No, just tired of explaining the same thing over and over, eh? Either believe what Jesus said or don’t and move on. 
That’s because you shoot everything down we have to offer you.
Jesus never said there are only 2 ages. Just because He did not mention more then 2…doesn’t mean there are only 2. Its not like He said, there are ONLY 2 ages.
Is that what you think we’re doing? You just seem to know it all. You simply refuse to even open your mind in thinking hey, maybe there’s something to this. But according to you, we’re all just full of hot air, in denial of “the truth” 
I can also assume you did not read that link. 
How can one possibly think they know everything there is to know about the word of God? We constantly ask questions and are learning all the time. But you appear to be beyond that… 
That’s exactly why we search and study for the way GOD wrote it, not to just blindly believe popular theology and tradition and a bad translated KJV.
Well, he has no intention of actually learning or opening his eyes as to WHY we believe what we do. He is here only to tell us we are all wrong and deceived and hiding our head in the sand to God’s truth. There is no other reason he is here. Of course he wont flat out tell us this tho…
I’m repeating this mainly for emphasis. Well said, Caroleem.
Revival, I don’t mind if you choose to disagree at all (your theology, like everyone’s here, is between you and Yahweh), but you could at least recognize that there is simply no contradiction with Yeshua mentioning one future age with there being countless more.
Jesus said this world and the world to come…that is 2, brothers. If you are confusing times with worlds than I’m sorry but Jesus was crystal clear about how many ages or worlds there are…2…this present evil age and the age to come.
And yet you deny later, in replying to Paidion, that there is more than one testimony in the NT about plural ages (i.e. eons in Greek) happening in the future. It isn’t only “age of ages”; that phrase is relatively rare in the NT compared to “ages of ages”. Come to think of it, Ephesians 3:21 is the only place “age of ages” occurs! Although Eph 2:7 also talks about “the oncoming ages”.
Gabriel promises that Christ shall be reigning into the eons. (Luke 1:33) That’s a future occurrence of multiple eons. (Mary thinks God also supports Israel into the eons, later in v.55.)
The Hebraist says that Christ is the same into the eons. (Heb 13:8) That’s a future occurrence of multiple eons.
St. Paul says God is blessed (and shall have the glory) into the eons several times (Romans 1:25; 9:5; 11:46; 2 Cor 11:31). That’s a future occurrence of multiple eons.
Peter says that the declaration of the Lord is remaining into the eons. (1 Peter 1:25)
Jude (sort of echoing Peter on this, or vice versa) gives a similar doxology of the Lord, “To God be the glory into the eons”. (Jud v.25)
These are all aside from the references I gave to “eons of the eons” in my previous reply.
If you want to say that those eons are all part of one eon, I totally agree (and already totally agreed). But that still rebuts any simplistic attempt at arguing any point from the supposed existence of one and only one eon to come, as if there are not also multiple eons to come.
And what I meant by continuing to happen now? Jesus may not use the term “parousia” (or whatever its Aramaic or Hebrew equivalent is, translated as parousia into Greek) to talk about His continuing presence, but He does talk about it (especially in promises to those who are faithful to Him).
Moving on…
I certainly don’t disagree, but I don’t think you’ve noticed that you’ve thereby acknowledged that people who die with a spiritual death nature can be (and even already have been) saved by Christ afterward, and be born again.
That principle isn’t affected by dividing the “righteous” and the “unrighteous” in hades: the righteous still died with a spiritual death nature (as you’ve been calling it), and died not having been born again, and didn’t earn their salvation by their own righteousness. They were saved from their sins and given eonian life and were born again after their deaths, thanks to Christ. They were also cared for in hades by Christ despite having none of those factors yet, and without their natures even being changed yet.
Which the texts don’t at all say. Pretty much every text referring to the times of Noah (including 1 Peter, not incidentally), indicates that everyone was disobedient and unrepentant except for Noah and his family.
Now I totally grant that (unless everyone ever born after Adam survived until the Flood, which I don’t seem to recall–Abel being the most obvious example) the saving of spirits in hades doesn’t only go back to the Flood, but as far back before that as people died. (I also totally grant that at no time has any unrepentant person been saved from their sins post-mortem, nor pre-mortem for that matter, nor will that ever happen including in the Day of the Lord to come, into the ages of the ages!) So I would have no disagreement in principle if someone said that Christ was saving Adam and Eve (for example) in the descent into Hades: saving them from their nature of spiritual death, giving them eonian life, so that they are born again (even though not resurrected yet either), etc.
But Peter, strictly speaking, emphasizes that he’s talking about spirits imprisoned for being disobedient in the days of the Flood. If he’s also talking about God saving repentant sinners post-mortem who died prior to the Flood, the same emphasis still applies: he’s talking about spirits imprisoned for being disobedient in the days before the Flood, in direct contrast to the righteous (exemplified by Noah and his family saved by the ark).
1 Peter 4 disagrees with you. He says it’s happening presently. “For into this [the coming judging of the living and the dead] the gospel is [brought] to the dead also, so that they may be judged indeed according to persons in flesh, yet should be living according to God in spirit.” The pagans who think it strange that Peter’s audience don’t race together into the same puddle of sin that they themselves do, and who insult Peter’s audience, are thus compared to the dead to whom the gospel is preached. The point is an inclusio: if Christ preaches the gospel even to the dead in order to save them from their sins so that they may be living in spirit, so should we also preach the gospel to those who haven’t yet physical died, even if they are insulting us.
This is aside from other scriptures (debated elsewhere on the forum) indicating that what happened in 1 Peter 3:18-19 will certainly and successfully happen again at the Second Coming of Christ and also after the Second Coming of Christ. But the example of 1 Peter already nixes your contention that it does not happen at all post-mortem.
Actually, you yourself just agreed that they received salvation exactly the same way we do (through and by the grace of God in the body and blood of His cross), because what is needed for us was also needed for them.
I don’t accept the theory, so I have no need to answer it. It would be like us challenging you to answer why Christ saves all sinners from sin, including at least some people in hell right now. And then us somehow counting it against you, and continuing to challenge you with that question, every time you remind us you don’t believe that. And then, when of course that continues to rightly fail, us falling back to challenging you to pretend theoretically it’s true and trying to answer it as if you believed it to be true. You would be under zero obligation at all, intellectually and/or ethically, to pretend for purposes of argument that you believed it was true and proceeded from there.
I have already indicated that if I did believe God doesn’t extend reconciliation to people in hades right now yet does extend it in the age to come, I would expect that soul-sleep of the wicked is somehow involved, since there is some OT indication that evildoers (and the righteous, for that matter) are not conscious entities in hades. But in fact (not in theory) I don’t believe God refuses to extend reconciliation to people in hades right now, and in fact (not in theory) I believe at least some impenitent sinners in hades are conscious entities.
So you can keep asking with bold and underline emphases as you please, “If God is not extending the not-yet reconciliation to people in hell right now, why not?” But I’m going to keep answering that I don’t believe God is not extending reconciliation to people in hell right now.
It may be inconvenient to you that one of your challenges for this thread depends on my position requiring what I repeatedly answer that my position doesn’t require, that God must be withholding reconciliation to anyone, but that’s how it is.
As ironically usual, you’re the only person here confusing times (eons, ages) with worlds. You do it in the above quote quite literally in the same sentence that you accuse universalists of wrongly doing so.
None of us deny there is a world now and a world to come. All of us affirm there is an age to come, and most of us affirm there are ages to come without denying that they are part of the world to come, while not simply conflating the age or ages with the world to come. The age and the ages are limited but long periods of time; the world to come is constituted by the visibly reigning presence of God acting to bring an end to injustice and the resurrection of the good and the evil (which are concepts generally agreed to, at least verbally if not in coherent theology, by non-universalist Christians, too.)
Notably, you’re only repeating something you started saying late in the thread, after reading how the KJV translates Matt 12:32 and Eph 1:21. But your KJV is who is confusing eons with worlds there, because in Greek each place reads “eon”.
The fact is that your argument depended on there not being multiple ages to come, and we have demonstrated that the scriptures testify to there being multiple ages to come. Quoting the KJV where it mistranslates “age” as “world”, as though this demonstrates anything to the point, also fails; and ignoring the correction while copy-pasting the mistranslation over again as though the fact the KJV says “world” there means anything in itself, verges into willful blindness.
Ahh, now soul sleep would be involved but some are asleep and some are conscious. Hmmm. Interesting concept, Jason. Let me see if I understand you correctly. There are some people who are not conscious and some people who are conscious in Hell? How does God decide who is conscious and who is not conscious in Hell? Better yet, How does God fail not to convert one conscious unbeliever in Hell? If God himself is evangelizing all conscious unbelievers right now in Hell would not His conversion rate be 100%? because we both know God cannot fail at anything He does and anything below 100% would be a failure according to His standards…yet we see billions upon billions thrown into the LOF at final judgment. Maybe the ones thrown into the LOF are the unconscious unbelievers who didn’t hear God evangelize? If God really were evangelizing unbelievers in Hell it would be emptied, period! And that is a fact and not a theory!
But the fact (not in theory) of the matter is, Jason…God is not evangelizing one unbeliever in Hell nor does He evangelize one unbeliever in the LOF!
And that’s because our precious free will ceases to be a concern to God post-mortem. According to Arminian theology we have free will to repent right up until we die and then oops! terribly sorry and all that chaps but I’m taking away your free will to repent now just because I can.
Hebrews 9:27
27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
God’s word not mine, Jeff. Take it up with him about it.
That quote has less than nothing to do with what I posted. Explain why the God who never changes suddenly changes with regard to my precious free will after I’m dead. If he is to be consistent then repenting post-mortem must have the same effect as repenting in this life - or is salvation based on believing the right things?
And quit with the ‘It’s not me it’s God - take it up with him’ that is patronising and insulting and boastful that you are the mouthpiece of God and understand scripture perfectly while everyone else here is in error.
Bear in mind that many here HAVE prayerfully taken up these things directly with God and as far as they are concerned he has given them answers that are diametrically opposed to yours.
Proverbs 14:12
12 There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.
Hebrews 9:27 is crystal clear, Jeff. You are appointed to die and then comes judgment. No in between post-mortem salvation s but judgment in Rev 20:10-15. Bear in mind my position has been the position of the body of Christ for over 2000 yrs and I, too, have prayerfully taken up these things directly with God.
So God tells you one thing and somebody else another. It still doesn’t alter the fact that in your theology God changes from someone who respects free will to someone who disregards it in the blink of an eye.
Revival you constantly take that verse out of its context. Hebrews 9:27 is crystal clear. It is clear about how many times Jesus needed to die for our sins. It says nothing about what happens to the person between the time they die and when they are judged. Let’s just say that judgment day is today, for the sake of argument. Alexander the Great died about 1700 years ago. That is 1700 years between his death and his judgment. Hebrews is silent on what takes place during those years. We are certain he will be judged. Hebrews tells us this. Nothing more.
Let’s look at the context:
*Hebrews 9
1Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.
2For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein was the candlestick, and the table, and the shewbread; which is called the sanctuary.
3And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all;
4Which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein was the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron’s rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant;
5And over it the cherubims of glory shadowing the mercyseat; of which we cannot now speak particularly.
6Now when these things were thus ordained, the priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God.
7But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people:
8The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:
9Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;
10Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.
11But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;
12Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.
13For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:
14How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
15And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
16For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
17For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.
18Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood.
19For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people,
20Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.
21Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry.
22And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.
23It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.
24For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:
25Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;
26For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.
27And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
28So (the author’s conclusion) Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.*
Read the chapter a few times Revival to see what it is about. The Hebrew writer is not answering the question, “How many chances does man get to repent?” Or “Does he get any chance after he dies?” Rather he is answering something like: “The high priest had to go in once a year and offer a sacrifice in the Holy place, how effective is Christ’s sacrifice? Does he have to do it more than once?” It is silent on the long years after a persons death, as to what God has to do with those who have rejected them. We don’t know if God talks to them or not. We don’t know if God has any dealings with them or not.
Dirtboy
Read Luke 16:19-31 to see what happens in between physically dying and judgment in Hebrews 9:27. People either go to Hades/Hell or Heaven temporarily until they are resurrected unto final judgment in Rev 20:10-15.
You did not respond to the fact that you misquoted Hebrews and the fact that it talks nothing about what you claim it to. I understand where people go when they die, but the scriptures says very little about what God does during that period of time. Very little.
I did not misquote Hebrews. I said you are appointed to die once and then comes judgment. That is what it says. It does not say you are appointed to die once and then post mortem salvation is offered to you and then comes judgment. God focuses on the living lost not the lost who have already physically died. Their fate is sealed, Dirtboy.
I’m glad you are not God.
Just telling you what God has said, Dirtboy.
Right on.
First the physical, then the spiritual (the physical of course being the shadow of the spiritual). That is definitely the biblical order/ pattern. That is one of the things that I value about the preterist perspective; it reminds us that there have been physical fulfillments of prophecy in history that will also be fulfilled spiritually (where they have not already).
I firmly believe that what we call “hell” (as well as what we traditionally call “heaven”) are both states of existence, not places we “go to”. The new Jerusalem descends out of heaven
I’m sure revival would cry ‘foul’ if I quoted…
Psalm 103:9 He will not always accuse, nor will he harbor his anger forever;
and then said - God said it, not me - take it up with him. I would be ingoring any context of the psalm as a whole in doing so - just has has been pointed out with supporting evidence here in this thread concerning the Hebrews quote.
The other problem with your Hebrews quote is that it only says judgement - it doesn’t say eternal separation from God - you are adding that concept into the passage. Any negative judgement could just as easily entail corrective punishment. Or are you saying that judgement is always negative - in a court a judgement can be favourable as well. The Hebrews quote applies to all people including Christians so the word judgement on its own cannot have eternal damnation substituted for it.
In other words what you have claimed to be the plain meaning of God in a single sentence (out of an entire chapter (let alone whole epistle)) can only be construed to mean eternal damnation for unrepentant sinners if you bring other concepts to the quote that you find supporting this in other parts of the bible - and yet! when supporters of UR do this within their arguments you refuse to accept this legitimate cross-referencing from them and dismiss their position(s) and say things like ‘…show me where in this verse or that verse it says x,y or z’. If I were to use the same tactic (which I am not) I would say the same back to you about the psalms quote.
Do you ever see why it is people get frustrated with your lines of argument here? This is a genuine question and not a wind-up - if we are to take your position seriously (and I acknowledge that some don’t) then you have to take our position seriously too.