Bible Threatenings Explained

[jabcat]

Preface
When one who has been reared in the Evangelical Church is favorably impressed with the doctrine of Universal Salvation, it frequently happens that the many texts he has heard quoted against it, operate as stumbling blocks in his way. The author of this book believes that no text of Scripture, properly understood, in any manner traverses the grand central truth of the Gospel: God's triumph over all his foes, converting them to himself; and he has arranged these expositions in a brief and popular style for the purpose of showing that the Threatenings of the Bible are perfectly harmonious with the Promises of Scripture; in fact, that the threatenings are given in order that the promises of Universal Reconciliation may be fulfilled.

He agrees with the Canon Farrar of the Episcopal Church, who says: "If the decision be made to turn solely on the literal meaning of the scriptures, I have no hesitation whatever in declaring my strong conviction that the Universalist and Annihilist theories have far more evidence of this sort for them than the popular view. It seems to me that if many passages of Scripture be taken quite literally, universal restoration is unequivocally taught, * * * * * * * * but that endless torments are nowhere clearly taught--the passages which appear to teach that doctrine being either obviously figurative or historically misunderstood."

If these pages shall assist any mind to remove obstacles that prevent it from beholding God as the Savior of the world, its purpose will be fulfilled.

http://www.tentmaker.org/books/BibleThreateningsExplained.html

[Paul Hazelwood]

I have to disagree with the preface to a point, to say that there are no clear verses that talk of endless punishment is wrong.

The issue is which context of Gods character is the prevailing truth.
These two verses are "clear" as day in the literal reading that the author talks about.

1 Timothy 2:4

Matthew 25:46

Both when read at face value contradict one another.  It is context that will read one as it is and explain the other one in accordance to the context.


If you are CU you will take 2 Timothy 2:4 at face value and say Matthew 25:46 is not translated properly.  If you are ET you will take Matthew 25:46 at face value and say that 1 Timothy 2:4 is not as it seems.

[jabcat]

Yeah, God's character is important, as you say, and seems to me to help us get an understanding of His character, I believe as always/usual, that context and translation are important.  Because mistranslated, veiled, distorted, many obviously view God's character "as holy but just", using that to justify their belief in eternal torment.  :upset:

I tend to agree with the author, but taking many things into consideration - the overall view of God's character,  viewing any punishment scriptures in context of that character and the scriptures that teach reconciliation, and as accurate of a translation as we can get.  

There are a few specific things that come to mind to consider with the Matthew scripture -  

1) age-during and 2) who Jesus was addressing and what age and kingdom were being discussed.  This was directly after the Matthew 24 warnings/judgments, which many believe were fulfilled in 70 AD.  Not positive myself, but something worth considering.   :2c: