I was going to type it all up for you, but instead I'm just going to give you some links and save some time.
Long but thorough study.
Something more modern and concise.
Specifically addressing Mathew 25:46.
Please read at least one of those throughouly if you want to comment further, because I'm not going to waste time by going over something that was covered in the articles.
br0kenrabbit
Well, the first is published by the Northwestern Universalist Publishing House which makes it loose absolutely all credibility with orthodox Christianity. Christianity is not a universalist religion but is an exclusivist religion. Any attempt to create it as anything else is heresy. The intention of this type of Christianity is to prove liberal and non-orthodox ideas, something that has been considered heresy for two thousand years.
As for the second link, it attempts to explain orthodox Christianity but fails. It uses Bible passages out of context and doesn't define terms as defined by Scripture (even simple definitions like death [true death ultimately being seperated from the Father, true life ulimately being with the Father]). Also, many of its arguments about certain texts are arguments from silence. Just because a certain passage does not specifically say that hell is eternal in now way means it is not. I obviously did not read all of it but each of the arguments I read had simple answers and have very little historical and literary backing. At one point the author says something along the lines of "But that is unfair, you say. It is not what the Bible means. You are twisting it to make it fit your own premise." Is that not what he is doing?
And the third link is by Ken Eckerty, also a universalist which makes him loose all credibility with me. If I look past his wrong and heretical motivations, his arguments still fail. Many times he accuses the Church of wrong beliefs which the church does not even hold. For example, at one time he even states, "The ancient Egyptian and Greek teaching that says that man has an immortal soul (now embraced by the Church) is not scriptural. The only reason man has any life at all is because God (who is life) chooses to impart it to His creatures." This is not true, the church does not hold to this position. He's arguing against Christian gnosticism, not orthodox theology which clearly says that our resurrection bodies, not spiritual bodies, will become imperishable (1. Cor. 15). He doesn't even know what he's arguing against.
Now, I'm fully aware I did not give a detailed analysis against these links but it would require a book's worth of writing for me to argue against these groups. Hopefully what arguments I did give shall suffice.
One can make the Bible say whatever they wish it to say. Heck, I can make a biblical argument that fat people can't go to heaven since "narrow is the way that leads to righteousness", the Bible promotes anarexia (fasting), etc. Just because you can "proof text" an argument from Scripture in no way makes you correct. We gain our knowledge from a reading of Scripture that is from a simple reading but understood in the historical and literary context, that has been excepted by catholic doctrine (that is, the core doctrine of the universal church, not necessarily the Catholic church) across the centuries, etc. Personally, if I had a belief about scripture that was unique from the typical reading, then I'd highly question my understanding. We are in no way supposed to go to Scripture, disagree with a text and thus change its meaning, and then say your way is the "biblical" way while all others are wrong.
But do not take me the wrong way, Scripture is our highest authority as Christians and can be understood properly. However, it easily can be taken wrongly. In this case, universalism is heresy. If you wanted to argue that there was a hell but was not eternal, sure we can debate but I in no way believe that was a belief held by the apostles nor is it standard orthodox teaching.
Also, why is there even a need to discuss this? Either follow Christ or completely reject him. Do not claim that he is God in the flesh and not take hell seriously even if it "might" be temporary.
Log in to comment