Did Jesus come to save all the people of the world?

So im still searching this out as we are called to do. I found this scripture
Matthew 25:46 And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."
Eternal is used in both instances and using your reasoning could suggest that if punishment is not eternal then salvation equaling eternal life might not be either.
This highlights one of the major issues of the debate.

Matthew 25:46 And these will go away into eternal (aionios) punishment (kolasis), but the righteous (fikaios) into eternal (aionios) life."

The following is a heavily reduced note from Appendix I of "A Larger Hope" by the theologian Ilaria Ramelli

Appendix I: The Meaning of Aionios
Terms for Eternity surveys the uses of two ancient Greek adjectives—aiénios and aidios, commonly translated as “eternal’—from their earliest occurrences in poetry and pre-Socratic philosophy down through the Septuagint (and a thorough comparison with the Hebrew Bible), the New Testament, and the Christian theologians, from the earliest to Maximus the Confessor (6th century).

The monograph examines the rise of the idea of infinitely extended time (generally denoted by aidios), and Plato’s innovative introduction of a concept of a timeless eternity, which in Platonic technical vocabulary—and only there—was denoted by aion, with aidnios meaning
“eternal” in the sense of “transcending time.”

In all the rest of Greek literature, however, and—what is most relevant to us here—in the Greek Bible, aionios has a wide range of meanings, but does not denote absolute eternity.

Since only aionios, and never aidios, is applied to the punishment of humans in the afterlife, Origen could find support in the biblical usage for
his doctrine of universal salvation and the finite duration of hell.


And so it goes on ... basically the Greek term, translated as 'eternal', has a range of meanings, but eternal is not one of them. As an example, it derives from the noun aeon, which means age, but it was universally understood that such an age was usually dependent upon what was being talked about, and aeon in that regard meant a lifespan – the aeon of a Mayfly being a day, of humans 70 years ...

So what happened? The Latin used eternus for aeon – and that does mean eternity.

There's more interesting stuff, and if you want me to post more, I happily will, but don't want to bore you with stuff I find really, really interesting! Sorry, I'm a nerd in that sense ...

+++

I highlighted the greek for punishment, kolasis, because that, too, is relevant.

Clement of Alexandria applied a distinction between timoria and kolasis – the first term implies a retributive punishment, whilst the latter is therapeutic punishment. Clement argues that God applies healing and refining punishments, but never retributive punishment – that is, God applies punishment towards a positive end, whereas retributive punishment is punishment for its own sake – revenge.

Clement, like his pupil Origen, and our brother-n-Christ @wil, saw a distinction between the sinner and the sin. The latter must be hated, but the sinner must be loved, because they are God's creature. Origen and later St Gregory of Nyssa will go on to say that we all bear the image of God, which sin can occlude and cover, but never extinguish or cancel.

Basically the New Testament scribes and later theologians saw the punishment of sin as a kind of medical procedure, a healing process, a coming-to-the-light.

+++

Anyway, that's the start. Keep poking me, and I'll keep on responding.
 
Yes that is our task Thomas. Baha'u'llah also offered these same things, but explained the contradiction in detail.

So one can see the quandary faced. Which interpretation of those passage should we look to?
I think you can guess my answer to that one.

The passage you have quoted, the verse in Colossians ... "In him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross." (Colossians 1:19–20) has an explanation that does not exclude any other Messengers from God as being seen in the same light.
I think it does.
 
This highlights one of the major issues of the debate.

Matthew 25:46 And these will go away into eternal (aionios) punishment (kolasis), but the righteous (fikaios) into eternal (aionios) life."

The following is a heavily reduced note from Appendix I of "A Larger Hope" by the theologian Ilaria Ramelli

Appendix I: The Meaning of Aionios
Terms for Eternity surveys the uses of two ancient Greek adjectives—aiénios and aidios, commonly translated as “eternal’—from their earliest occurrences in poetry and pre-Socratic philosophy down through the Septuagint (and a thorough comparison with the Hebrew Bible), the New Testament, and the Christian theologians, from the earliest to Maximus the Confessor (6th century).

The monograph examines the rise of the idea of infinitely extended time (generally denoted by aidios), and Plato’s innovative introduction of a concept of a timeless eternity, which in Platonic technical vocabulary—and only there—was denoted by aion, with aidnios meaning
“eternal” in the sense of “transcending time.”

In all the rest of Greek literature, however, and—what is most relevant to us here—in the Greek Bible, aionios has a wide range of meanings, but does not denote absolute eternity.

Since only aionios, and never aidios, is applied to the punishment of humans in the afterlife, Origen could find support in the biblical usage for
his doctrine of universal salvation and the finite duration of hell.


And so it goes on ... basically the Greek term, translated as 'eternal', has a range of meanings, but eternal is not one of them. As an example, it derives from the noun aeon, which means age, but it was universally understood that such an age was usually dependent upon what was being talked about, and aeon in that regard meant a lifespan – the aeon of a Mayfly being a day, of humans 70 years ...

So what happened? The Latin used eternus for aeon – and that does mean eternity.

There's more interesting stuff, and if you want me to post more, I happily will, but don't want to bore you with stuff I find really, really interesting! Sorry, I'm a nerd in that sense ...

+++

I highlighted the greek for punishment, kolasis, because that, too, is relevant.

Clement of Alexandria applied a distinction between timoria and kolasis – the first term implies a retributive punishment, whilst the latter is therapeutic punishment. Clement argues that God applies healing and refining punishments, but never retributive punishment – that is, God applies punishment towards a positive end, whereas retributive punishment is punishment for its own sake – revenge.

Clement, like his pupil Origen, and our brother-n-Christ @wil, saw a distinction between the sinner and the sin. The latter must be hated, but the sinner must be loved, because they are God's creature. Origen and later St Gregory of Nyssa will go on to say that we all bear the image of God, which sin can occlude and cover, but never extinguish or cancel.

Basically the New Testament scribes and later theologians saw the punishment of sin as a kind of medical procedure, a healing process, a coming-to-the-light.

+++

Anyway, that's the start. Keep poking me, and I'll keep on responding.
I always appreciate your thought out responses. You never did answer my question as to whether satan and the 1/3 angels that fell with him will eventually be saved as they too are Gods creation. The bible says that hell gehenna was created for them but it also says that unbelievers will be cast there with the them. I can imagine the pain of being cast out of Gods presence.. being that the enemy knows the Word better than we do why the volent hatred and wafare with the saints?

Im always seeking to know Gods will. Im troubled with men's interpretations of the Word. There is a lot of false teaching in the church and i have fallen victim in the past. I prayed for discernment and search the word daily for the truth of things.

I will continue to poke this as long as you are open to it. ❤️
 
I see that is your way of seeing it Thomas.
To be fair, it's not my way, it's what the Hebrew, Christians and Moslem scriptures, clearly say with regard to the prophets. Argue with them, not me.

The Talmud lists 55 prophets, furthermore it offers a tradition that the number of prophets in the era of prophecy was double the number of Israelites who left Egypt (600,000 males). The recorded prophets are so because their words have eternal relevance, and not just for their own generation or era, whereas there are numerous others who have experienced ecstatic encounters with God. [7][8] Hebrew scripture makes references to groups of such ecstatic prophets (cf 1 Samuel 10:13).

During the Exodus, "the spirit which was upon Moses" was passed to seventy elders, who were thus enabled to prophecy for one time only (Numbers 11:25). When Eldad and Medad continued to prophecy, Moses expressed the hope that "all the Lord's people" could be prophets (11:26-29).

In the New Testament, John the Baptist is a prophet, a messenger, but is not the equal of Christ.

There are numerous mentions of prophets – Anna, Joachim, Elizabeth. Barnabas, Simon Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manahen, Saul. There is John of Patmos, Judas Barsabbas, Silas, Agabus, who was one among many (Acts 11:27), Philip and his four daughters.

Prophecy is a gift of the Holy Spirit, it does not deify the person.

As people, we are all manifestations of God.

The Noble Quran calls prophets the "blessed by Allah" along with martyrs, the righteous and the people of truth. (4:69) – but to assert the prophet has a divine nature is contrary to Islam.

Prophets are divinely inspired, but they are human beings with no divine knowledge or power other than that granted to them by God.

So my way, unless I am mistaken, is the way of Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
 
"..Know thou assuredly that the essence of all the Prophets of God is one and the same. Their unity is absolute. God, the Creator, saith: There is no distinction whatsoever among the Bearers of My Message." – Baha’u’llah, Gleanings from the Writings of Baha’u’llah, p. 78.
Because the prophecy comes from the Divine, either directly, or by the intermediation of an angel. The essence of the Message is one, and it is divine by virtue of its source, but the Messenger is not, and the Baha'i claim is a radical departure from Abrahamic orthodoxy.

Baha'u'llah explains the twofold station, that of the Divine and that of the Human, which binds the Messengers to humanity.
Again ...

We share that flesh with the Messengers, we share the suffering that were part of, we can be born again into the Spirit that is the Essence of the Messengers, the image we are made in.
Agasin ... not according to the Abrahamic Traditions.

In the end Thomas, I would offer we see the same things in different frames of references.
And I have consistently shown that your use of Abrahamic Scriptures to advocate your own Baha'i teachings are tragically flawed.

I have chosen the path of Oneness, inclusive of Jesus Christ, which in the end has no conflict in living the life asked of us by Jesus, even if we practice those morals and virtues in a slightly different way.
Ah, nice bit of 'holier-than-thou' sophistry, old chum. ;)
 
You never did answer my question as to whether satan and the 1/3 angels that fell with him will eventually be saved as they too are Gods creation.
We can but hope ...

But here's the thing: As I said aionios does not mean eternal, but aidios can, and often did, mean an eternity. And that word, aidios occurs only twice in the New Testament:

"For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal (aidios power and Godhead... " Romans 1:20
So here we see the term, applied to God, clearly cannot mean any duration of time, but must mean, when speaking of God, eternally.

And the other one is Jude 1:6
"And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting (aidios[/]) chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.
Here then we have implied eternity – but only to the day of judgement – but could suggest the angels fell right at the very beginning of creation, and some would say before the creation of the world.

And these are the only two occasions when the word is used.

And i could hazard that angels, being created intelligences, when they fell became corrupted in their very nature, whereas humanity fell into sin, but retains the dignity of its divine image, albeit that image is buried under the mantle of sin, as it were. Our souls, or something in our souls, remains inviolate, despite our sin, and belongs to God.

Whereas angels don't exist as we do, it is suggested that the fallen have become corrupt through and through, and when they face the purifying flame, nothing remains ... but that is just my speculation.






The bible says that hell gehenna was created for them but it also says that unbelievers will be cast there with the them. I can imagine the pain of being cast out of Gods presence.. being that the enemy knows the Word better than we do why the volent hatred and wafare with the saints?

Im always seeking to know Gods will. Im troubled with men's interpretations of the Word. There is a lot of false teaching in the church and i have fallen victim in the past. I prayed for discernment and search the word daily for the truth of things.

I will continue to poke this as long as you are open to it. ❤️
 
Because the prophecy comes from the Divine, either directly, or by the intermediation of an angel. The essence of the Message is one, and it is divine by virtue of its source, but the Messenger is not, and the Baha'i claim is a radical departure from Abrahamic orthodoxy.


Again ...


Agasin ... not according to the Abrahamic Traditions.


And I have consistently shown that your use of Abrahamic Scriptures to advocate your own Baha'i teachings are tragically flawed.


Ah, nice bit of 'holier-than-thou' sophistry, old chum. ;)
Isn't Bahai an Abrahamic faith?
 
Whereas angels don't exist as we do, it is suggested that the fallen have become corrupt through and through, and when they face the purifying flame, nothing remains ... but that is just my speculation.
Back to conditional immortality, but in this interpretation, for angels but not humanity?
 
Isn't Bahai an Abrahamic faith?
The claims, taken at face value, present irreconcilable differences with regard to Christianity in particular and Abrahamic anthropology in general.

That every prophet is a divine being is a major theological stumbling-block for mainline Judaism, Christianity and Islam, and the three-nature claim for the Messengers, which renders them a kind of demi-god or meta-human status, is an issue anthropologically.

Whether the Baha'i faith can be defended as authentically Abrahamic would depend on the Muslim view, as the roots and foundations of the Baha'i faith lie in the Shi'i Islam line of Shaikh Ahmad Zayn-al-Din – and those differences (was he orthodox, heterodox or heresiarch?) would have to be resolved before there could be any further discussion.
 
Back to conditional immortality, but in this interpretation, for angels but not humanity?
I think that's a whole debate in itself.

If we say that someone becomes so sinful as to be 'rotten to the core', as it were, that when the dross is cleansed away, there is nothing of the 'person' – that which I identify as 'me', left ... what then?

The soul, we would say, is inviolate, but as my Buddhist brethren would tell me, that which I perceive as 'I' is a whole mass of ephemeral stuff ... and there may be some order of common ground here...

Angels ... I dunno ... I can look up references?
 
Angels ... I dunno ... I can look up references?
oh the comment I was responding to of yours - "Whereas angels don't exist as we do, it is suggested that the fallen have become corrupt through and through, and when they face the purifying flame, nothing remains ... but that is just my speculation."
I thought the way you were describing angels in that comment sounded like annihilationism
 
I agree. It's unfortunate someone decided to troll this thread, so I've removed a few posts which were a back and forth arguing with, discussing and quoting the poster and their intentions. That way we can get back to a more settled and interfaith discussion. :)
 
Hi! Ready to be poked again? 😂

Im not a scholar per se but i do have the ability to learn when applying myself. I wanted to go back to this as the Koine Greek is important in studying the NT. I use The Blue Letter Bible to do this and as its Saturday i had time to do this justice. Please forgive me as I'm doing this on my phone and its not the most efficent way to go between screens.

Im picking this post to reply to because im not up for tackeling the whole reasoning you provided. I dont follow a list of theologians and scholars as i believe the Holy Spirit will teach me what He wants me to know in my study of scripture. Also not wanting to be influenced by wrong teaching. I do find that learning Koine Greek helps me to understand nuances of what English fails to provide.

So what i found in the text provided below is that Aionios is also used to describe an everlasting God who is eternal as well as His Power His Glory the Holy Spirit etc... So it can mean eternal as listed in Strongs as used 42 times in the NT

As an example of eternal:
Mark 3:29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal G166 damnation:

Hebrews 6:2 Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal G166 judgment.

Jude 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal G166 fire.

I so very much apologize for the exhaustive copy and paste below but i wanted to show what i was referencing for my points. I also added the strongs for aion as it is the root word and a link to see the quite lengthy Vines expository dictionary entry.


Vine's Expository Dictionary: View Entry
TDNT Reference: 1:208,31
Strong's Info
Strong’s Definitions
αἰώνιος aiṓnios, ahee-o'-nee-os; from G165; perpetual (also used of past time, or past and future as well):—eternal, for ever, everlasting, world (began).

KJV Translation Count — Total: 71x
The KJV translates Strong's G166 in the following manner: eternal (42x), everlasting (25x), the world began (with G5550) (2x), since the world began (with G5550) (1x), for ever (1x).
Outline of Biblical Usage
Thayer's Greek Lexicon

Concordance Results​


Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words
Close Button

2Strong's Number: g166Greek: aionios
Eternal:
"describes duration, either undefined but not endless, as in Rom 16:25; 2Ti 1:9; Tts 1:2; or undefined because endless as in Rom 16:26, and the other sixty-six places in the NT.
"The predominant meaning of aionios, that in which it is used everywhere in the NT, save the places noted above, may be seen in 2Cr 4:18, where it is set in contrast with proskairos, lit., 'for a season,' and in Phm 1:15, where only in the NT it is used without a noun. Moreover it is used of persons and things which are in their nature endless, as, e.g., of God, Rom 16:26; of His power, 1Ti 6:16, and of His glory, 1Pe 5:10; of the Holy Spirit, Hbr 9:14; of the redemption effected by Christ, Hbr 9:12, and of the consequent salvation of men, Hbr 5:9, as well as of His future rule, 2Pe 1:11, which is elsewhere declared to be without end, Luk 1:33; of the life received by those who believe in Christ, Jhn 3:16, concerning whom He said, 'they shall never perish,' Jhn 10:28, and of the resurrection body, 2Cr 5:1, elsewhere said to be 'immortal,' 1Cr 15:53, in which that life will be finally realized, Mat 25:46; Tts 1:2.
"Aionios is also used of the sin that 'hath never forgiveness,' Mar 3:29, and of the judgment of God, from which there is no appeal, Hbr 6:2, and of the fire, which is one of its instruments, Mat 18:8; 25:41; Jud 1:7, and which is elsewhere said to be 'unquenchable,' Mar 9:43. "The use of aionios here shows that the punishment referred to in 2Th 1:9, is not temporary, but final, and, accordingly, the phraseology shows that its purpose is not remedial but retributive.
" * [* From Notes on Thessalonians by Hogg and Vine, pp. 232, 233.]

Strong’s Definitions
αἰώνιος aiṓnios, ahee-o'-nee-os; from G165; perpetual (also used of past time, or past and future as well):—eternal, for ever, everlasting, world (began).

KJV Translation Count — Total: 71x
The KJV translates Strong's G166 in the following manner: eternal (42x), everlasting (25x), the world began (with G5550) (2x), since the world began (with G5550) (1x), for ever (1x).


The Blue Letter Bible
Lexicon :: Strong's G165 - aiōn
Strong's
Red Letter
αἰών
Transliteration aiōn (Key)
Pronunciation ahee-ohn'Listen
Part of Speech masculine noun
Root Word (Etymology)
From the same as ἀεί (G104)
Greek Inflections of αἰών
Dictionary Aids
Vine's Expository Dictionary: View Entry


Strong's Info
Strong’s Definitions
αἰών aiṓn, ahee-ohn'; from the same as G104; properly, an age; by extension, perpetuity (also past); by implication, the world; specially (Jewish) a Messianic period (present or future):—age, course, eternal, (for) ever(-more), (n-)ever, (beginning of the , while the) world (began, without end). Compare G5550.

KJV Translation Count — Total: 128x
The KJV translates Strong's G165 in the following manner: ever (71x), world (38x), never (with G3364) (with G1519) (with G3588) (6x), evermore (4x), age (2x), eternal (2x), miscellaneous (5x).


For Vines expository dictionary for aion
Matthew 25:46 And these will go away into eternal (aionios) punishment (kolasis), but the righteous (fikaios) into eternal (aionios) life."

The following is a heavily reduced note from Appendix I of "A Larger Hope" by the theologian Ilaria Ramelli

Appendix I: The Meaning of Aionios
Terms for Eternity surveys the uses of two ancient Greek adjectives—aiénios and aidios, commonly translated as “eternal’—from their earliest occurrences in poetry and pre-Socratic philosophy down through the Septuagint (and a thorough comparison with the Hebrew Bible), the New Testament, and the Christian theologians, from the earliest to Maximus the Confessor (6th century).

The monograph examines the rise of the idea of infinitely extended time (generally denoted by aidios), and Plato’s innovative introduction of a concept of a timeless eternity, which in Platonic technical vocabulary—and only there—was denoted by aion, with aidnios meaning
“eternal” in the sense of “transcending time.”

In all the rest of Greek literature, however, and—what is most relevant to us here—in the Greek Bible, aionios has a wide range of meanings, but does not denote absolute eternity.

Since only aionios, and never aidios, is applied to the punishment of humans in the afterlife, Origen could find support in the biblical usage for
his doctrine of universal salvation and the finite duration of hell.


And so it goes on ... basically the Greek term, translated as 'eternal', has a range of meanings, but eternal is not one of them. As an example, it derives from the noun aeon, which means age, but it was universally understood that such an age was usually dependent upon what was being talked about, and aeon in that regard meant a lifespan – the aeon of a Mayfly being a day, of humans 70 years ...

So what happened? The Latin used eternus for aeon – and that does mean eternity.

There's more interesting stuff, and if you want me to post more, I happily will, but don't want to bore you with stuff I find really, really interesting! Sorry, I'm a nerd in that sense ...

+++

I highlighted the greek for punishment, kolasis, because that, too, is relevant.

Clement of Alexandria applied a distinction between timoria and kolasis – the first term implies a retributive punishment, whilst the latter is therapeutic punishment. Clement argues that God applies healing and refining punishments, but never retributive punishment – that is, God applies punishment towards a positive end, whereas retributive punishment is punishment for its own sake – revenge.

Clement, like his pupil Origen, and our brother-n-Christ @wil, saw a distinction between the sinner and the sin. The latter must be hated, but the sinner must be loved, because they are God's creature. Origen and later St Gregory of Nyssa will go on to say that we all bear the image of God, which sin can occlude and cover, but never extinguish or cancel.

Basically the New Testament scribes and later theologians saw the punishment of sin as a kind of medical procedure, a healing process, a coming-to-the-light.

+++

Anyway, that's the start. Keep poking me, and I'll keep on responding.
 
As an example of eternal:
Mark 3:29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal G166 damnation:
...
αἰώνιος aiṓnios, ahee-o'-nee-os; from G165; perpetual (also used of past time, or past and future as well):—eternal, for ever, everlasting, world (began).
...
Right .. so some people are going to hell, and might never be forgiven.
That should be a warning to us..

..and who are these people, according to Jesus, peace be with him?

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, ‘Truly I tell you, 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.”

- Matthew 25 -

..so as I have repeatedly said before, it is the wealthy who are in danger.
Almighty G-d forgives whomsoever He wills, and punishes whomsoever He wills.

Whether eternal means a million years, or a billion billion, is hardly the point ! 😑
 
Back
Top