without beginning

3) without end, never to cease, everlasting

Within the context of the verse and chapter it is up to the translator to use what He/She feels best conveys that message of Christ.
But was was mentioned by BW, the same word is used to describe what happens to non-righteous and the righteous.

I think the issue is Christ saying that the un-rigtheous ( in this case those that did not help and take care of their fellow man- although some believe this is only applicable to Jesus disciples) will suffer punishment eternally.
Well, the fact is, literally anyways, that IS what Christ is saying.

B. W. wrote:Also the YLT uses Age-During - this means forever - eternal not lasting a few ages.

Universalism also makes out God as an actual torturer – torturing people until they Love God – this also defies what Universalist claim love means. Show the inconstancies…

(YLT) And these shall go away to punishment age-during, but the righteous to life age-during.

Age-during (temporary) life-age-during (everlasting)

Here's the contention, yes?

PaulSacramento wrote:The word translated as "eternal" is aionios and it means:
1) without beginning and end, that which always has been and always will be

2) without beginning

3) without end, never to cease, everlasting

Within the context of the verse and chapter it is up to the translator to use what He/She feels best conveys that message of Christ.
But was was mentioned by BW, the same word is used to describe what happens to non-righteous and the righteous.

I think the issue is Christ saying that the un-rigtheous ( in this case those that did not help and take care of their fellow man- although some believe this is only applicable to Jesus disciples) will suffer punishment eternally.
Well, the fact is, literally anyways, that IS what Christ is saying.

Thanks Paul - I agree. But I want to prepare for every 'loophole' the Universalist might raise...

B. W. wrote:Universalism also makes out God as an actual torturer – torturing people until they Love God – this also defies what Universalist claim love means. Show the inconstancies…

Oh I will do

DannyM wrote:

B. W. wrote:Also the YLT uses Age-During - this means forever - eternal not lasting a few ages.

Universalism also makes out God as an actual torturer – torturing people until they Love God – this also defies what Universalist claim love means. Show the inconstancies…

(YLT) And these shall go away to punishment age-during, but the righteous to life age-during.

Age-during (temporary) life-age-during (everlasting)

Here's the contention, yes?

Nope. It's inconsistent all the way! Punishment age-during... life age-during...either both are non-eternal or both are eternal.

DannyM wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:The word translated as "eternal" is aionios and it means:
1) without beginning and end, that which always has been and always will be

2) without beginning

3) without end, never to cease, everlasting

Within the context of the verse and chapter it is up to the translator to use what He/She feels best conveys that message of Christ.
But was was mentioned by BW, the same word is used to describe what happens to non-righteous and the righteous.

I think the issue is Christ saying that the un-rigtheous ( in this case those that did not help and take care of their fellow man- although some believe this is only applicable to Jesus disciples) will suffer punishment eternally.
Well, the fact is, literally anyways, that IS what Christ is saying.

Thanks Paul - I agree. But I want to prepare for every 'loophole' the Universalist might raise...

Well, what you will be arguing then is what Christ was MEANING, as opposed to what Matt wrote that he said.

That Christ makes it clear that those the CHOOSE to be unrighteous will be punished is clear, but does he truly mean "eternal" or is he simply being "colorful" in his writings ( Matthew I mean)?
Matthew could have used any other term to stated that the unrighteous would be punished for a ore-determined time or for as long as they were "rebellious" or for as long as "God willed" it, but he didn't, so it means that Matt wanted to make the statement that the punishment of the unrighteous would be "everlasting".

BUT the other issue is when we start comparing one Gospel writers view with another, trying to OPPOSE their views instead of harmonising them.
Not a good why to do things but a very common way when people want to justify opposing viewpoints.

Rather than focus on what Matt said the Jesus said, it may be best to focus on what seems to imply that punishment will NOT be eternal.

Hi Dan.

I don't believe you have to go back to the Greek for proper understanding of this passage. It clearly states it in the English. It's the word 'punishment'. It is not the word 'punishing'. If we changed the word to punishing:

And these shall go away into everlasting punishing: but the righteous into life eternal.

It changes the meaning of the verse. Punishing would insinuate eternal torture. That word is not used. The punishment then is the second death. That is, some are going to die twice. The death of their flesh ended their physical life. The death of their soul ends their eternal life. The advantage of being a believer (and not that I'm a believer because of this advantage), is that we are resurrected with an immortal soul, meaning our soul can no longer die and is immune to the second death. A non-believer will have a 'mortal' soul meaning, their soul is still liable to die because they did not believe on Christ during their flesh life and they may have to suffer the second death, if they fail the judgement.

In Heb 9:27, judgment involves a few things: A trial, a sentence and an execution of that sentence.

Also, In Rev 20:12, the dead were judged according to their works. We know that this does not apply to believers because we are not judged according to our works but according to our faith in Christ. Those who pass judgment day are granted eternal life just like believers. Those who fail, it's the second death for them. Christ promised eternal life to all those who believe. Believers still have to go through judgment day but it a day of reward, not a day where we will be judged according to our works. Work based salvation is not in the cards for believers, only for non-believers.

Hope that helps.

I often use a inquiry of the nature of God to get the person to view the error.

Is God fair?
Do you believe God will judge the world?
Do you think he should be fair in judgement?

Often they will admit YES to all the above, and we can conclude this.

If sin goes on forever, the punishment must go on forever.

DannyM wrote:

B. W. wrote:Well Danny,
Been there done that...

Both Greek words used in same sentence for the word eternal are in the same grammar and tense format, therefore, if punishment is not eternal, neither can eternal life be.

God would be forced to renege of his promise of eternal life as well deny aspects of his own nature and moral character.

And what of the claim kolasin is a remedial punishment?

Strong's gives me: kolasin: punishment

Short Definition: chastisement, punishment
Definition: chastisement, punishment, torment, perhaps with the idea of deprivation.

Bryan, where are they getting this idea of only remedial punishment?

Where do they get this idea of remedial punishment - answer - from their own opinions, or Origen, or even from the influence from (I think from) Jeremy Bentham’s or Mills concept of social utilitarianism retributive justice. Note quote below.

Utilitarianism

According to the utilitarian, as already noted, justice requires the maximization of the total or average welfare across all relevant individuals. Punishment is bad treatment of someone, and therefore can’t be good in itself, for the utilitarian. But punishment might be a necessary sacrifice that maximizes the overall good in the long term, in one or more of three ways:

Deterrence. The credible threat of punishment might lead people to make different choices; well-designed threats might lead people to make choices that maximize welfare.

Rehabilitation. Punishment might make bad people into better ones. For the utilitarian, all that ‘bad person’ can mean is ‘person who's likely to cause bad things (like suffering) ’. So, utilitarianism could recommend punishment that changes someone such that they are less likely to cause bad things.

Security/Incapacitation. Perhaps there are people who are irredeemable causers of bad things. If so, imprisoning them might maximize welfare by limiting their opportunities to cause harm and therefore the benefit lies within protecting society.

So, the reason for punishment is the maximization of welfare, and punishment should be of whomever, and of whatever form and severity, are needed to meet that goal. Worryingly, this may sometimes justify punishing the innocent, or inflicting disproportionately severe punishments, when that will have the best consequences overall (perhaps executing a few suspected shoplifters live on television would be an effective deterrent to shoplifting, for instance). It also suggests that punishment might turn out never to be right, depending on the facts about what actual consequences it has.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice

As for the Greek word translated Punishment you cited, context, tense, and grammar structure refine the meaning of this word - recompense, punishment, etc...

In Matthew 25:46 Jesus sums up what Matthew 25:41 gives clues to, the current Hell was originally designed for the devil and his messengers, followers, or minions. Note that Jesus and the apostles stated that people are either children of the devil / darkness or God / light. Those that do not belong to God as his-own are classed with whom? Now note what Revelation 14:10, 11 says as well as Revelation 20:10, 12, 13, 14, 15c states about the future of the current hell and those that inhabit it – it is everlasting.

Therefore, Matthew 25:41 ties into these verses as well as all others that define punishment as recompense that is eternal not restorative because if it last forever for the devil - it will be so for others. Next, Luke 16:19-31 gives clue of the type of torment one experiences as recompense - not torture as we humans define it, but as personal torment that exposes ones sin nature completely and it is not defined or alluded as restorative in any manner in Luke’s account.

If so, then man earns his or her own salvation through personal works of going thru suffering and saves him/her self, which, violates Isaiah 43:11, Isaiah 45:21, 22, 23, 24, 25c completely as it makes God bow to man...

In Matthew 25:46, The Greek words for punishment is used in same sentence alongside eternal and life. The same grammar and tense format is used for both punishment and life, therefore, if punishment is not eternal, neither can eternal life be.

That is more terrifying than soul sleep, annihilation, or universalism – a person truly reaping what they have sown without end. Universalism also has a dim view and complete missunderstanding what sin is as well as what it does to goodness, wholeness, and love. As well as has a low view of God who will not deny himself one iota.
-
-
-

The Brothers have come out in fine style. You've given me all that I need, Brothers. Thanks

DannyM wrote:The Brothers have come out in fine style. You've given me all that I need, Brothers. Thanks

You’re welcome!

Also note that according to Christian Universalist thought, the fires of hell are for purification so all eventually end up in heaven loving God. In accordance with their doctrine, this fiery bath is to be feared above all else because it is excruciatingly painful and that is one reason why, according to Christian Universalism, Jesus came to spare those that believe in Him from this flaming bath.

However, if all end up in heaven anyways, because of a post salvific bath designed to torture one until they love God, Jesus’ work on the cross would be in essence unnecessary, to say the least if not less… losing its punch in the process as well...
-
-
-

B. W. wrote:

DannyM wrote:The Brothers have come out in fine style. You've given me all that I need, Brothers. Thanks

You’re welcome!

Also note that according to Christian Universalist thought, the fires of hell are for purification so all eventually end up in heaven loving God. In accordance with their doctrine, this fiery bath is to be feared above all else because it is excruciatingly painful and that is one reason why, according to Christian Universalism, Jesus came to spare those that believe in Him from this flaming bath.

However, if all end up in heaven anyways, because of a post salvific bath designed to torture one until they love God, Jesus’ work on the cross would be in essence unnecessary, to say the least if not less… losing its punch in the process as well...
-
-
-

B.W.,
At risk of beating this to death, how is the Universalist thought of the fires of hell purifying people different from the Catholic purgatory, which is also said to purify before heaven?