INTRODUCTION: 00:00 Holy Scripture (KJV): 00:56 St. Ignatius of Antioch: 04:29 St. Justin Martyr: 05:01 St. Theophilus of Antioch: 05:14 St. Irenaeus of Lyons: 05:38 St. Hippolytus of Rome: 06:08 St. Cyprian of Carthage: 06:26 St. Cyril of Jerusalem: 06:43 St. Basil the Great: 07:25 St. Epiphanius of Cyprus: 08:20 St. John Chysostom: 08:50 Blessed Jerome of Stridonium: 09:43 Blessed Augustine: 10:10 St. Theodore the Studite: 12:43 St. Symeon the New Theologian: 13:08 St. Nicetas Stethatos: 13:48 Blessed Theophylact of Bulgaria: 14:14 St. Symeon of Thessalonica: 14:56 St. Elias Miniatis: 15:46 St. Ignatius Brianchaninov: 16:44 St. Theophan the Recluse: 18:00 St. Cyriacus the Solitary: 20:53 Blessed John Moschus: 21:50 Evening Prayers by St. John Chrysostom and St. John Damascene: 23:08 St. John Chrysostom: 23:30 St. Amphilochius of Iconium: 24:52 St. Ephraim the Syrian: 25:08 Synodical Letter of St. Sophronius of Jerusalem read and accepted by the Sixth Ecumenical Council: 26:15 Concerning the views of St. Isaac the Syrian: 29:44 Concerning the views of St. Gregory of Nyssa: 31:51 CONCLUSION: St. Paisios the Athonite: 34:47 Prayer to the Mother of God during Compline of Great Lent: 35:15 Evening Prayer from St. John Chrysostom: 36:14
@@l21n18 The Christian enjoyment is to be in God his goodness and his commands. The Christian struggle is against that which prevents one from coming to God.
Glory to God! Your videos are excellent! We really need videos like these, not only for some very good apologetics, but simply because there does not seem to be a lot of videos on these heresies like evolution and universalism!
Glory to God. There is a lot that addresses these issue in text form but less in audio. And this video here is not a complete treatment of the issue but it should add something for those wanting to learn more and those hoping to save their souls. As always, I aim to present the teachings of the Saints, those enlightened by the one Who is Lord of all.
@@OrthodoxWisdom I forgot to ask, I've seen some people say that the Synod of Jerusalem (1583 A.D.), which condemned the Catholics, purgatory, universalism, and the heterodox (among other things), is not dogma since it is not in the Ecumenical Councils. However, to refute this, we could say that the Synod of 1583 is included in the Synodikon of Orthodoxy which we celebrate every year (The feast of the Triumph of Orthodoxy). However, people then say how the Synodikon list itself is not dogma. Do you have any good counter-argument for this? Though these people follow the heretic David Bentley Hart (I use the word "heretic" as humbly as I can, I hope I'm not coming off as pretentious), who called St. Justinian an "imbecile" or something like that. There is also anathemas for Universalism in the 5th and 7th Ecumenical council, but the DBH followers say how it does not matter since the "Emperor" called the council, so it somehow does not hold water. In my opinion, Universalism does not hold water itself and is a house made out of sand.
God loves us that he gave his begotten son Jesus Christ to die for us for our sins. God is giving us a second chance. I repented from having lesbian sex with a woman. I left that because I want to live a righteous life. No sin is worth your soul in hell for eternity.
What would you say to this: I readily admit that that which will befall those who will not follow Christ and who will reject the eternal gift of salvation offered to us by God, will be the worst thing that could ever befall a person. There is nothing worse. However, I find it difficult to understand why God would choose to maintain the souls of his beloved lost creation in a perpetual state of torment with no hope or plan of bringing about their healing - simply imprisoning them in a state of torment, why? As some form of retributive justice? This anecdote from Saint Silouan captures my feelings well: It was particularly characteristic of Staretz Silouan to pray for the dead suffering in the hell of separation from God’, writes Fr Sophrony, and he goes on to recall an exchange that he overheard between the Starets and a somewhat dour hermit: I remember a conversation between him and a certain hermit, who declared with evident satisfaction, ‘God will punish all atheists. They will burn in everlasting fire.’ Obviously upset, The Staretz said: ‘Tell me, supposing you went to paradise and there looked down and saw somebody burning in hell-fire - would you feel happy?’ ‘It can’t be helped. It would be their own fault,’ said the hermit. The Staretz answered him with a sorrowful countenance: ‘Love could not bear that,’ he said. ‘We must pray for all’ (no simple "everything is going to be okay so no worries" rejection of the Traditional teaching of hell, but also a recognition that eternal unending suffering of sinners is a profoundly difficult concept for a loving soul to accept, which will spur us on to deep, pained prayer of heart for the salvation of all humanity [like we find in Saint Isaac] rather than the somewhat detached, impersonal, and cold response we see from the "dour hermit" in the story. Essentially we should desperately hope and long for the "salvation of all" while painfully recognizing that our true freedom will likely lead to some being lost)
Thank you for this response and question. I completely agree that a loving heart would be in pain at the thought of even one soul suffering for all eternity, being "scourged by the scourge of love" as St. Isaac the Syrian put it. Praying for their souls, that somehow God would help them seems completely appropriate. Where I think some go too far is when their desire to help a suffering soul begins to erode the dogma of the Church, the dogma not just about hell and its duration, but about what has been revealed about the seriousness of repenting in this life and the intense value Christ places upon our free will and allowing us to exercise it. We see this balance actually in St. Silouan who also said, "Only those who do not want to repent are not saved, and in this I see their despair, and I weep much, feeling pity for them." He also states, "What a pity it is for those people who do not know God. They do not see the eternal light, and after death they go to eternal darkness. We know about this because the Holy Spirit in the Church reveals to the saints what there is in heaven and what there is in hades." St. Silouan shows us the royal path: deep pain of heart and prayer for all men, and love for the revealed truth, ultimately the one Who is Truth: Christ.
@@OrthodoxWisdom Thank you so much, that really helps a lot and I appreciate you taking the time to respond. God bless you and keep up all the good work you are doing 😇
Hi. You are right. The punishment will be eternal for nothing will remain from their bodies and souls. They will be destroyed forever. They will burn for a while, each according to their sins..but not for eternity. God is a God for the living and thats what He wants for all, thats why He sent His Son...so we wont die. But we choose our end and no matter how much it hurts Him, He allows us our freedom. So, I do believe you are right în your thinking.
fascinating how this video came up in my recommended right after me and my good friend had a conversation about annihilationism vs. hell. he and i knew that an eternal soul was dogma but he was unsure on scripture. i advocated for the everlasting soul, but couldn't produce scripture at the top of my head. ill be sure to send this to him.
My issue is being scared of being deceived by any of the churches. I am still vulnerable, because I have not done anything past realizing the truth and repenting(remorseful Repentance) because I don't know where to go. I'm frozen in fear and don't know who to trust for guidance in the church.
Church isnt as important as faith. Do you believe in Christ as God? do you believe through him and only HIm you will be saved? you believe he died ans then ressurected?? Then youre christian. Different denomniations are just reflections of different cultures that come into contact with Chrsit
@@mikesmoth-v4w I know that, but I'm saying you're wrong that church isn't that important when there's false churches and they all say exactly what you said but have heretical beliefs tied to those phrases. A good church is needed to disciple a Christian in Gods truth :)
Thank you. I really needed some perspective on consequence today. Are you aware of any Saints that had trouble with ignorance to sin who finally saw the severity of sin and repented? Pride & substance (my prescribed medication) abuse, feeling very ashamed, weak. I want to run away and hide. I know I can't, sorry to go public on this but I don't know of any drug addict Saints I can appeal to for help....
We certainly run to the saints for help, but we also always run to the Lord for help. Despair is one of the worst sins. “It is human to fall. But it is demonic not to get up.” -St. John Chrysostom
Padre Pio was a (tobacco) snuff taker. St. Peter was reminded that everything God made is clean. Jesus said, "it's not what goes into your mouth that defiles you but what comes out." Nevertheless if you don't have faith that what you are partaking in is God's will for you then repent you must. If it offends your brother to eat meat, then for the sake of peace and unity it might be best you not eat meat in his presence. Have you tried looking into herbal alternatives to the prescription drugs you take? The Tree of Healing of All Nations? In Genesis we are told that God created every herb and seed for Man.
Hi. This is the fiery lake. It will be a real lake which will burn each person found there only according to their sins. Lord Jesus said they wont get out until paying for everything. Even if it burns you for a whole day its enough to make it seem eternal. But it wont burn for thousands of years. After paying for each sin, the soul will be distructed and what remains of the body will continue to burn until becoming ashes. So it will be eternal for their bodies and souls will dissapear forever. I know God cant bear any of his creations burning forever. He îs just not a monster. Yes, they will burn în fire but not for eternity. I hope this helps and I mean no harm by my words and I know I am speaking truth.
Before my entry into the Church, when I held universalist beliefs, I would hold up St. Isaac and St. Gregory as examples to support my case. But after being in the Church and developing the phronema of the fathers and reversing my belief in this soul-damaging heresy, it became something about St. Gregory (and St. Isaac) that caused me a great deal of grief and confusion. Because his brother, St. Basil, obviously was firmly against the heresy of universalism, so I would assume, being as close as they were, that St. Basil would have corrected St. Gregory concerning this? As well as St. Macrina, who I've heard held a similar view.
There is much more written about St. Gregory and St. Isaac than I presented here, but what I presented here helps shows that both of them taught things incompatible with the supposed views their universalist supporters think they held.
Everlasting and eternal, two words through bias incorrectly translated from Greek. Eastern Orthodoxy and its understanding of APOKATASTASIS speaks a better truth of God who ultimately wins through Jesus on the cross defeating death and ALL sin. This is a God that my heart intrinsically warms to, not a God who sees that which is of Himself (us) be tormented for ever as it were. Please check out ex Fundamentalist pastor now Orthodox Bradley Jerzak's brilliant and enlightened talk/book on a "MORE CHRISTLIKE GOD." So encouraging compared to the fear based Christianity that we have known especially since the Medieval Era and later Evangelical Fundamentalism.
I know that most persons understand by the story of Nineveh and its king, the ultimate forgiveness of the devil and all rational creatures. -St. Jerome
@@MaximusWolfeGlad we have you to set us straight. Now tell us about the divine plan to unite all things in Christ, and St John's visions of all critters singing God's praise.
@@benc6537 What are you on about? I’m not setting anyone straight. The scriptures, Church fathers and holy councils did that thousands of years ago. Unfortunately you reductionist blasphemers never got the memo.
Can people be saved after death? I.e. between the interval of our death and The Final judgement. I believe there is no salvation after the Final judgement, but between that time period, any hope for the deceased non orthodox? Are there instqnces of non orthodox being saved after death? Please?
If a person dies with some real repentance and faith, even if small, the prayers and active love of those on earth can benefit that reposed person, even helping him be saved. But for those who die not in repentance there is no hope. See “Life after Death” by St. John Maximovtich: www.orthodox.net/articles/life-after-death-john-maximovitch.html Also see this account from Elder Ephraim: ua-cam.com/video/B2wjSgk398Q/v-deo.html
Very interesting. Very true. It must be believed that eternal hell exists. It is black and white. No grey areas here. So how come the serpent was associating with Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden if we are led to believe that the devil is not-NOT- to associate with the Good God and the saved in Heaven? any thoughts please.....
Personally, i feel tge belief in an eternal hell is practical and edifyin and so i choose to believe. But i also proclaim Gods mercy is infinite and who am i to impose a limit on His saving power?
Those who defend eternal torment have not bothered to look deeply into its inconsistencies. First, eternal torment is not justice; it's cruelty. The essence of justice is BALANCE. There is no balance in tormenting someone forever for offenses that were done within a finite time frame. Even solitary confinement is more merciful than eternal torture. Are you saying that man knows how to be more merciful and compassionate than God Himself? Everyone can see that eternal pain for however many sins a person may have committed is essentially unjust. If anyone can judge such a sentence as cruel, then should we also say that God would be the worst tyrant and sadist that has ever existed and could ever exist? You mention that supposedly the Lord appeared to one of those fathers and said that mercy is seduction and deception from the devil. But if we examine that, do we find that as true? Is it better to see that mercy and love prevailed? Or cold and unyielding justice, bordering on cruelty prevailed? What purpose does it accomplish to have someone suffer forever? Have you bothered to think about that? Have you thought about all the implications? It would mean that God is not just a sadist, but a masochist as well. Because if He loves, then the suffering in the lake of fire would cause Him suffering as well. So, not only would those beings suffer forever, but so will God. And also as Revelation 16:7 states, God's judgments are just and true. People realize that not just because God says that they are, but because God will allow them to see that His judgments are indeed so. It's the essence of truth. It's not just because He says so, but because in essence they are true. So He will let people understand why they are so; why He had to judge like that. Eternal torment goes against justice, against mercy. Therefore, it cannot be true. And what you said in the video that there are only 2 places in the spirit realm, if we compare with reality, do we see that as true? Are there only 2 places on the Earth? Is there only one world that exists in all reality?. No. Therefore, heaven and hell are not the only places where people go after they die. Just like the Bible does not tell you that Japan exists or France exists; does not mean that they really don't exist. Truth is reality. Revelation expands the minds and is also progressive. How is mercy deception when we all know that eternal torment is the worst possibility? So when the Bible says that God's mercy is forever, then He suddenly forgot all about mercy for the people in hell and the lake of fire? Who is more in need of mercy? Those in heaven or those in hell and the lake of fire? So mercy ceased to exist for all eternity?
As someone inquiring into Orthodoxy I'm struggling with accepting the possibility of ECT. Not only does it seem unjust, but it seems to go against Scripture, entirely. I'd argue there is a much, much, much stronger case for annihilationism. Some of the most well-known early Church Fathers like Iraneaus seem to hold this view as well. According to some scholarly sources, among the first 300-500 years of the 6 major schools of early church catechism, only the one in Rome taught eternal torment, the rest were either some form of universalism, or annihilationism.
@@catalyst3713 I think that souls can be taken out of hell and can also be annihilated. In both scenarios, mercy is demonstrated. But in eternal torment, there is no mercy and no love. I have thought about this subject deeply. I analyzed the picture with every piece of information I know. For one, God and the devil can make salvation so hard that it's almost impossible to be saved. The easiest way would be to ask for forgiveness of all sins right before you die. Why did I say that God and the devil make salvation hard? Because God allows the devil to increase evil in the world and lay all kinds of traps without people knowing, and then he goes and accuses people of things that they don't know about. Or He allows the devil to infiltrate society so much, that then he goes to the heavenly court to accuse people of using his products and therefore he has claim over those souls. But God was the one who allowed the devil to infiltrate society to such a degree that almost 100% of all industries are corrupted by the devil in some way. The devil could claim that all souls belong to him because the internet is his and everyone that uses the internet belongs to him. Just like he claims that anybody that uses any form of adornment on their bodies belongs to him because the Bible supposedly forbids adornments. What's the role of art then? And then what about the people who sin in whatever way, but behind the sinning is ignorance. Not that they don't know if something is wrong, but if an undesirable reaction emerges from within them, they don't know what to do with that and are just carried away by the reaction. So they sinned. Does ignorance warrant infinite pain forever and ever? What about the people who have a hard time changing the way they think? What if they have a hard time expanding their minds? What if they have a hard time humbling themselves? What if they have insecurities? Traumas? Wounds that all influence the way they think and behave? Are they all supposed to suffer infinitely because of all those things? And then we have the question of why God decided to make the conditions on Earth so tough? First, we take God by His word that He is love. He shows that by placing in parents the ability to love unconditionally. When parents have their children, they remember how much they loved the child even when the baby is still forming in the womb. And then as the child grows, they remember all the tenderness they felt as they watched the child sleep and grow. So then, God who claims to be love, prefers to cast the being He incubated spiritually even before life on Earth, whom He loved as He incubated him or her, spent time with that spirit in heaven, knew the spirit and then decides to discard him or her forever because that person failed in some way here, or refused to do what He wanted. Did God forget all the love He felt? Even with all the tests that He let the person go through to purify and expose the person's true condition, is it better to let that person end up in eternal torment and then He cries about it because He exposed that person so much to the point that it's clear the person cannot or will not love God 100%? Or would it be better to accept that even if the person whom God claims to love, cannot or will not love Him 100%, God as a superior being of love, could still get to spend time with the person He claims to love, and make memories with him or her despite knowing that the person could possibly rebel against Him in the future? Wouldn't that be better than throwing that person into eternal torment and trap the individual in pain and a place that they will never be able to escape? At least God had years in heaven with that person, got to love the person, got to embrace the person, etc. Even if the person rebels in the future, it would have been better than discarding him or her forever because He can see that there's rebellion hidden in the heart. And then He cries about it because the person is suffering forever in hell. Does it have to be so? If God is suffering is because He wants to suffer. It would have been easier for Himself and us to make us so that we could not even conceive a thought that could oppose His will. If all He wanted was people who always did what He wants, robots would have been a much easier choice for us and for Him. He would have spared Himself and us the pain. Especially the pain of hell and the lake of fire. But He wanted things to be hard for Himself and for us. He does not have to be crying for the souls suffering in hell. If He is crying now, with foreknowledge, is because He wanted the pain. He wanted the challenge. But this is why I reject the idea of eternal torment. It paints God as a masochist and a sadist. If we as people have to learn to let go of people who don't love us, why can't God let go too? Why can't He let those people live in a place where they are not suffering, but without Him? And if He loves them so much, He can visit them periodically, but do they have to be in a constant state of suffering? I'm a Christian, but I don't like seeing extreme forms of justice. When I see things like only 1% or 2% make it to heaven, I don't even want to believe those numbers. Because that would mean that love, light and goodness did not really prevail. And God put Himself in a losing position. He got into an investment where He knew that He would lose almost 100% of the people He claims to love. What, Jesus died for only 1% to be saved? Where's the love that you claim to have for the other 99%? When you made things so hard so that only 1% or 2% can be saved? Something is not right there. And all this for what? To see who really loves you? Shouldn't God who is the superior being, prioritize and prefer loving His inferior creations with their imperfections, than Him testing them in every way possible to see who would love Him above all? I know that even if the people I love do not love me 100%, I would prefer to be able to be with them and love them than discarding them forever. After all, is it not better to give than to receive? Yes, there should be justice, but I don't agree with extreme justice. And let's not forget that the majority of the sin in the world is due to ignorance in one way or another. If you analyze the situations deeply, you will see there's some form of ignorance behind the sinning. And not only is there ignorance, there is weakness too. So, should people be eternally tormented due to ignorance and weakness?
No one escapes judgment of God. The souls that chose Him in this present life will be covered in Mercy, those who rejected Christ in this present life will be covered in condemnation. Most souls will escape God's salvation
I agree that all souls are judged (set right) by God...We can trust the Judgements of God....Isa 26:9 for when Thy judgments are in the earth, the inhabitants of the world will learn righteousness.
@@JWM5791 1 Tim 2:3-4 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth...Amen
Unending punishment is arbitrary in every sense and has no true telos, any more than coherent reasoning. God is worthy of nothing less than the redemption of all, and therefore will not settle for less than such a resolve. Justice at the end of the day should look like God getting what He deserves rather than what we deserve or don’t deserve. And what does He deserve? He deserves all that Christ sowed in His death and reaps in His resurrection. There could be no greater glory than such a redemption. Any so-called “father of the faith” that would deny this based on their clouded understanding of a sacred text never truly knew love or justice, and it’s a shame they should be revered as saints. Christ, have mercy😔💔🙏
Your just trying to reinvent Christianity by appealing to emotions elicited by the prospect of post eschatological immutability. But having a free will means being answerable. That is the blessing and the implication. There is no esoteric clause you’ve discovered that provides you a a greater vantage or wisdom than these great fathers and bearers of the faith. Universalism is an apostasy.
We can set no limits to the agency of the Redeemer to redeem, to rescue, to discipline in his work, and so will he continue to operate after this life. -St. Clement of Alexandria 150 - 211 AD
@@thecarlitosshow7687 This man is just another in a long line of converts to the Orthodox East who has dragged in hell from the West (hell is a Roman Catholic invention which got its real start with Blessed Augustine) and is determined that everyone should go to hell except the repentant. Born in Africa and never heard the Gospel so you can repent? Awwww, but too bad for you! Demon-possesssed and not in your right mind because of a generational curse and you die. Well, that's just too bad, but you earned it by being born into the wrong family! After all, Christ only died for those who are "worthy" of salvation, right? Sorry for the snark, but these hellists really get under my skin with their instance that our loving heavenly Father is just like the pagan gods who demanded that the children of Israel burn their infants as an acceptable sacrifice in order to insure good crops for the coming year.
@@thecarlitosshow7687 It has nothing to do with bitterness. It’s the overwhelming consensus of the fathers (so that finding a few contradictory quotes is not compelling argumentation), the holding of the 6th council and teaching of scripture. No one is delighting in the immutability of eternal damnation. Nothing could be sadder.
@@MaximusWolfe all you’re saying is making fallacy’s. Youre committing an appeal to authority and an ad populism fallacy, and no one wants to burn in the flames to be tortured for ever. Where’s your actual argument for ECT? The church fathers are fallible human beings. St Justinian the emperor is a fallible human and he’s not God. St Augustine was wrong to promote Eternal punishment in the Latin church. Jesus Christ, the apostles and Saint Paul held to Universal reconciliation and so did The Early church did for 500 years. Even st Isaac the Syrian after the 5th ecumenical held to universalism and lived in the year of 700 ad. Also Scripture itself points to Universalism. Jesus is the Savior of All. Eternal Torment cannot confirm a God of Infinite Attributes of Love, Goodness, Knowledge, and Power if he is to send them to Torment forever. Well actually he can be all powerful and and all knowing if he does but then he’s not all love and goodness. Only an immoral doctrine such as eternal torment is insane and Evil God.
@@OrthodoxWisdom I'm just beginning as a catechumen, so I cannot yet take confession. Although I do confess my sins and ask for our Lord's mercy each day. I'm looking forward to being baptized and chrismated in the Church, but as you know this can be a lengthy process. Father Joseph told me to "slow down" and take my time lol.
Yes I understand. I’m also a convert and I remember saying similar things and gently being assisted in channeling my zeal in healthy ways. Say your prayer rule everyday, fast, give to others, read the Saints a little at a time and go to the services as often as you can. God help you on your journey.
@@OrthodoxWisdom Bingo!!! I somehow KNEW you were a convert. Let me guess. X-Calvinist or perhaps Southern Baptist? Seems that the loudest defenders of the horrendous idea of God torturing people forever are Western converts who come into Orthodoxy and bring their eschatological baggage with them.
It matters not what I say, but what the Ecumenical Councils and the Holy Fathers say. I’d be happy to defend universalism if it wasn’t a heresy condemned many times over. I take no pleasure in the suffering of sinners. I do, however, take pleasure in defending the truth for the sake of everyone coming to salvation. Deal with the teachings of the Holy Fathers.
Can you explain then why, in the original Greek NT text, Jesus himself describes afterlife punishment in Matthew 25:46 as "aionion kolasin", which properly translates to "age-lasting correction", not eternal punishment?
That refers to the coming age, i.e., the unbroken and immutable place without time. Since their is no duration there there is also no opportunity for protraction in reclamation. This is why we must repent and be joined to the mystical body now, where time, according to its unique attributes, allows us to go from one thing to another.
@@MaximusWolfe If it is a place without time, it would not be described as an age. An age is a non-specific period of time, but it is still a period of time. It is illogical to say that, for a period of time (an age), time will not exist. Moreover, why would Jesus describe afterlife punishment as "correction" if the purpose was to punish offenders forever? The purpose of correction is to improve the character and behavior of the offender so that they will not offend in the future. What would be the point of that if the punishment lasts forever?
@@alwaysadawg6488 Time/duration and concomitant deterioration is the effect of the fall. An overwhelming amount of the Church Fathers agree on this. Ontologically speaking, God being uncreated (there never being a time when He was not) indicates that He is not bound by protraction in the way that His creation is after the lapse of Adam. In heaven there is union with God and the effect of that reciprocity would be that we are joined or reintegrated to Gods timelessness (“partake of the divine nature”). To assume the word age means protraction is a classic example of the word concept fallacy. Age can have more than one meaning or referent. It can refer to something that transcends the attributes associated with time. Although time is one of the great mysteries, we do know that it effects the creation in terms of deterioration. Will we get old and die in heaven? Of course not. So it follows that time has passed away in heaven and that indicates that time is provided hitherto the eschaton for persons to “work out there salvation with fear and trembling.”
@@alwaysadawg6488 Time/duration and concomitant deterioration is the effect of the fall. An overwhelming amount of the Church Fathers agree on this. Ontologically speaking, God being uncreated (there never being a time when He was not) indicates that He is not bound by protraction in the way that His creation is after the lapse of Adam. In heaven there is union with God and the effect of that reciprocity would be that we are joined or reintegrated to Gods timelessness (“partake of the divine nature”). To assume the word age means protraction is a classic example of the word concept fallacy. Age can have more than one meaning or referent. It can refer to something that transcends the attributes associated with time. Although time is one of the great mysteries, we do know that it effects the creation in terms of deterioration. Will we get old and die in heaven? Of course not. So it follows that time has passed away in heaven and that indicates that time is provided hitherto the eschaton for persons to “work out there salvation with fear and trembling.”
You mean... departed.? Orthodox God is the God of the living. In Him all are alive. We pray to Him to have a mercy on our departed and grant them the everlasting life in His Kingdom.
When the writings of the Early Fathers - those that are not specifically done in an ecumenical council, which we are obligated to believe and practice - go against that which the Apostles wrote in the Sacred Scriptures, which one has authority? When St. Paul says that God will have mercy on ALL, and yet the Fathers claim that the vast majority of human beings will not be treated with mercy, but burned forever, which one am I obligated to believe?
You listen to St Paul as interpreted by the Holy and God bearing Fathers. The same Holy Spirit inspired them all. What you don't do is put yourself above the Fathers, as though you correctly understand St Paul but the God Bearing Fathers were too dumb and unenlightened to.
@@woodstocklad The God bearing Fathers, St. Isaac of Syria, St. Gregory of Nyssa (the "Father of the Fathers"), St. Clement, The Cappadocians, St. Macarina, and a host of others, all taught Universal Salvation. Was St. Augustine a "God-bearing Father?" Was Tertullian a "God-bearing Father? Both of these taught eternal hell. So who is right? Tertullian and Augustine were both members of the Latin Church. I find it interesting that it is the Latin Fathers who insist upon an eternal torment of sinners, while the Eastern Fathers embraced God's all-inclusive love which results in salvation for all mankind. What this shows me is that culture has a strong influence on how we think about God and how we approach Him.
Hi. There will be those who will be destroyed în that fire. Otherwise Lord Jesus wouldve died în vain. He died to rescue as many as possible from that real reality. So, not all will be saved. I hope those saved will outnumber by many those who will be destroyed. May God forgive us all but May His will be done for He knows what can be done and what cannot be done for the good of all beings.
But people ca be saved out of hell, until the Second Coming of the Lord, by prayer, and if they come for the Throne on the Last Judgement, they can repent and eventually be saved. After that there is no possibility anymore. Or am I wrong here, but that is the reason we pray for the dead, that they will be saved and be safe?!
St. John Maximovitch writes, “Some souls find themselves (after the forty days) in a condition of foretasting eternal joy and blessedness, and others in fear of the eternal torments which will come in full after the Last Judgment. Until then changes are possible in the condition of souls, especially through offering for them the Bloodless Sacrifice (commemoration at the Liturgy), and likewise by other prayers.” www.orthodox.net/articles/life-after-death-john-maximovitch.html What I’ve seen from my reading is that for anyone to be saved they still need love and repentance in this life. If their repentance was real but weak, then our prayers and offerings for the them can be beneficial, as God loves all. None of this overcomes the will of the person. The free will is still held intact. That is why repentance is still necessary in this life and when we die. These are deep matters! Run to the Saints!
The Adventists PREACH the wicked should ignore the warnings of eternal torment! These very scriptures were intended to send stark terror in the hearts of the wicked that they would turn to Christ and righteousness. Yet, Ellen G. White the Adventist Church says to ignore them and do everything they can to force them to be meaningless to the wicked! Christ commanded His Church to preach these things, but the corrupt Sabbath keepers forbid it as they did in Acts 5. 1. The Adventists all teach *the undying worms are eating on a dead body* so that you can tell THE WICKED they won't feel any pain or torment. *When the truth is, the scripture is speaking of the TORMENT OF THE WORMS EATING ON THE BODY AND SOUL OF THE WICKED NEVER TO STOP!* (Mark 9:48, Isaiah 66:22-24) 2. The Adventists teach the wicked that *the unquenchable fire, will be quenched in a few second so, so THE WICKED won't feel any pain and have nothing to fear.* *When the truth is, the scripture is speaking of the TORMENT OF THE FIRE BURNING THE BODY AND SOUL OF THE WICKED NEVER TO STOP!* (MT. 5:41-45) 3.The Adventists teach the WICKED *the torment of the wicked in Hades is just a grave,* so you don't have to worry about being punished with torment like Christ Himself taught about the wicked rich man. *When the truth is, the scripture is speaking of the TORMENT OF THE FLAMES BURING ON THE BODY AND SOUL OF THE WICKED NEVER TO STOP!* (LUKE 16:19-31) 4. The Adventists teach, *the soul CAN be killed when the body is killed,* so the WICKED don't have to worry about being punished after death as Christ taught. *Moreover, if the soul dies with the body, than other people COULD kill both the body and the soul in one act* Mt. 10:28 *says the soul CANNOT BE KILLED* 5. *The Adventist's are preparing the way for the Beast and the False Prophet* The Adventists teach *eternal punishment is annihilation,* so they won't fear eternal punishment and repent of their sins. You all make void the word of God by your traditions and lies. The Adventists have made *the threat of eternal punishment meaningless* which was intended to make the wicked repent lest they go to eternal punishment. Adventists make the threat of unquenchable fire meaningless, because you claim it only burns for seconds. *When the truth is, the scripture is speaking of the TORMENT NEVER TO STOP TORTURING THE BODY AND SOUL OF THE WICKED* 6. *The Adventists have made the threat of unquenchable fire meaningless* which was intended to make the wicked repent lest they go to the unquenchable fire, now they do not repent and neither do you all. Adventists make the threat of the torment of the gnawing of undying worms meaningless, because you claim, they only eat dead bodies that feel no pain!! Oh how the false prophet and the beast's love the gospel of annihilationism. They Adventists are preparing the way for the false prophet. Do you think for one moment the false prophet will promise the torment of the wicked if they are worshiped? Not for one second, they will tell everyone how there is no immortal soul and torment of the wicked at their death. 7. When Christ speaks explicitly and says the entire Old Testament ( *the law and the prophets* ) warn of the soul of the wicked being punished immediately after death, The Adventist say, IGNORE IT, IT'S JUST A "PARABLE" so that the WICKED will not repent and neither will the Adventists. 8. When Christ says, the rich man wanted to warn his five living brothers, "lets they come to this place of TORMENT", Adventist teach there is no torment in Hades, it's only a grave and a pile of dirt. The truth is that "HADES" is never the grave. 9. When Christ says, that they wouldn't believe even if the rich man came back from Hades and told them OF THE TORMENT IN HADES the Adventist Church says, men aren't alive in Hades. JUST IGNORE CHRIST AND HIS WARNING, hades is just a pile of dirt so that the WICKED ADVENTISTS WILL NOT REPENT exactly as the false prophet and the beast would have you believe! When, the opposite is true. 10. Here in Luke 16:19-31 *Christ opens the people's eyes unto the unseen world immediately after death and the Adventist despise Him for it!* Here Christ warns them what will happened to them if they refuse to repent, and the Adventist despise and blaspheme Christ for doing so. Christ let's every man know what happened to all the wicked in Noah's time, and to those in Sodom and Gomorrah and all the wicked down through the ages including false teachers and doers of evil and the Adventist despise Christ for it rather than repent of their sins. God is immortal and when God created man, he said, "let us make Man in OUR image" and then He breathed in to man and made him A LIVING SOUL. God is immortal and so He made man in His image. You all can't get the simplest things correct. God did NOT breathe into the animals as He did man! *The Adventists have made the threat of unquenchable fire meaningless which was intended to make the wicked repent lest they go to the unquenchable fire,* now they do not repent and neither do you all. *Adventists make the threat of TORMENT IN HADES meaningless, because you claim it's only a dirt grave!* The Adventists have made the threat of the torment in Hades meaningless, now they do not repent and neither do you all. *Except you repent, you will deserve every thing you get!* >
*This was writen to the Adventists* The Adventists and the cults seize upon every place in the Old Testament where the destruction of the wicked is promised on a physical level and then say it mean annihilation, just as the rich man's brothers did not know of the torment of the wicked themselves. While every reader of the Old Testament scripture and prophet who wrote them were NOT annihilationist at all. Just as the author did not believe in annihilation of the wicked so the reader did not as well. They knew that when God had destroyed the wicked in the flood or Sodom and Gomorrah, God had intervened in human affairs to send those wicked directly to hades to be tormented because they were no so much as to be allotted time to repent. This is thoroughly and explicitly shown in the teaching of Christ that "Moses and the Prophets" had taught the torment of the wicked immediately after the death of body. And, this is not concealed at all in the Old Testament. Therefore, all those who use the Old Testament scriptures to support conditional immortality are condemned by Christ. Because Christ taught the Old Testament taught the exact opposite of conditional immortality. Likewise, the carnal minded Adventist seize upon every place where the destruction of the wicked off the earth is spoken of when it speaks of the person's body and not their soul. Yet every reader of the Old Testament truly understood that that was not the end of the punishment for the wicked and that their soul continued to be punished. But, the fleshly minded Adventists only see what is visible to them and not believing God or Christ about the torment of the soul of the wicked immediately after death as Christ and the Apostles taught. The Adventists, the Atheists and the JW's are just like the rich man's 5 brothers! They ONLY saw that he was physically dead and knew NOTHING of his UNSEEN TORMENT IN THE FLAME. Therefore, like the carnal minded The Adventists, the Atheists and the JW's refuse to hear Christ's words about the unseen torment of the rich man in Hades. Because, they can only see with the flesh even when Christ warns them of what will happen to them also after death. The Adventists, the Atheists and the JW's refuse to believe. Thus, Christ answer them, "Neither would they believe even if someone came from the dead to warn them. And, so it is with these fools. In Revelation 14:9-11, we are told that anyone who worships the beast and receives his mark “will be tormented with burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment rises forever and ever.”The Adventists, the Atheists and the JW's and all the wicked preach that no one will suffer* *torment forever and ever* A complete denial of the teachings of Christ and the Apostles. And, they do so because they have been taught that the true Christ is "Satan" , while it is Satan himself, that leads them to deny the explicit words of scripture. And, because they disbelieve the scripture, they FIGHT against Christ and his Church, as an agent of the Wicked One. And, what do you suppose the beast is telling the wicked who worships them? That if they do they will be tormented forever and ever? Who would then follow them? The Adventists, the Atheists and the JW's will believe the beast when He tells them there is no HELL AND NO TORMENT, THEY ALREADY HAVE BELIEVED AND FOLLOWED THAT GREAT FALSE TEACHING. Then what do The Adventists, the Atheists and the JW's and the wicked do? They call Christ "Satan, a Monster, a Tyrant" because they have been taught by a false prophet to hate the just and righteous punishments of Christ upon the wicked. The carnal mind only see what is fleshly and not as Christ and the Church taught. Adventism is fully carnal. When they see the wicked die, they only see the death of the body and not the torment of the soul. This is exactly what happened to the rich man in Luke 16:19-31. Any 3rd grader can read the story and see the end of the matter, but not an Adventists, because they have been WILFULLY blinded by their carnal mind and Ellen G. White. Like Sodom and Gomorrah the people in Edom are still burning and in torment. That is what Christ, and the Apostles taught. You guys are so carnal you can only see what is earthly. You are fully prepared to go to hell yourselves for corrupting the gospel of Christ and the Apostles and charming the wicked. You all have sent all your followers to hell and many more millions who did not repent with your Atheistic gospel of soul sleep and annihilationism. Get ready, because except you repent, you will find yourself there shortly. Why do the Adventists and their like, so despise the eternal punishment? Because, they know they are evil and rather than repent of their evil, they find it much easier to deny the explicit teachings of Christ and Christ Himself, than to repent. A righteous man does not fear the just punishments of God. 1. Revelation 16:7 And I heard another out of the altar say, *Even so, Lord God Almighty, true and righteous are thy judgments.* Revelation 19:2 *For true and righteous are his judgments:* for he hath judged the great whore, which did corrupt the earth with her fornication, and hath avenged the blood of his servants at her hand.
How about the sterling reasoning of St Theophan the Recluse @18:40. God is good and merciful, ergo eternal torment is good and merciful. Sounds like the good saint needed to get out more. Reason with me: though your sins are scarlet, they shall be white as snow. Until you sleuth out exactly what the Lake of Fire is, you'll be left groping with absurd notions like how the God who is love consigns most of humanity to hopeless, endless, relentless, cruel, grim, boundless, burning burning exquisite torment. What a sick and evil thought, and a slur on God's holy name. They have built the high places of Topheth in the Valley of Hinnom so they could burn their sons and daughters in the fire-something I never commanded, nor did it even enter My mind. (Jer 7:31) And how does Hades not have an end if it is cast into the Lake of Fire in Rev 20:14, pray tell? With respect, the usual handful of disparate and decontextualised scriptural witnesses relied upon here (Matt 25:46, Isa 66:24, Dan 12:2, Matt 18:8-9, 2 Thes 6:1-9, Jude 7, 13 and Rev 13:9-11) do not readily agree or are amenable to literal interpretation. Is it darkness or fire, is it destruction or torment etc? And how will you escape the wrath to come - we've all committed the sins of the 'goats' in Matt 25:31-46. Jesus comes to save the world from sin and death. He conquers our hearts and minds and converts us by grace and truth, not by spiritual terrorism. He raises the dead, heals the sick, frees the prisoners, restores sight to the blind etc. Saves, not condemns. See the Son, see the Father. God wills for all to be saved from perishing in its false love of darkness, and we must affirm that His will be done. "BEHOLD, I AM MAKING ALL THINGS NEW!" (Rev 21:5), making good on His covenant to Abraham and His oath to Cyrus as sealed and revealed at Calvary and in the consummation. "And may the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all, Amen" (Rev 22:21). Glad tidings of great joy for all mankind - there is good, God is good, good wins.
Category error. Christian doctrine isn’t based solely on the popularity of a given precept. The Church is not a democracy. It was a majority vote that saw Barabbas loosed and God Himself beaten, spit upon, derided and murdered.
As far as I understand it, there is no dogma in Orthodoxy *for* universalism. But there is also no dogma in Orthodoxy *against* universalism. I've heard an Orthodox patriarch say that we may hope in universal reconcilation but we cannot teach it as dogma.
Universal salvation, i.e. the notion that all will be saved in the end, has been condemned by the 5th, 6th, and 7th Ecumenical Councils. What an Orthodox Patriarch has said is not enough to overturn the witness of the Church, especially the Church in Council. The condemnation of universalism has entered into the Synodikon of Orthodoxy read on the Sunday of Orthodoxy each year during Great Lent. Countless Saints have taught explicitly on this matter in agreement with the Councils mentioned above. For one example of an Ecumenical condemnation, listen to the section in this video on the Synodical Letter by St. Sophronius of Jerusalem. You can also find a slightly longer section read here, including a link to the text in the video description: ua-cam.com/video/3PxYWzYY6h0/v-deo.html Is this helpful?
@@EricBryantLook up what the Church Fathers teach on Salvation. Read the Biblically relevant Texts on this matter, and look at how they are interpreted (!) by the Fathers, see if you find agreement, study what the Church teaches too, the Church Fathers are not infallible. Finally, pray with an honest heart, for answers that are relevant to this life and be led by the Holy Spirit. Talk to your Priest.
@@EricBryant Podvig: Baptism, Chrysmation, repentance (including regular formal confession to priest), prayerful consideration of every momentous decision, divestment from those things that world gropes at (political power, riches, renown, secular glory).
The idea of an all-knowing Supreme Being who would know in advance that mankind would fall into sin and by doing so, billions would suffer eternally, and yet would go ahead and create those beings, should HORRIFY anyone with a conscience. Would God, who is described as being love - that is, it is His very being to be love - do such a thing? If God foreknew that mankind would fall and as a result, billions would be condemned to eternal suffering by the action of His creation, and yet He went ahead and did it anyway, then the only conclusion you can come to is that this suffering was the entire purpose of creating these lost beings. That is terrifying beyond all expression and does not make me particularly feel that this the "God who alone loves mankind" as we say in Orthodoxy.
I see you have great zeal for this issue, which I commend and praise wholeheartedly. I also see you have felt the need to share many lengthy comments attempting to defend your position. The main message I get from what you have written is that you seem to think you are more loving and more just than the saints the Church has glorified and recognized as being in union with the One Who is Love. Do we dare act this way? Do we stand in judgment of the Saints? You quote from a book that says what the saints say, unless speaking in an ecumenical council, amounts to nothing more than a "only a theologoumenon, a privately held understanding or definition." Am I then to treat your words with more authority than the saints' so-called "theologoumenons"? This is foreign to the way of Orthodoxy and inevitably leads to views like yours that reject the Saints and assume to be more "loving" than they are, calling into the question the Holy Spirit at work in the Church to canonize saints and set them forth as example of righteousness. Regarding the ecumenical councils, I recomend you listen/read again the Synodical Letter of St. Sophronius of Jerusalem that was accepted by the 6th Ecumenical Council. Key excerpts include: “[Origen and other heretics] want an end to punishment” “alleging the restoration of all rational creatures, angels, human beings, demons” “we both speak of the consummation of the present world and believe that that life which is to come after the present life will last forever, and we hold to unending punishment” Video here with link to full text in the description: ua-cam.com/video/3PxYWzYY6h0/v-deo.html&ab_channel=OrthodoxWisdom I know you are convinced of your position and are probably not here to change my mind but rather the minds of those coming to this video who are not yet grounded in the truth. I respond here primarily for their sake. Are you more loving than the great St. Paisios, among countless others, some of which are commemorated in this video? St. Paisios, universally loved and recognized as a teacher of the faith, in unison with the other saints who are commemorated in this video, prophetically calls out to us, saying, "Struggle with all your power to gain Paradise. And do not listen to those who say that everyone will be saved. This is trap of Satan so that we would not struggle.”
@@OrthodoxWisdom Thank you for your irenic reply. No, I am not more loving than the saints. I am painfully aware of my shortcomings and sins, which is what makes this such a "hot-button" issue for me. I'm sure that you would agree that Orthodox soteriology deals with what we are ontologically, that is, we are not forgiven by some legal decree made in heaven, as Protestantism and, by extension, Roman Catholicism teaches. God deals with each one of us as we are, and according to Orthodoxy, the sins we hold to and love will be that which make the love of God to be experienced as torment. In short, I am such a mess, even with the Sacrament of Confession regularly, that since Christ God deals with us ontologically, I fear for my soul. Somehow, despite all my efforts, I am stuck in sin. This means that either I am a false believer who is destined for eternal hell (according to you) or I am a very sick child who, if Universal Restoration is true, is in for a painful healing of these sins in the next life, but not for being eternally tortured. Furthermore, I have dear children who want nothing to do with Christ because when I was a Bob Jones Fundamentalist of the worst and most dysfunctional kind, they did not see the love of Christ from me or the churches I attended, but rather saw nothing but condemnation and anger. They heard precious little of the love of God through Christ, but rather heard of this angry God who is returning someday to whup up on everyone. What child can love that? How is that God appealing. So my bad theological decisions, combined with the fact that God allows these heretics to spew their venom in the world, results in my children going to an eternal place of torment, if you are correct. My final question would be this: are the saints, as good, loving, and holy as they are, infallible in what they believe? Is it possible to have personal background and cultural pressures mold and shape one's understanding of God, especially if the Scriptures have been so horribly mistranslated by Latin translators who did not know Greek? These are deeply felt issues I wrestle with. My hope is in God's universal love, for as we say in the prayers of Orthodoxy, it is God alone who loves mankind. At the same time, as I look at the way that people run to sin, reject admonition, and refuse to repent, I do question in my heart Universal Salvation, not that God is not loving, but that we are so stubborn and determined in our sin. Pray for me, a sinner!
St John Chrysostom "Someone may ask: “Why didn’t God get rid of the devil as soon as he deceived man in Paradise?” This was because of His great concern for us. If the devil had reigned by force, then there would be some grounds for this question. However, since he has been deprived of such power and was left only with the ability to persuade-and it is up to is if we choose to listen to him or not-why do you want to reject the opportunity to prosper and eliminate the cause for crowns? Even if God had allowed the devil to exist, knowing that he would be unbeatable and that he would defeat every single person, this still should not make you skeptical. It would still be up to us whether or not we allow the devil to prevail, and he would be unable to defeat anyone by force-only them who voluntary submit to him. Additionally, if there are already many people who overcame his power, just as there are many who will defeat him in the future, why do you want to deprive these people (who will advance in virtue and attain a glorious victory) of such great honor? God allowed the devil to remain in order for man, who had been previously defeated by him, to vanquish him in turn. This will constitute the greatest hell possible for the devil and will bring upon him the worst condemnation. If one continues with this type of reasoning, one will end up blaming and finding fault with God’s providence, and defaming God’s entire creation. One will criticize God for creating mouths and eyes; for human beings use their mouth to curse God and preach corruptive beliefs, and with their eyes they desire things which they shouldn’t and fall into adultery. Does this mean that God should have created people without a tongue and eyes? With this type of logic, we should also cut off people’s legs and sever their hands, since legs are used to race toward a variety of evils and hands are often covered in blood. Not even the ears can be spared from this savage syllogism, since they accept unbeneficial sounds and convey destructive teachings to the soul. Therefore, we should also cut off the ears. If this were to happen, then we must also do away with food, drinks, the sky and the earth, the moon and all the stars, along with all the genera of irrational animals. What would be the need for all these things if man, for whom they were all created, was cut to pieces and so pathetically dismembered? Do you see how this lethal train of thought necessarily leads to a laughable and absurd conclusion? The devil does evil to and harms himself, not us. On the contrary, if we want, we can harvest innumerable good things on account of the devil-without, of course, him realizing or desiring this"
@@OrthodoxWisdom How can you not at least hope that his position might be true? Are you not afraid to possibly find yourself amongst those eternally condemned? I do not find, that he is full convinced about his "position", he just fights with all means available to even beg anyone free from torments & you could - instead of seemingly being satisfied about an outcome of your "position" - join in to pray and beg pardon for everyone. 🤷🏿
There is no contradiction between praying for everyone’s salvation, both those on earth and those reposed, and upholding the dogmatic truth, as established by ecumenical councils and the exceeding majority of saints, that not all will be saved. I hope and pray for the salvation of all but I do not entertain any rejection or modification of the Holy Spirit’s teaching that He showed forth through the holy fathers of the 5th, 6th, and 7th ecumenical councils.
Second problem: translation of the Fathers: From the book A LAYMAN INVESTIGATES UNIVERSAL SALVATION: Another problem with using the early fathers as a reference is that unless they are speaking in an ecumenical council, the best you can say is their reflections are only a theologoumenon, a privately held understanding or definition. Such thoughts do not have the authority of being sacred scripture, nor a canon of an ecumenical council. Therefore, appealing to them has no weight in the search for truth. They may be, in fact, quite influenced by the culture in which they were developed. For instance, the one theological school which taught eternal torment was a Latin school with its emphasis on crime and punishment. But there is a more fundamental problem. The writings from which he quotes are not in their original Greek language. What is posted on his site are Western translations, and as mentioned before, many of the linguists who took on the translation of the Greek into Latin were deficient in properly understanding Greek. The first proof Wallace offers is from the Epistle of Barnabas: “The way of darkness is crooked, and it is full of cursing. It is the way of eternal death, with punishment.” The Epistle of Barnabas (70-130 AD). In what language was the original written? That’s right-Greek! With a Google search, I found the original text. From our earlier discussion of the Greek word “aionios” you should realize there could be a problem with the translation of Barnabas from Greek to Latin, and then to the English we read today. The Greek word which has been translated eternal in Barnabas is the same aionios which Dr. Ilaria Ramelli has noted, does not necessarily mean “eternal.” There is a specific word for eternal in Greek. The Greek word for eternal is “adidios.” But when you have been taught to translate aionios as “eternal,” you follow what you have been taught as an obedient member of the church. It is also interesting to note that in the full English text online, the English translation uses the words “thou” and “thee.” I discount the Epistle of Barnabas as being an indelible proof of eternal hell. This is more likely Medieval translation from the Greek-and a bad one. Researching the next quote, from Ignatius of Antioch, I found more errors in translation. The New Advent translation of Ignatius’ letter to the Ephesians reads: Do not err, my brethren. James 1:16 Those that corrupt families shall not inherit the kingdom of God. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10. If, then, those who do this as respects the flesh have suffered death, how much more shall this be the case with anyone who corrupts by wicked doctrine the faith of God, for which Jesus Christ was crucified! Such an one becoming defiled [in this way], shall go away into everlasting fire, and so shall every one that hearkens unto him. This again is not what the Greek text says. It took me a few minutes to figure this out because in my research I was reading the New Advent mistranslation and trying to find it in the Greek text of Ignatius. Only when I went back to my friend’s paper did I realize my mistake. The translation in her paper is correct: Those that corrupt families shall not inherit the kingdom of God. If, then, those who do this as respects the flesh have suffered death, how much more shall this be the case with anyone who corrupts by wicked doctrine the faith of God, for which Jesus Christ was crucified! Such an one becoming defiled [in this way], shall go away into unquenchable fire, and so shall every one that hearkens unto him. That is exactly what the Greek reads. The Greek word for unquenchable is asbestos! What the translators have done here is to superimpose their own understanding on the text rather than look at the Greek words. Unquenchable does not mean eternal any more than red means green! The New Advent translation of Ignatius isn’t even in line with other Latin translations. It is profoundly dishonest to take the word asbestos and say it means eternal. Hebrews 12:29 For our God is a consuming fire. The early fathers taught that this unquenchable fire is the passionate love of God. It consumes all which is not like Him, cleansing us and making us pure. It can never be put out, never ended, never stopped. It is a love eternal, and thus is indeed the unquenchable fire. To try to make this the same as eternal punishment is reading into the text what Wallace desires to see and has been trained to see by those who have overseen his conversion to Christianity. The same is true of the next quote we are given, which is from Second Clement 5:5. If we do the will of Christ, we shall obtain rest; but if not, if we neglect his commandments, nothing will rescue us from eternal punishment. (“Second Clement” 5:5) Once again, the word translated eternal is aionios. By now it should start to be clear there are legitimately serious concerns with any of the quotes from the early fathers used by Infernalists to try to prove eternal conscious torment. You should also realize something else about the Early Fathers. These Greek-speaking men had great regard for the writings of the Apostles and St. Paul. If the word aionios in the Scriptures only meant eternal, then there is no way that the teaching of Apokatastasis would have hung around Christianity for five hundred years! It would have been early brought to a council, declared a heresy, and done with.
It was condemned at an ecumenical council. The book of Revelation uses the same word “aionios” to describe the punishment of the wicked as it does to describe God. Cope harder Origunt.
Mark 3:29 """but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit does not have forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin”"" No one thinks that this sin is Everlasting as though once you start blaspheming it never stops. It is called an "eternal sin" because it is committed directly against the Eternal One. Hebrews 6:2 """of the doctrine of baptisms, of laying on of hands, of resurrection of the dead, and of Eternal Judgement.""" No one thinks that this Judgment is Everlasting as though Judgement Day never ends. It is called Eternal Judgement because the judgement comes directly from the Eternal One. Hebrews 9:12 ""”Not with the blood of goats and calves, but with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption""" No one thinks that redemption is Everlasting as though the redeeming never ends. It is called Eternal Redemption because the redemption came directly from the Eternal One. Ephesians 3:11 """according to the eternal purpose which He accomplished in Christ Jesus our Lord,""" No one thinks this purpose is Everlasting as though it was never be achieved and will always be the purpose. It was called the Eternal Purpose because it was the purpose of the Eternal One. 2 Thessalonians 1:9 """These people will pay the penalty of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power,""" Neither should one think that this destruction is Everlasting as though destruction can never be achieved and therefore never ends. It is called Eternal Destruction because the destruction comes directly from the Eternal One. Matthew 25:46 """And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”"" Neither should you think that this punishment is Everlasting as though the punishment never ends and justice is never satisfied. It is called Eternal Punishment because the punishment comes directly from the Eternal One. And it is called Eternal Life because the Life comes directly from the Eternal One.
So eternal life that comes from the Eternal One is eternal, without end, and unceasing but eternal condemnation is temporal, with and ending point, and stops because…well it just can’t be?! A few of the saints in this video talk specifically about this parallel, and how it just that, a parallel. The only humble way to read the Scriptures is to read them while living the life of the Church, submitting to a true spiritual father, and with the humble awareness that the Holy Fathers are enlightened and together reveal to us the truth of Christ, including the truth of the Scriptures.
@@OrthodoxWisdom So you think Eternal Sin never ends? Once you start the eternal sin you never end it? And eternal judgement is judgement that never ends? Once judgement day starts it never ends? Its obvious that eternal life and eternal punishment means that the source is eternal but does not speak to the duration of the life or the punishment, otherwise you must treat eternal sin as a sin that never stops sinning and eternal judgement as judging that never ends.
The problem with your approach is it’s rationalistic and divorced from the holy tradition of the Church. It seems you think you can jump back to the Scriptures, connect to them and their meaning without being connected to the living tradition that produced and preserved such Scriptures and placed them in their proper place. You cannot be a faithful disciple of Christ and not be connected to the living saints and the most recent saints in time. In addition, do you take as authoritative the Ecumenical Councils? In this recording I read from the letter of St. Sophronius which was approved of by the fathers of the 6th Council. There is clear condemnation of hell being temporal and the doctrine of universalism. These questions are more basic to this current issue than just looking at the Scriptures and arguing over their meaning. The question really is: who do you trust?
@@OrthodoxWisdom I dont trust any Latinized church doctrine. It seems that Augustine was not qualified to interpret the scriptures, yet he was such a good speaker and writer of Latin that his thoughts gained the most ground. I dont trust men who are charismatic in that way. I also dont trust tradition just as Jesus did not trust tradition.
For it is evident that God will in truth be all in all when there shall be no evil in existence, when every created being is at harmony with it self and every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord; when every creature shall have been made one body. -Gregory of Nyssa, 335-390, who made significant contributions to the doctrine of the Trinity and the Nicene Creed. He was honored with the title of "Father of the fathers" by the Seventh Ecumenical Council.
St. Gregory of Nyssa was not impeccable despite his important contributions. God gives us a free will that we might choose Him rather than those things that did not give us and the universe being and gave man deified immortality. Those with faculty enough to make that choice (the unborn and infants excluded), who then choose the latter are the true designers and advocates of hell. Indeed, as Evdokimov stated: "Hell can be conceived of as a cage surrounded by mirrors; nobody and nothing is reflected in these mirrors but the image of oneself multiplied ad infinitum." Are persons not given sufficient time to deliberate between the imperatives of God and the premiums of the zeitgeist? The scriptures are clear that we are “without excuse” in this regard yet you strive to provide us with a clause. I understand how hard it is to imagine those we love suffering eternally. But were these deprived of a free will? Since we are not predestinationists we must reply no.
Why should punishment and torment last forever? Correction is one thing, but it’s not an act of correction because there is no chance of repentance. Why when people’s eyes are fully opened to the reality of their sin and God are they now tormented eternally? It makes very little sense to me. Ignorance isn’t a good reason to torture someone forever. Also what happened to the orthodox interpretation that Gods love will burn people who reject him, and that God is not actively allowing people to BE TORTURED. It’s a state of being. Why would someone who never really heard the Bible and died be tormented forever instead of God giving them an opportunity to feel regret about sin. It seems like a convenient theology for elitists who think only they will inherit Gods love, and it’s not for all. I think the age is not eternal like many others, and its purpose is for correction and repentance so God can have His creation fully reconciled to him. The Greek simply does not state endless eternal torment. Ions is terrible enough and should be avoided, although it may feel eternal it’s not. Because God being Good can do more than this for His children. As he states numerous times. That’s the Good news. We can be reconciled to him and avoid hellish torments
The scripture is extremely clear that God wishes for ALL to come to the knowledge of Christ. Unfortunately, most people have a self important view and a rebellious heart. God sends no one to hell, and sacrificed His Son to stop them. In the end God deals with everyone's heart, it's their decision how they respond.
@@BoyKagome whether you can convince yourself of what you think the word means, the Councils and Fathers understood it to mean an unending amount of time when they used the phrase “unto ages of ages.”
@@OrthodoxWisdom So will God wipe away every tear or not? Was Clement of Rome wrong, where did the apprentice of an apostle get the idea that all will go to heaven and not get corrected by the very apostle he trained under? Why does the lake of fire have sulfure, a purifying agent - if there is no purifying going on?
My opinion is there are two main factors that underlie our disagreement thus far: 1) a distrust of the Saints, or at least a need to more thoroughly sit at their feet and learn from them, and 2) holding tightly to the truth that God will never violate a man's free will. If we can hold on to these two things, not running to speculative academic theologians who are not purified and illumined like the Saints, then we will probably solve a lot of disagreements on this matter. Also, most importantly, we will both more eagerly repent and humble ourselves before Christ.
How will sinners continue sinning if the Devil/Satan is the source of temptations and by casting him away non will be tempted forever, we we're not made to love a person who fries and boils human people forever in lava, no-one could ever force thyself to love that, you would forever violate Christs first commandment to love God with all your heart. No amount of superficial distractions in gardens or singing hymns could make the heart content with billions burning infinitely beyond any number your can think of times itself. The human heart was not created for that to even be possible.
Daniel 12 does not say "everlasting." The Hebrew word is "olam" and it does not indicate an everlasting time without end. This same word was translated in the Septuagint as "aionios," which means "age-long" or "age-lasting." Thus, Matthew 18: 8-9 does not prove an "eternal fire" but rather, an "age-lasting" fire. Now this is nothing to scoff at and continue in sin because "all will be saved in the end." No, the presence of Christ to the wicked will be tormenting, painful, and chastening, but it will have an end. The purpose of the fire of God's love -- for this is what the fire is according to Hebrews 12:29, a consuming fire -- is to correct and cleanse. We see this in the mention of being "cast into a furnace of fire." The furnace spoke of in this verse (Matthew 13: 42 and 50) is a furnace for smelting. In other words, it is not a fire of hellish torment, but rather a furnace which purifies and cleanses. I don't understand Orthodox who want to follow Roman Catholic pagan beliefs regarding who God is, His character, and how He treats sinners. Honestly, of what character would be our Father in heaven if He, knowing beforehand that mankind would fall and billions of sentient beings would suffer eternal an unending horror, went ahead with creation anyway? Have you ever really meditated upon that? It appears that many Orthodox, like most Catholics and Protestant, dig as deep as they can to try to find some patristic evidence that an eternal hell of torment really exists. Meanwhile, they have to ignore the Greek of the Scriptures, the fact that it was Western patristics, influenced by Roman Empire thinking, who promoted the pagan idea of hell, and the fact that for the first 500 years of the Christian faith, Apokatastasis was widely taught and yet there was not one single council called with the idea that this was a heresy. I also don't understand why you are so in love with the idea of God punishing rather than healing His creation. So many people I speak with seem downright offended by the idea that God will cleanse all His children by fire and then shall "God be all in all." Do you sing "Christ has risen from the dead, by death He conquered death . . . " at Pascha? Well, if you believe that billions of souls will be locked in a state of death and torment forever, next Pascha, please refrain from singing that hymn as you really don't believe it. In your heart you believe that death wins, God locks souls into a state of eternal death (separation) and sin against Him, and that the Cross really wasn't all that big a victory. I'll listen to the rest of your broadcast later, but you aren't off to a good start when you misquote Scripture.
St John Chrysostom "If the evil are not punished, then another may say that the good are not crowned; and then where will the love of mankind and the righteousness of God be? So people, do not be fooled, deceived by the devil, - because all this is his (devil's) thoughts. If judges, gentlemen and teachers reward the good, and punish the bad, then how would it be appropriate if God would do the opposite, if the good and evil would be worth the same thing? When would you be evil and behind evil? In fact, if, while waiting for punishment, they do not lag behind evil, then, being free from this fear, not only not falling into hell, but also reaching the kingdom, where the evil would stop? I heard some sinners say that for fear, God threatened hell, as if it was impossible for Him, being merciful, to punish someone, especially one who does not know Him. Tell me, you, exposing God as a deceiver, who in the days of Noah poured waves over the whole universe, made that terrible shipwreck and arranged the death of our entire family? Who sent down those lightnings and thunders to the land of Sodom? Who drowned all of Egypt? Who destroyed six hundred thousand in the desert? Who burned the assembly of Avironovo? Who commanded the earth to open its mouth and devour the fellow practitioners of Korea and Dathan? Who at the time of David struck seventy thousand in an instant? Who during the prophecy of Isaiah killed one hundred eighty-five thousand in one night? But do you not see the everyday misfortunes that we sin? What would be the point if some were punished, while others were not punished? Genuine, if God is not unrighteous - and He is not just unrighteous - you will certainly be punished for sins; if God does not punish, because He is humane, then they should not be punished. That's even for these very words,"
@@mh7008 Of course there is punishment for evil doing. Both Jesus and St. Paul said we would receive for the deeds done in the flesh. No one escapes this. But the idea of an everlasting punishment which neither heals the sinner, nor accomplishes anything other than revenge, comes from paganism and not from God.
@@IrishEddie317 I am not one to disagree with the Orthodox saints or church fathers, I prefer to learn from them, rather than to question if they have it right or wrong. I thought it was paganism that taught that hell will not be eternal.
@@mh7008 If you will look at the history of Universal Restoration, you will see that it was predominantly the Eastern Fathers who taught it. The Western Roman Catholic Fathers appear to be the ones in love with the idea of God beating the hell out of people forever and never stopping. There is a very strong reason for this difference. The Latin speaking Roman Empire of Roman Catholicism was consumed with the idea of law, law breaking, and punishment. Everything about the Roman mind was about Roman law and Roman punishment, and they easily transferred this to God and the Gospel. Punishment is not good news, being healed and forgiven is good news. The gospel is supposed to be good news. An eternal hell, where 95% of the people who ever lived go there and suffer torture forever, does not qualify as good news in any way.
@@mh7008 One other thing. If you're going to learn from the Early Fathers, why not learn from the ones that taught God's mercy instead of God's anger and judgment?
With over 43,000 confusing denominations scattered worldwide, *you are not the Christian you like to think you are.* And that brings us to- “how do you factually KNOW you are following the true Christ?” You may claim the Bible as your belief source, well then which “correct” Bible- the Slave Bible, the Catholic Bible, the Protestant Bible, the Hebrew Bible, the Mormon Bible, the Jehovah's Witness Bible, the Gideon’s bible, or how about The Bishop's Bible from 1568? They all have a particular slant that expresses their preferred version of gospel. Once you figure that out now your credibility problems have *only just begun* since you must also PROVE to all your Bible choice is *the one that Jesus Himself would embrace, damning all the others.* Come on now, give it a shot, the world has been waiting 2,000 years for an answer.
The foundation of my faith in Christ and His Church, the Orthodox Church, does not rest on a set of God-inspired texts, but on the Body of Christ, "the Church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth" (1 Tim 3:15). It's the Church where Christ continues His incarnation, showing forth through the saints that he is and will always be "the Way, the Truth, and the Life" (John 14:6). My faith is not something that can be defined only by words, only by logic, or only by experience. My faith is solid, God help me, because He has shown Himself trustworthy to my entire being: my mind, my heart, and my soul. As Philip said to Nathaniel who wasn't sure about Jesus Christ, "Come and see" (John 1:46). If you really want to know what the Orthodox Church is and is what we say is true, one thing you must do is come to our churches, spend time with our living saints wherever they may be, experience in a small way our life in Christ, and in this way you will, "Come and see."
We are the True ones since we've been here from the very beginning. Our Church Fathers were the Apostles disciples that lived together with them and heard about Christ directly from them. St John the Apostle of Love died in 100-101 A.D. our St. Clement of Rome slept around the same time 101 A.D. St Ignatius of Antioch slept in 120 A.D and St. Polycarp another student of St. John the apostle martyred around 168 A.D. Read the Bible and you'll find that the Apostles left successors to continue their word and these successors are what we call the Holy Fathers. So Orthodoxy didn't just pop-out of nothing but was handed over to us by those very Apostles that lived with Christ themselves. If you don't consider the Apostles as fraudsters then I find it difficult to prove that Orthodoxy is something made up.
@@panagiotismakris8276 Very true, and the Orthodox faith IS the faith which was left to the world by the Apostles. Furthermore, it was passed down from faithful men to faithful men who guarded it at the cost of their lives. How then, if this faith was passed down and came from the Apostles, did the majority of theological schools teach Universal Salvation? How was it that Augustine admitted that there was a "great number" of people who believed in it? And how did it exist for the first 500 years of the Church without a whiff of the word "heresy" ever being spoken, nor any of its teachers, such at St. Gregory of Nyssa and St. Isaac of Syria, being condemned as heretics? Answer, please!
@@IrishEddie317 Let me answer in short: 1. St. Isaac never taught universal salvation. The writings that are attributed to St. Isaac of Syria and which are speaking of Universal Salvation and Nestorianism are not of St. Isaac. It's a mistake for Orthodox Christians to considered them as his. 2. St. Gregory of Nyssa teaching on universal salvation and apokastasis have been condemned by the Church Councils multiple times and other Church Fathers in their writings. Many times did the Fathers not recognize heresy in the beginning. St. Gregory of Nyssa was having debates with the heretic Apollinaris of Laodicea but he just considered them friendly debates. On the other hand, St. Basil the Great was asking for a Council to condemned Apollinaris and his ideas. Guess what! Apollinarianism was condemned in the end by the 2nd Ecumenical Council. Of course, someone will not be considered a heretic just because of a wrong theory they formulated, that's what the followers of the Popes believe. Church Fathers are humans after all and only Ecumenical Councils and the Scriptures are considered infallible. St. Augustine for example had expressed some wrong theories regarding salvation and he was criticized because of them, yet no Church Father regarded his as a heretic. However, because of those wrong theories the Church does not regard him as an authority on theology like other Fathers (St. Basil the Great, Gregory the Theologian, Gregory Palamas etc). It's exactly the same with St. Gregory of Nyssa. 3. Many times have heresies co-exist with the right teachings of the Church. Chiliasm was an idea that in the first centuries of Christianity was having massive influence, yet because the Holy Fathers fought against it, in the end it was condemned. The same can be said with Origen, though regarded a most respected teacher by many inside the Church, one man understood his heresies far before anyone else, that was Methodius of Olympus. He was writing against Origen heresies, while Origen was regarded by most as an authority on theology. In the end, Origen heresies where condemned by the Church. Just because some Church Fathers supported a theory or because an idea had massive support in the Church for some time, doesn't mean that this theory was part of the Church teaching in the beginning. What is regarded as Church teaching is what is accepted by the Consesus Patrum. How are we supposed to accept Universal Salvation as part of the teaching of the Church, when most Fathers have condemned it in their writings and there have been Church Councils against it? We accept only what has been accepted by the Fathers and that which has not been condemned by them. And universalism has been regarded as a heresy by many of them.
@@panagiotismakris8276 St Gregory of Nyssa has never been formally declared a heretic by the Church. You need to answer me this - HOW is it possible that the teaching of Universal Salvation existed from the very beginning of the Church? If it was a heresy that just popped up one day and started to get traction, like the Arian heresy, that would be one thing, but this goes back much farther than that. And how could ANYONE teach it if the Scriptures are so clear that the next life is eternal torment for the wicked? The Greek-speaking Fathers taught it, yet you and other Infernalists claim that the Scriptures teach "eternal torment" (aionios kolasis). Either aionios does not mean "eternal" (as taught by Dr. Illaria Ramelli and other Greek scholars) or they were not saints, but liars! Answer me this: QUOTE: "The idea of an all-knowing Supreme Being who would know in advance that mankind would fall into sin and by doing so, billions would suffer eternally, and yet would go ahead and create those beings, should HORRIFY anyone with a conscience. Would God, who is described as being love - that is, it is His very being to be love - do such a thing? If God foreknew that mankind would fall and as a result, billions would be condemned to eternal suffering by the action of His creation, and yet He went ahead and did it anyway, then the only conclusion you can come to is that this suffer was the entire purpose of creating these lost beings. That is terrifying beyond all expression and does not make me particularly feel that this the "God who alone loves mankind" as we say in Orthodoxy." How would such a God, who would so such a thing to sentient beings, be nothing more than an unspeakable monster. That is not our God. He is the one who "alone loves mankind." To create sentient beings you know will suffer eternally, when you have no need to create them, nor a plan to save them when they fall, is NOT LOVE! That is the heresy of Calvinism, that dark and demonic religion which ascribes to God that for His glory He creates the "non-elect" who will suffer forever without remediation. And finally -- and I could go on for hours here -- how do we Orthodox sing "Christ is Risen from the dead, by death He conquered death . . . " at Pascha when, according to Infernalist teaching, death is not defeated at all, but is kept alive by the will of God, with billions of people maintained in this state of death forever. THAT in no way to me sounds like conquering death.
I could not disagree any more with this whole pile of garbage! The video starts off with a misleading exclusion, the Bible verse actually says. "The smoke of their torment ascends unto ages of ages."not just "their torment ascends..." So whether these people ever get forgiven and released by God this smoke could keep going up, fulfilling this prophecy, until the "ages of ages" is over. Next is the fact that this translation, which is a correct literal translation, actually REFUTES everything else in the ENTIRE VIDEO! AMAZING! The entire "eternal torment" teaching hinges completely on the mistranslation of the greek word "Aion". Those who taught and believed in the eventual restoration of all God's children, His creation, were convinced that the word "Aion" should be translated as an age, or the english equivelent, an "eon". The adjective forms of this noun, "aionion" and "aionios" would be translated as something like "pertaining to the age", "enduring through the age", or "age enduring", but not as "eternal". Those who argued for eternal torment, the infernalists, believed this word "aion" could mean eternal, and the adjective forms could be translated as "forever and ever", even though they admitted that these words at other times should be tranlated as "age" or "world" or other terms not depicting eternality. For example Mat. 24:3 "What will be the sign of your return, and of the end of the 'aion'?" So they would admit it was up to the translators to choose which way to translate these words, but when they describe afterlife correction, they insisted the context requires the "forever" translation. But if you have no other reason to depict this afterlife correction as eternal, how does the context demand this? It becomes a form of "circular reasoning", as in "it must be translated as 'eternal' here because it describes afterlife correction, which we know should be eternal because of how we have translated "aionion". So this whole video is confusing because it uses the Universalist favored translation of this passage in the title, which actually defends the universal restoration position perfectly! If they are only punished for "ages" or even "ages of ages", then that may be a long, long, long time, but that does not depict eternal at all. All of the early church fathers who supported Universal Restoration through Jesus Christ would have agreed with this translation completely.
Hahaha if virtue is not necessary for salvation, I will go and do whatever with my life, even if I suffer 10000 years, God will eventually forgive me and in that way I will foolish God, right?
The Lord Jesus Christ established a Church which He promised that hell will not prevail against (Matthew 16:18). A Church that is the “pillar & foundation of the truth,” (2 Timothy 3:15), a “glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.” (Ephesians 5:27). Do you deny these words as being holy & true? The Lord didn’t just come on Earth, preach moral truths & the way of salvation, and dip leaving behind only a Bible that can be misinterpreted thousands of ways. The Lord didn’t even write anything Himself. He established a Church through His Apostles to continue to preserve His truth (true Gospel) and act as a vessel of His Grace for the salvation of mankind throughout the ages.
@@gravelroad1228Does God dwell in temples made by human hands? There's a spiritual church and then there are earthly churches. Only the latter smother the hope of universal salvation.
@@benc6537 I don’t see anything like this super holiness in these groups, just a great deal of conceit. It’s funny because you see the same people, Protestant fundies, trad Catholics, super conservative Orthodox who all think everyone else is damned besides them and really share the same spirit. The irony is If one of them is right, the other two groups are going to be roasting in hell
It's stories in old books. You don't know who wrote them. In the rare cases that the author's name is thought to be known, nothing else about the author's character, agenda, credibility, or state of mental health is known to any degree worth considering. Neither Jesus nor God wrote any part of the Bible. You worship stories. Hindu, Muslims, etc. Story worshipping. fi that's your thing fo for it, but be aware. That is what you're doing. Stories that you read and stories that people you about those stories.
you then discount all of history. for what would we know of what happened in the past if it was not stories in old books? this is how tradition is passed down. are you discounting the roman emperors, the middle ages, etc.? forgive me, your logic is faulty. you have to apply this thought to everything then, not just what makes you uncomfortable.
@@christophermessenger2262 of course we don't know anything about history but we have good reasons to believe it when we find both writings or archeological findings that confirm it. The Bible is not coherent nor with science nor in itself. The gospels are contradictory a lot of times. How do you know Bhagavad Gita is false then ??
@@christophermessenger2262 Let me clarify, old HOLY books. Most of which I suspect you discount without a 2nd thought also. As the saying goes there's lies, damned lies and history. History books should always be believed with an appropriate degree of skepticism depending on what is claimed to have happened. Nero eating an apple can be accepted or rejected with equal ease, Nero flapping his arms and flying around Rome should be doubted no matter how many times the author asks for Faith.
@@konyvnyelv. you're saying two different things. you affirm history/archeological findings but then you bring philosophy into your biased view against Holy Scripture. this is confirmation bias. you can not apply the philosophical 'law of contradiction' to Holy Scripture & not to everything else just because you choose to do so. you can not put the triune God in a box. the mind is not the generator of Truth. forgive me.
@@dimbulb23 dear RCW, you should not suspect anything about me because you do not know me at all. i appreciate & respect your words, but nobody is currently giving nor have they ever given their lives over to willing death for 2,000 years for a curated, specific claim such as Nero fiddling away at the burning of Rome. Though this has happened with Christ's claims through the Holy Orthodox Church. If you want to make your views more widely accepted by others that are reading, steer away from passive aggressive jabs after someone pushes back on your viewpoint. forgive me.
Hello my friend. I understand this way of thinking. I do not want to argue, but I just wanted to clarify this teaching in the way that I understand it. Please don't take this the wrong way. I am not attacking you or your faith. The way I see it, we believe that Jesus is the word of God who "was with God and who was God" (John 1:1). If Jesus is God, then the Virgin Mary is His Mother. Not that she created Him. He existed before her. However, it is through her that He comes into the world. In that way she is the Mother of Christ, and the Mother of God the Son. I'm sorry if I rambled on a lot. God bless you!
Christ derived His flesh from Mary via gestation. Christ was/is God. Hence, Mother of God. No one claims Mary created the second person of the Godhead.
INTRODUCTION: 00:00
Holy Scripture (KJV): 00:56
St. Ignatius of Antioch: 04:29
St. Justin Martyr: 05:01
St. Theophilus of Antioch: 05:14
St. Irenaeus of Lyons: 05:38
St. Hippolytus of Rome: 06:08
St. Cyprian of Carthage: 06:26
St. Cyril of Jerusalem: 06:43
St. Basil the Great: 07:25
St. Epiphanius of Cyprus: 08:20
St. John Chysostom: 08:50
Blessed Jerome of Stridonium: 09:43
Blessed Augustine: 10:10
St. Theodore the Studite: 12:43
St. Symeon the New Theologian: 13:08
St. Nicetas Stethatos: 13:48
Blessed Theophylact of Bulgaria: 14:14
St. Symeon of Thessalonica: 14:56
St. Elias Miniatis: 15:46
St. Ignatius Brianchaninov: 16:44
St. Theophan the Recluse: 18:00
St. Cyriacus the Solitary: 20:53
Blessed John Moschus: 21:50
Evening Prayers by St. John Chrysostom and St. John Damascene: 23:08
St. John Chrysostom: 23:30
St. Amphilochius of Iconium: 24:52
St. Ephraim the Syrian: 25:08
Synodical Letter of St. Sophronius of Jerusalem read and accepted by the Sixth Ecumenical Council: 26:15
Concerning the views of St. Isaac the Syrian: 29:44
Concerning the views of St. Gregory of Nyssa: 31:51
CONCLUSION:
St. Paisios the Athonite: 34:47
Prayer to the Mother of God during Compline of Great Lent: 35:15
Evening Prayer from St. John Chrysostom: 36:14
Can't thank you enough for this sir ...
Please pray that my soul will be willed to repentance.
A sober and thorough treatment of this reality is a medicine to melt our wild passions and lead them to God alone.
I am a catechumen and I am terrified of hell because I am no more than worthy of it.
❤✝ CHRIST IS RISEN ✝❤
❤💪🙏✝ GOD BE WITH US AGAINST EVIL AND TEMPTATIONS ✝🙏⛪🕊
Praise God that we know the truth!
This is good. Makes me consider my ways. Thank you
Completely terrifying and brought me to tears. I cannot understand it but I truly believe it. Lord help us.
What’s to understand?
@@l21n18 the experience of life after this life
@@Stephanie-el4sx how’s that hard to understand.
@@l21n18 probably because I’m not God, dude. Chill
@@l21n18 you cannot understand God
Thank you for this video and Glory to God
Sobering reminders! Thank you so much 🙏
Life is not to be enjoyed, but overcome. - Arthur Schopenhauer.
Why?
@@l21n18 Look at this world and tell me the places of sanity. Pure hardships, struggles, and sorrows is the majority than happiness.
@@sunriseschubert4391 even if that’s the case, I don’t see how the quote follows from that
@@l21n18 The Christian enjoyment is to be in God his goodness and his commands. The Christian struggle is against that which prevents one from coming to God.
@@prayunceasingly2029 ok, still don’t see the connection and it’s kinda weird to quote an atheist
Glory to God!
Your videos are excellent! We really need videos like these, not only for some very good apologetics, but simply because there does not seem to be a lot of videos on these heresies like evolution and universalism!
Glory to God. There is a lot that addresses these issue in text form but less in audio. And this video here is not a complete treatment of the issue but it should add something for those wanting to learn more and those hoping to save their souls. As always, I aim to present the teachings of the Saints, those enlightened by the one Who is Lord of all.
Thank you. I didn't know that THE WORD was still being published..
What are you referring to by “THE WORD”?
@@OrthodoxWisdom 🙏☦
@@OrthodoxWisdom I forgot to ask, I've seen some people say that the Synod of Jerusalem (1583 A.D.), which condemned the Catholics, purgatory, universalism, and the heterodox (among other things), is not dogma since it is not in the Ecumenical Councils. However, to refute this, we could say that the Synod of 1583 is included in the Synodikon of Orthodoxy which we celebrate every year (The feast of the Triumph of Orthodoxy).
However, people then say how the Synodikon list itself is not dogma. Do you have any good counter-argument for this?
Though these people follow the heretic David Bentley Hart (I use the word "heretic" as humbly as I can, I hope I'm not coming off as pretentious), who called St. Justinian an "imbecile" or something like that.
There is also anathemas for Universalism in the 5th and 7th Ecumenical council, but the DBH followers say how it does not matter since the "Emperor" called the council, so it somehow does not hold water.
In my opinion, Universalism does not hold water itself and is a house made out of sand.
That was a much needed kick in the pants. Thank you and God Bless you ☦️🙏🏻
God loves us that he gave his begotten son Jesus Christ to die for us for our sins. God is giving us a second chance. I repented from having lesbian sex with a woman. I left that because I want to live a righteous life. No sin is worth your soul in hell for eternity.
Amen and thank you for being strong enough to admit that our impulses and propensities are not who we are.
What would you say to this:
I readily admit that that which will befall those who will not follow Christ and who will reject the eternal gift of salvation offered to us by God, will be the worst thing that could ever befall a person. There is nothing worse.
However, I find it difficult to understand why God would choose to maintain the souls of his beloved lost creation in a perpetual state of torment with no hope or plan of bringing about their healing - simply imprisoning them in a state of torment, why? As some form of retributive justice?
This anecdote from Saint Silouan captures my feelings well:
It was particularly characteristic of Staretz Silouan to pray for the dead suffering in the hell of separation from God’, writes Fr Sophrony, and he goes on to recall an exchange that he overheard between the Starets and a somewhat dour hermit:
I remember a conversation between him and a certain hermit, who declared with evident satisfaction, ‘God will punish all atheists. They will burn in everlasting fire.’
Obviously upset, The Staretz said:
‘Tell me, supposing you went to paradise and there looked down and saw somebody burning in hell-fire - would you feel happy?’
‘It can’t be helped. It would be their own fault,’ said the hermit.
The Staretz answered him with a sorrowful countenance:
‘Love could not bear that,’ he said. ‘We must pray for all’
(no simple "everything is going to be okay so no worries" rejection of the Traditional teaching of hell, but also a recognition that eternal unending suffering of sinners is a profoundly difficult concept for a loving soul to accept, which will spur us on to deep, pained prayer of heart for the salvation of all humanity [like we find in Saint Isaac] rather than the somewhat detached, impersonal, and cold response we see from the "dour hermit" in the story. Essentially we should desperately hope and long for the "salvation of all" while painfully recognizing that our true freedom will likely lead to some being lost)
Thank you for this response and question. I completely agree that a loving heart would be in pain at the thought of even one soul suffering for all eternity, being "scourged by the scourge of love" as St. Isaac the Syrian put it. Praying for their souls, that somehow God would help them seems completely appropriate. Where I think some go too far is when their desire to help a suffering soul begins to erode the dogma of the Church, the dogma not just about hell and its duration, but about what has been revealed about the seriousness of repenting in this life and the intense value Christ places upon our free will and allowing us to exercise it.
We see this balance actually in St. Silouan who also said, "Only those who do not want to repent are not saved, and in this I see their despair, and I weep much, feeling pity for them." He also states, "What a pity it is for those people who do not know God. They do not see the eternal light, and after death they go to eternal darkness. We know about this because the Holy Spirit in the Church reveals to the saints what there is in heaven and what there is in hades."
St. Silouan shows us the royal path: deep pain of heart and prayer for all men, and love for the revealed truth, ultimately the one Who is Truth: Christ.
@@OrthodoxWisdom Thank you so much, that really helps a lot and I appreciate you taking the time to respond. God bless you and keep up all the good work you are doing 😇
Hi. You are right. The punishment will be eternal for nothing will remain from their bodies and souls. They will be destroyed forever. They will burn for a while, each according to their sins..but not for eternity. God is a God for the living and thats what He wants for all, thats why He sent His Son...so we wont die. But we choose our end and no matter how much it hurts Him, He allows us our freedom. So, I do believe you are right în your thinking.
@@miyaiun4723 This exact video literally shows that everything you are saying is heresy and condemned by the church
@@Zappacuda it's clearly what is taught in Scripture though. The "doctrine" of eternal conscious suffering can hardly be called historic.
Enough to make me repent and confess
fascinating how this video came up in my recommended right after me and my good friend had a conversation about annihilationism vs. hell. he and i knew that an eternal soul was dogma but he was unsure on scripture. i advocated for the everlasting soul, but couldn't produce scripture at the top of my head. ill be sure to send this to him.
My issue is being scared of being deceived by any of the churches. I am still vulnerable, because I have not done anything past realizing the truth and repenting(remorseful Repentance) because I don't know where to go. I'm frozen in fear and don't know who to trust for guidance in the church.
I have it too
Church isnt as important as faith. Do you believe in Christ as God? do you believe through him and only HIm you will be saved? you believe he died ans then ressurected?? Then youre christian. Different denomniations are just reflections of different cultures that come into contact with Chrsit
@@mikesmoth-v4w it's not that simple, say those words to a Mormon and they'll say yes. But if you know that religion you know it is far from Christ
@@Zappacuda Mormon isnt christian. I was refering to the millions of protestant denominations and catholics/orthodox
@@mikesmoth-v4w I know that, but I'm saying you're wrong that church isn't that important when there's false churches and they all say exactly what you said but have heretical beliefs tied to those phrases. A good church is needed to disciple a Christian in Gods truth :)
Thank you. I really needed some perspective on consequence today. Are you aware of any Saints that had trouble with ignorance to sin who finally saw the severity of sin and repented? Pride & substance (my prescribed medication) abuse, feeling very ashamed, weak. I want to run away and hide. I know I can't, sorry to go public on this but I don't know of any drug addict Saints I can appeal to for help....
We certainly run to the saints for help, but we also always run to the Lord for help. Despair is one of the worst sins. “It is human to fall. But it is demonic not to get up.” -St. John Chrysostom
Padre Pio was a (tobacco) snuff taker.
St. Peter was reminded that everything God made is clean. Jesus said, "it's not what goes into your mouth that defiles you but what comes out." Nevertheless if you don't have faith that what you are partaking in is God's will for you then repent you must. If it offends your brother to eat meat, then for the sake of peace and unity it might be best you not eat meat in his presence.
Have you tried looking into herbal alternatives to the prescription drugs you take? The Tree of Healing of All Nations? In Genesis we are told that God created every herb and seed for Man.
So does this gel with the concept that “hell” is being in Gods embrace and hating it?
Because that’s what I was told in catechism.
Hi. This is the fiery lake. It will be a real lake which will burn each person found there only according to their sins. Lord Jesus said they wont get out until paying for everything. Even if it burns you for a whole day its enough to make it seem eternal. But it wont burn for thousands of years. After paying for each sin, the soul will be distructed and what remains of the body will continue to burn until becoming ashes. So it will be eternal for their bodies and souls will dissapear forever. I know God cant bear any of his creations burning forever. He îs just not a monster. Yes, they will burn în fire but not for eternity. I hope this helps and I mean no harm by my words and I know I am speaking truth.
Before my entry into the Church, when I held universalist beliefs, I would hold up St. Isaac and St. Gregory as examples to support my case. But after being in the Church and developing the phronema of the fathers and reversing my belief in this soul-damaging heresy, it became something about St. Gregory (and St. Isaac) that caused me a great deal of grief and confusion. Because his brother, St. Basil, obviously was firmly against the heresy of universalism, so I would assume, being as close as they were, that St. Basil would have corrected St. Gregory concerning this? As well as St. Macrina, who I've heard held a similar view.
There is much more written about St. Gregory and St. Isaac than I presented here, but what I presented here helps shows that both of them taught things incompatible with the supposed views their universalist supporters think they held.
@@OrthodoxWisdom Yes, of course. Thank you for providing much needed clarification for me concerning St. Gregory's views.
What were you then?
@@l21n18 Before I became Orthodox I was Protestant.
@@OrthodoxWisdom is St. Isaac & Gregory treading on the line of heresy then? (Oof. That felt weird to even type 😕)
Everlasting and eternal, two words through bias incorrectly translated from Greek. Eastern Orthodoxy and its understanding of APOKATASTASIS speaks a better truth of God who ultimately wins through Jesus on the cross defeating death and ALL sin. This is a God that my heart intrinsically warms to, not a God who sees that which is of Himself (us) be tormented for ever as it were. Please check out ex Fundamentalist pastor now Orthodox Bradley Jerzak's brilliant and enlightened talk/book on a "MORE CHRISTLIKE GOD." So encouraging compared to the fear based Christianity that we have known especially since the Medieval Era and later Evangelical Fundamentalism.
I know that most persons understand by the story of Nineveh and its king, the ultimate forgiveness of the devil and all rational creatures. -St. Jerome
Universalism. Amen 🙏
So St. Jerome was in error. This is not unprecedented among the holy fathers. Far from it.
@@MaximusWolfeGlad we have you to set us straight. Now tell us about the divine plan to unite all things in Christ, and St John's visions of all critters singing God's praise.
@@benc6537
What are you on about? I’m not setting anyone straight. The scriptures, Church fathers and holy councils did that thousands of years ago. Unfortunately you reductionist blasphemers never got the memo.
Can people be saved after death? I.e. between the interval of our death and The Final judgement. I believe there is no salvation after the Final judgement, but between that time period, any hope for the deceased non orthodox? Are there instqnces of non orthodox being saved after death? Please?
If a person dies with some real repentance and faith, even if small, the prayers and active love of those on earth can benefit that reposed person, even helping him be saved. But for those who die not in repentance there is no hope.
See “Life after Death” by St. John Maximovtich: www.orthodox.net/articles/life-after-death-john-maximovitch.html
Also see this account from Elder Ephraim: ua-cam.com/video/B2wjSgk398Q/v-deo.html
Very interesting. Very true. It must be believed that eternal hell exists.
It is black and white.
No grey areas here.
So how come the serpent was associating with Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden if we are led to believe that the devil is not-NOT- to associate with the Good God and the saved in Heaven?
any thoughts please.....
That’s where these orthobros get stumped. Hell is God. It’s his presence. But the sinners hate it, Like the demons hate it.
Personally, i feel tge belief in an eternal hell is practical and edifyin and so i choose to believe. But i also proclaim Gods mercy is infinite and who am i to impose a limit on His saving power?
Those who defend eternal torment have not bothered to look deeply into its inconsistencies. First, eternal torment is not justice; it's cruelty. The essence of justice is BALANCE. There is no balance in tormenting someone forever for offenses that were done within a finite time frame. Even solitary confinement is more merciful than eternal torture. Are you saying that man knows how to be more merciful and compassionate than God Himself? Everyone can see that eternal pain for however many sins a person may have committed is essentially unjust. If anyone can judge such a sentence as cruel, then should we also say that God would be the worst tyrant and sadist that has ever existed and could ever exist?
You mention that supposedly the Lord appeared to one of those fathers and said that mercy is seduction and deception from the devil. But if we examine that, do we find that as true? Is it better to see that mercy and love prevailed? Or cold and unyielding justice, bordering on cruelty prevailed? What purpose does it accomplish to have someone suffer forever? Have you bothered to think about that? Have you thought about all the implications? It would mean that God is not just a sadist, but a masochist as well. Because if He loves, then the suffering in the lake of fire would cause Him suffering as well. So, not only would those beings suffer forever, but so will God. And also as Revelation 16:7 states, God's judgments are just and true. People realize that not just because God says that they are, but because God will allow them to see that His judgments are indeed so. It's the essence of truth. It's not just because He says so, but because in essence they are true. So He will let people understand why they are so; why He had to judge like that.
Eternal torment goes against justice, against mercy. Therefore, it cannot be true. And what you said in the video that there are only 2 places in the spirit realm, if we compare with reality, do we see that as true? Are there only 2 places on the Earth? Is there only one world that exists in all reality?. No. Therefore, heaven and hell are not the only places where people go after they die. Just like the Bible does not tell you that Japan exists or France exists; does not mean that they really don't exist. Truth is reality. Revelation expands the minds and is also progressive. How is mercy deception when we all know that eternal torment is the worst possibility? So when the Bible says that God's mercy is forever, then He suddenly forgot all about mercy for the people in hell and the lake of fire? Who is more in need of mercy? Those in heaven or those in hell and the lake of fire? So mercy ceased to exist for all eternity?
As someone inquiring into Orthodoxy I'm struggling with accepting the possibility of ECT. Not only does it seem unjust, but it seems to go against Scripture, entirely. I'd argue there is a much, much, much stronger case for annihilationism. Some of the most well-known early Church Fathers like Iraneaus seem to hold this view as well.
According to some scholarly sources, among the first 300-500 years of the 6 major schools of early church catechism, only the one in Rome taught eternal torment, the rest were either some form of universalism, or annihilationism.
@@catalyst3713 I think that souls can be taken out of hell and can also be annihilated. In both scenarios, mercy is demonstrated. But in eternal torment, there is no mercy and no love. I have thought about this subject deeply. I analyzed the picture with every piece of information I know. For one, God and the devil can make salvation so hard that it's almost impossible to be saved. The easiest way would be to ask for forgiveness of all sins right before you die.
Why did I say that God and the devil make salvation hard? Because God allows the devil to increase evil in the world and lay all kinds of traps without people knowing, and then he goes and accuses people of things that they don't know about. Or He allows the devil to infiltrate society so much, that then he goes to the heavenly court to accuse people of using his products and therefore he has claim over those souls. But God was the one who allowed the devil to infiltrate society to such a degree that almost 100% of all industries are corrupted by the devil in some way. The devil could claim that all souls belong to him because the internet is his and everyone that uses the internet belongs to him. Just like he claims that anybody that uses any form of adornment on their bodies belongs to him because the Bible supposedly forbids adornments. What's the role of art then?
And then what about the people who sin in whatever way, but behind the sinning is ignorance. Not that they don't know if something is wrong, but if an undesirable reaction emerges from within them, they don't know what to do with that and are just carried away by the reaction. So they sinned. Does ignorance warrant infinite pain forever and ever? What about the people who have a hard time changing the way they think? What if they have a hard time expanding their minds? What if they have a hard time humbling themselves? What if they have insecurities? Traumas? Wounds that all influence the way they think and behave? Are they all supposed to suffer infinitely because of all those things?
And then we have the question of why God decided to make the conditions on Earth so tough? First, we take God by His word that He is love. He shows that by placing in parents the ability to love unconditionally. When parents have their children, they remember how much they loved the child even when the baby is still forming in the womb. And then as the child grows, they remember all the tenderness they felt as they watched the child sleep and grow. So then, God who claims to be love, prefers to cast the being He incubated spiritually even before life on Earth, whom He loved as He incubated him or her, spent time with that spirit in heaven, knew the spirit and then decides to discard him or her forever because that person failed in some way here, or refused to do what He wanted. Did God forget all the love He felt? Even with all the tests that He let the person go through to purify and expose the person's true condition, is it better to let that person end up in eternal torment and then He cries about it because He exposed that person so much to the point that it's clear the person cannot or will not love God 100%? Or would it be better to accept that even if the person whom God claims to love, cannot or will not love Him 100%, God as a superior being of love, could still get to spend time with the person He claims to love, and make memories with him or her despite knowing that the person could possibly rebel against Him in the future? Wouldn't that be better than throwing that person into eternal torment and trap the individual in pain and a place that they will never be able to escape? At least God had years in heaven with that person, got to love the person, got to embrace the person, etc. Even if the person rebels in the future, it would have been better than discarding him or her forever because He can see that there's rebellion hidden in the heart. And then He cries about it because the person is suffering forever in hell. Does it have to be so? If God is suffering is because He wants to suffer. It would have been easier for Himself and us to make us so that we could not even conceive a thought that could oppose His will. If all He wanted was people who always did what He wants, robots would have been a much easier choice for us and for Him. He would have spared Himself and us the pain. Especially the pain of hell and the lake of fire. But He wanted things to be hard for Himself and for us. He does not have to be crying for the souls suffering in hell. If He is crying now, with foreknowledge, is because He wanted the pain. He wanted the challenge.
But this is why I reject the idea of eternal torment. It paints God as a masochist and a sadist. If we as people have to learn to let go of people who don't love us, why can't God let go too? Why can't He let those people live in a place where they are not suffering, but without Him? And if He loves them so much, He can visit them periodically, but do they have to be in a constant state of suffering?
I'm a Christian, but I don't like seeing extreme forms of justice. When I see things like only 1% or 2% make it to heaven, I don't even want to believe those numbers. Because that would mean that love, light and goodness did not really prevail. And God put Himself in a losing position. He got into an investment where He knew that He would lose almost 100% of the people He claims to love. What, Jesus died for only 1% to be saved? Where's the love that you claim to have for the other 99%? When you made things so hard so that only 1% or 2% can be saved? Something is not right there. And all this for what? To see who really loves you? Shouldn't God who is the superior being, prioritize and prefer loving His inferior creations with their imperfections, than Him testing them in every way possible to see who would love Him above all? I know that even if the people I love do not love me 100%, I would prefer to be able to be with them and love them than discarding them forever. After all, is it not better to give than to receive? Yes, there should be justice, but I don't agree with extreme justice. And let's not forget that the majority of the sin in the world is due to ignorance in one way or another. If you analyze the situations deeply, you will see there's some form of ignorance behind the sinning. And not only is there ignorance, there is weakness too. So, should people be eternally tormented due to ignorance and weakness?
No one escapes the Salvation of God
No one escapes judgment of God. The souls that chose Him in this present life will be covered in Mercy, those who rejected Christ in this present life will be covered in condemnation. Most souls will escape God's salvation
I agree that all souls are judged (set right) by God...We can trust the Judgements of God....Isa 26:9 for when Thy judgments are in the earth, the inhabitants of the world will learn righteousness.
Salvation is the Work of God which includes His Just Judgements
@@undergrace722 Most people will go to he'll for an eternity, not be saved.
@@JWM5791 1 Tim 2:3-4 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;
Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth...Amen
Unending punishment is arbitrary in every sense and has no true telos, any more than coherent reasoning. God is worthy of nothing less than the redemption of all, and therefore will not settle for less than such a resolve. Justice at the end of the day should look like God getting what He deserves rather than what we deserve or don’t deserve. And what does He deserve? He deserves all that Christ sowed in His death and reaps in His resurrection. There could be no greater glory than such a redemption.
Any so-called “father of the faith” that would deny this based on their clouded understanding of a sacred text never truly knew love or justice, and it’s a shame they should be revered as saints.
Christ, have mercy😔💔🙏
What heresies are you spewing?
@@voievod9260the Origenists decided to raid this video, sadly. Pray for them.
Your just trying to reinvent Christianity by appealing to emotions elicited by the prospect of post eschatological immutability. But having a free will means being answerable. That is the blessing and the implication. There is no esoteric clause you’ve discovered that provides you a a greater vantage or wisdom than these great fathers and bearers of the faith. Universalism is an apostasy.
@@voievod9260is it a heresy to affirm the total victory of Christ?
Thanks for posting. Its probably hate speech to remind people of Hell tho 😂
There are very many in our day, who though not denying the Holy Scriptures, do not believe in endless torments. - Augustine (354-430 A.D.)
What does that prove vis a vis Church doctrine? The many are often woefully wrong while the few are entirely correct. Orthodoxy isn’t a numbers game.
Augustine also promoted the error of Original Sin.
We can set no limits to the agency of the Redeemer to redeem, to rescue, to discipline in his work, and so will he continue to operate after this life. -St. Clement of Alexandria 150 - 211 AD
Clement of Alexandria is not a saint, but a heretic
Amen 🙏. These Infernalists keep being bitter.
@@thecarlitosshow7687 This man is just another in a long line of converts to the Orthodox East who has dragged in hell from the West (hell is a Roman Catholic invention which got its real start with Blessed Augustine) and is determined that everyone should go to hell except the repentant. Born in Africa and never heard the Gospel so you can repent? Awwww, but too bad for you! Demon-possesssed and not in your right mind because of a generational curse and you die. Well, that's just too bad, but you earned it by being born into the wrong family! After all, Christ only died for those who are "worthy" of salvation, right?
Sorry for the snark, but these hellists really get under my skin with their instance that our loving heavenly Father is just like the pagan gods who demanded that the children of Israel burn their infants as an acceptable sacrifice in order to insure good crops for the coming year.
@@thecarlitosshow7687
It has nothing to do with bitterness. It’s the overwhelming consensus of the fathers (so that finding a few contradictory quotes is not compelling argumentation), the holding of the 6th council and teaching of scripture. No one is delighting in the immutability of eternal damnation. Nothing could be sadder.
@@MaximusWolfe all you’re saying is making fallacy’s. Youre committing an appeal to authority and an ad populism fallacy, and no one wants to burn in the flames to be tortured for ever. Where’s your actual argument for ECT?
The church fathers are fallible human beings. St Justinian the emperor is a fallible human and he’s not God. St Augustine was wrong to promote Eternal punishment in the Latin church.
Jesus Christ, the apostles and Saint Paul held to Universal reconciliation and so did The Early church did for 500 years. Even st Isaac the Syrian after the 5th ecumenical held to universalism and lived in the year of 700 ad. Also Scripture itself points to Universalism. Jesus is the Savior of All. Eternal Torment cannot confirm a God of Infinite Attributes of Love, Goodness, Knowledge, and Power if he is to send them to Torment forever. Well actually he can be all powerful and and all knowing if he does but then he’s not all love and goodness. Only an immoral doctrine such as eternal torment is insane and Evil God.
So the question becomes: how do we avoid this eternal torment?
Repent, be baptized, and keep repenting!
@@OrthodoxWisdom I'm just beginning as a catechumen, so I cannot yet take confession. Although I do confess my sins and ask for our Lord's mercy each day. I'm looking forward to being baptized and chrismated in the Church, but as you know this can be a lengthy process. Father Joseph told me to "slow down" and take my time lol.
Yes I understand. I’m also a convert and I remember saying similar things and gently being assisted in channeling my zeal in healthy ways. Say your prayer rule everyday, fast, give to others, read the Saints a little at a time and go to the services as often as you can. God help you on your journey.
@@OrthodoxWisdom Bingo!!! I somehow KNEW you were a convert. Let me guess. X-Calvinist or perhaps Southern Baptist? Seems that the loudest defenders of the horrendous idea of God torturing people forever are Western converts who come into Orthodoxy and bring their eschatological baggage with them.
It matters not what I say, but what the Ecumenical Councils and the Holy Fathers say. I’d be happy to defend universalism if it wasn’t a heresy condemned many times over. I take no pleasure in the suffering of sinners. I do, however, take pleasure in defending the truth for the sake of everyone coming to salvation. Deal with the teachings of the Holy Fathers.
So who's depicted in the devil's lap?
The wretched antichrist
Can you explain then why, in the original Greek NT text, Jesus himself describes afterlife punishment in Matthew 25:46 as "aionion kolasin", which properly translates to "age-lasting correction", not eternal punishment?
bible is no longer the word of God. It's pretending to be, to serve the sickly needs of those who truly control this world
That refers to the coming age, i.e., the unbroken and immutable place without time. Since their is no duration there there is also no opportunity for protraction in reclamation. This is why we must repent and be joined to the mystical body now, where time, according to its unique attributes, allows us to go from one thing to another.
@@MaximusWolfe If it is a place without time, it would not be described as an age. An age is a non-specific period of time, but it is still a period of time. It is illogical to say that, for a period of time (an age), time will not exist. Moreover, why would Jesus describe afterlife punishment as "correction" if the purpose was to punish offenders forever? The purpose of correction is to improve the character and behavior of the offender so that they will not offend in the future. What would be the point of that if the punishment lasts forever?
@@alwaysadawg6488
Time/duration and concomitant deterioration is the effect of the fall. An overwhelming amount of the Church Fathers agree on this.
Ontologically speaking, God being uncreated (there never being a time when He was not) indicates that He is not bound by protraction in the way that His creation is after the lapse of Adam.
In heaven there is union with God and the effect of that reciprocity would be that we are joined or reintegrated to Gods timelessness (“partake of the divine nature”).
To assume the word age means protraction is a classic example of the word concept fallacy. Age can have more than one meaning or referent. It can refer to something that transcends the attributes associated with time.
Although time is one of the great mysteries, we do know that it effects the creation in terms of deterioration.
Will we get old and die in heaven? Of course not. So it follows that time has passed away in heaven and that indicates that time is provided hitherto the eschaton for persons to “work out there salvation with fear and trembling.”
@@alwaysadawg6488
Time/duration and concomitant deterioration is the effect of the fall. An overwhelming amount of the Church Fathers agree on this.
Ontologically speaking, God being uncreated (there never being a time when He was not) indicates that He is not bound by protraction in the way that His creation is after the lapse of Adam.
In heaven there is union with God and the effect of that reciprocity would be that we are joined or reintegrated to Gods timelessness (“partake of the divine nature”).
To assume the word age means protraction is a classic example of the word concept fallacy. Age can have more than one meaning or referent. It can refer to something that transcends the attributes associated with time.
Although time is one of the great mysteries, we do know that it effects the creation in terms of deterioration.
Will we get old and die in heaven? Of course not. So it follows that time has passed away in heaven and that indicates that time is provided hitherto the eschaton for persons to “work out there salvation with fear and trembling.”
Well, I guess I'm going to hell no matter what I do, since even going through the motions won't stop the bitterness and resentment in my heart.
Never give up. Keep hope, even if it feels stupid. Do you have a good priest near you? Do you want help getting connected to one?
Why all the prayers for the dead?
You mean... departed.? Orthodox God is the God of the living. In Him all are alive. We pray to Him to have a mercy on our departed and grant them the everlasting life in His Kingdom.
When the writings of the Early Fathers - those that are not specifically done in an ecumenical council, which we are obligated to believe and practice - go against that which the Apostles wrote in the Sacred Scriptures, which one has authority? When St. Paul says that God will have mercy on ALL, and yet the Fathers claim that the vast majority of human beings will not be treated with mercy, but burned forever, which one am I obligated to believe?
I believe the answer to your question is in the video.
Are you mentally ill?
You listen to St Paul as interpreted by the Holy and God bearing Fathers. The same Holy Spirit inspired them all. What you don't do is put yourself above the Fathers, as though you correctly understand St Paul but the God Bearing Fathers were too dumb and unenlightened to.
@@woodstocklad The God bearing Fathers, St. Isaac of Syria, St. Gregory of Nyssa (the "Father of the Fathers"), St. Clement, The Cappadocians, St. Macarina, and a host of others, all taught Universal Salvation. Was St. Augustine a "God-bearing Father?" Was Tertullian a "God-bearing Father? Both of these taught eternal hell. So who is right?
Tertullian and Augustine were both members of the Latin Church. I find it interesting that it is the Latin Fathers who insist upon an eternal torment of sinners, while the Eastern Fathers embraced God's all-inclusive love which results in salvation for all mankind. What this shows me is that culture has a strong influence on how we think about God and how we approach Him.
Hi. There will be those who will be destroyed în that fire. Otherwise Lord Jesus wouldve died în vain. He died to rescue as many as possible from that real reality. So, not all will be saved. I hope those saved will outnumber by many those who will be destroyed. May God forgive us all but May His will be done for He knows what can be done and what cannot be done for the good of all beings.
But people ca be saved out of hell, until the Second Coming of the Lord, by prayer, and if they come for the Throne on the Last Judgement, they can repent and eventually be saved. After that there is no possibility anymore. Or am I wrong here, but that is the reason we pray for the dead, that they will be saved and be safe?!
St. John Maximovitch writes, “Some souls find themselves (after the forty days) in a condition of foretasting eternal joy and blessedness, and others in fear of the eternal torments which will come in full after the Last Judgment. Until then changes are possible in the condition of souls, especially through offering for them the Bloodless Sacrifice (commemoration at the Liturgy), and likewise by other prayers.”
www.orthodox.net/articles/life-after-death-john-maximovitch.html
What I’ve seen from my reading is that for anyone to be saved they still need love and repentance in this life. If their repentance was real but weak, then our prayers and offerings for the them can be beneficial, as God loves all. None of this overcomes the will of the person. The free will is still held intact. That is why repentance is still necessary in this life and when we die.
These are deep matters! Run to the Saints!
The Adventists PREACH the wicked should ignore the warnings of eternal torment! These very scriptures were intended to send stark terror in the hearts of the wicked that they would turn to Christ and righteousness. Yet, Ellen G. White the Adventist Church says to ignore them and do everything they can to force them to be meaningless to the wicked! Christ commanded His Church to preach these things, but the corrupt Sabbath keepers forbid it as they did in Acts 5.
1. The Adventists all teach *the undying worms are eating on a dead body* so that you can tell THE WICKED they won't feel any pain or torment. *When the truth is, the scripture is speaking of the TORMENT OF THE WORMS EATING ON THE BODY AND SOUL OF THE WICKED NEVER TO STOP!* (Mark 9:48, Isaiah 66:22-24)
2. The Adventists teach the wicked that *the unquenchable fire, will be quenched in a few second so, so THE WICKED won't feel any pain and have nothing to fear.* *When the truth is, the scripture is speaking of the TORMENT OF THE FIRE BURNING THE BODY AND SOUL OF THE WICKED NEVER TO STOP!* (MT. 5:41-45)
3.The Adventists teach the WICKED *the torment of the wicked in Hades is just a grave,* so you don't have to worry about being punished with torment like Christ Himself taught about the wicked rich man.
*When the truth is, the scripture is speaking of the TORMENT OF THE FLAMES BURING ON THE BODY AND SOUL OF THE WICKED NEVER TO STOP!* (LUKE 16:19-31)
4. The Adventists teach, *the soul CAN be killed when the body is killed,* so the WICKED don't have to worry about being punished after death as Christ taught. *Moreover, if the soul dies with the body, than other people COULD kill both the body and the soul in one act* Mt. 10:28 *says the soul CANNOT BE KILLED*
5. *The Adventist's are preparing the way for the Beast and the False Prophet* The Adventists teach *eternal punishment is annihilation,* so they won't fear eternal punishment and repent of their sins. You all make void the word of God by your traditions and lies.
The Adventists have made *the threat of eternal punishment meaningless* which was intended to make the wicked repent lest they go to eternal punishment. Adventists make the threat of unquenchable fire meaningless, because you claim it only burns for seconds. *When the truth is, the scripture is speaking of the TORMENT NEVER TO STOP TORTURING THE BODY AND SOUL OF THE WICKED*
6. *The Adventists have made the threat of unquenchable fire meaningless* which was intended to make the wicked repent lest they go to the unquenchable fire, now they do not repent and neither do you all. Adventists make the threat of the torment of the gnawing of undying worms meaningless, because you claim, they only eat dead bodies that feel no pain!! Oh how the false prophet and the beast's love the gospel of annihilationism. They Adventists are preparing the way for the false prophet. Do you think for one moment the false prophet will promise the torment of the wicked if they are worshiped? Not for one second, they will tell everyone how there is no immortal soul and torment of the wicked at their death.
7. When Christ speaks explicitly and says the entire Old Testament ( *the law and the prophets* ) warn of the soul of the wicked being punished immediately after death, The Adventist say, IGNORE IT, IT'S JUST A "PARABLE" so that the WICKED will not repent and neither will the Adventists.
8. When Christ says, the rich man wanted to warn his five living brothers, "lets they come to this place of TORMENT", Adventist teach there is no torment in Hades, it's only a grave and a pile of dirt. The truth is that "HADES" is never the grave.
9. When Christ says, that they wouldn't believe even if the rich man came back from Hades and told them OF THE TORMENT IN HADES the Adventist Church says, men aren't alive in Hades. JUST IGNORE CHRIST AND HIS WARNING, hades is just a pile of dirt so that the WICKED ADVENTISTS WILL NOT REPENT exactly as the false prophet and the beast would have you believe! When, the opposite is true.
10. Here in Luke 16:19-31 *Christ opens the people's eyes unto the unseen world immediately after death and the Adventist despise Him for it!* Here Christ warns them what will happened to them if they refuse to repent, and the Adventist despise and blaspheme Christ for doing so. Christ let's every man know what happened to all the wicked in Noah's time, and to those in Sodom and Gomorrah and all the wicked down through the ages including false teachers and doers of evil and the Adventist despise Christ for it rather than repent of their sins.
God is immortal and when God created man, he said, "let us make Man in OUR image" and then He breathed in to man and made him A LIVING SOUL. God is immortal and so He made man in His image. You all can't get the simplest things correct. God did NOT breathe into the animals as He did man!
*The Adventists have made the threat of unquenchable fire meaningless which was intended to make the wicked repent lest they go to the unquenchable fire,* now they do not repent and neither do you all.
*Adventists make the threat of TORMENT IN HADES meaningless, because you claim it's only a dirt grave!* The Adventists have made the threat of the torment in Hades meaningless, now they do not repent and neither do you all.
*Except you repent, you will deserve every thing you get!*
>
*This was writen to the Adventists* The Adventists and the cults seize upon every place in the Old Testament where the destruction of the wicked is promised on a physical level and then say it mean annihilation, just as the rich man's brothers did not know of the torment of the wicked themselves. While every reader of the Old Testament scripture and prophet who wrote them were NOT annihilationist at all. Just as the author did not believe in annihilation of the wicked so the reader did not as well. They knew that when God had destroyed the wicked in the flood or Sodom and Gomorrah, God had intervened in human affairs to send those wicked directly to hades to be tormented because they were no so much as to be allotted time to repent. This is thoroughly and explicitly shown in the teaching of Christ that "Moses and the Prophets" had taught the torment of the wicked immediately after the death of body. And, this is not concealed at all in the Old Testament. Therefore, all those who use the Old Testament scriptures to support conditional immortality are condemned by Christ. Because Christ taught the Old Testament taught the exact opposite of conditional immortality.
Likewise, the carnal minded Adventist seize upon every place where the destruction of the wicked off the earth is spoken of when it speaks of the person's body and not their soul. Yet every reader of the Old Testament truly understood that that was not the end of the punishment for the wicked and that their soul continued to be punished. But, the fleshly minded Adventists only see what is visible to them and not believing God or Christ about the torment of the soul of the wicked immediately after death as Christ and the Apostles taught. The Adventists, the Atheists and the JW's are just like the rich man's 5 brothers! They ONLY saw that he was physically dead and knew NOTHING of his UNSEEN TORMENT IN THE FLAME. Therefore, like the carnal minded The Adventists, the Atheists and the JW's refuse to hear Christ's words about the unseen torment of the rich man in Hades. Because, they can only see with the flesh even when Christ warns them of what will happen to them also after death. The Adventists, the Atheists and the JW's refuse to believe. Thus, Christ answer them, "Neither would they believe even if someone came from the dead to warn them. And, so it is with these fools.
In Revelation 14:9-11, we are told that anyone who worships the beast and receives his mark “will be tormented with burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment rises forever and ever.”The Adventists, the Atheists and the JW's and all the wicked preach that no one will suffer* *torment forever and ever* A complete denial of the teachings of Christ and the Apostles. And, they do so because they have been taught that the true Christ is "Satan" , while it is Satan himself, that leads them to deny the explicit words of scripture. And, because they disbelieve the scripture, they FIGHT against Christ and his Church, as an agent of the Wicked One.
And, what do you suppose the beast is telling the wicked who worships them? That if they do they will be tormented forever and ever? Who would then follow them? The Adventists, the Atheists and the JW's will believe the beast when He tells them there is no HELL AND NO TORMENT, THEY ALREADY HAVE BELIEVED AND FOLLOWED THAT GREAT FALSE TEACHING. Then what do The Adventists, the Atheists and the JW's and the wicked do? They call Christ "Satan, a Monster, a Tyrant" because they have been taught by a false prophet to hate the just and righteous punishments of Christ upon the wicked.
The carnal mind only see what is fleshly and not as Christ and the Church taught. Adventism is fully carnal. When they see the wicked die, they only see the death of the body and not the torment of the soul. This is exactly what happened to the rich man in Luke 16:19-31. Any 3rd grader can read the story and see the end of the matter, but not an Adventists, because they have been WILFULLY blinded by their carnal mind and Ellen G. White. Like Sodom and Gomorrah the people in Edom are still burning and in torment. That is what Christ, and the Apostles taught. You guys are so carnal you can only see what is earthly. You are fully prepared to go to hell yourselves for corrupting the gospel of Christ and the Apostles and charming the wicked. You all have sent all your followers to hell and many more millions who did not repent with your Atheistic gospel of soul sleep and annihilationism. Get ready, because except you repent, you will find yourself there shortly.
Why do the Adventists and their like, so despise the eternal punishment? Because, they know they are evil and rather than repent of their evil, they find it much easier to deny the explicit teachings of Christ and Christ Himself, than to repent. A righteous man does not fear the just punishments of God.
1. Revelation 16:7
And I heard another out of the altar say, *Even so, Lord God Almighty, true and righteous are thy judgments.*
Revelation 19:2
*For true and righteous are his judgments:* for he hath judged the great whore, which did corrupt the earth with her fornication, and hath avenged the blood of his servants at her hand.
How about the sterling reasoning of St Theophan the Recluse @18:40. God is good and merciful, ergo eternal torment is good and merciful. Sounds like the good saint needed to get out more. Reason with me: though your sins are scarlet, they shall be white as snow.
Until you sleuth out exactly what the Lake of Fire is, you'll be left groping with absurd notions like how the God who is love consigns most of humanity to hopeless, endless, relentless, cruel, grim, boundless, burning burning exquisite torment. What a sick and evil thought, and a slur on God's holy name.
They have built the high places of Topheth in the Valley of Hinnom so they could burn their sons and daughters in the fire-something I never commanded, nor did it even enter My mind. (Jer 7:31)
And how does Hades not have an end if it is cast into the Lake of Fire in Rev 20:14, pray tell?
With respect, the usual handful of disparate and decontextualised scriptural witnesses relied upon here (Matt 25:46, Isa 66:24, Dan 12:2, Matt 18:8-9, 2 Thes 6:1-9, Jude 7, 13 and Rev 13:9-11) do not readily agree or are amenable to literal interpretation. Is it darkness or fire, is it destruction or torment etc? And how will you escape the wrath to come - we've all committed the sins of the 'goats' in Matt 25:31-46.
Jesus comes to save the world from sin and death. He conquers our hearts and minds and converts us by grace and truth, not by spiritual terrorism. He raises the dead, heals the sick, frees the prisoners, restores sight to the blind etc. Saves, not condemns. See the Son, see the Father. God wills for all to be saved from perishing in its false love of darkness, and we must affirm that His will be done. "BEHOLD, I AM MAKING ALL THINGS NEW!" (Rev 21:5), making good on His covenant to Abraham and His oath to Cyrus as sealed and revealed at Calvary and in the consummation.
"And may the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all, Amen" (Rev 22:21). Glad tidings of great joy for all mankind - there is good, God is good, good wins.
Jesus saith "don't be ye a dick" John 8:7
The mass of men (Christians) say there is to be an end to punishment and to those who are punished.-St. Basil the Great
Category error. Christian doctrine isn’t based solely on the popularity of a given precept. The Church is not a democracy. It was a majority vote that saw Barabbas loosed and God Himself beaten, spit upon, derided and murdered.
25:41 bookmark
As far as I understand it, there is no dogma in Orthodoxy *for* universalism. But there is also no dogma in Orthodoxy *against* universalism. I've heard an Orthodox patriarch say that we may hope in universal reconcilation but we cannot teach it as dogma.
Universal salvation, i.e. the notion that all will be saved in the end, has been condemned by the 5th, 6th, and 7th Ecumenical Councils. What an Orthodox Patriarch has said is not enough to overturn the witness of the Church, especially the Church in Council.
The condemnation of universalism has entered into the Synodikon of Orthodoxy read on the Sunday of Orthodoxy each year during Great Lent. Countless Saints have taught explicitly on this matter in agreement with the Councils mentioned above. For one example of an Ecumenical condemnation, listen to the section in this video on the Synodical Letter by St. Sophronius of Jerusalem. You can also find a slightly longer section read here, including a link to the text in the video description: ua-cam.com/video/3PxYWzYY6h0/v-deo.html
Is this helpful?
@@OrthodoxWisdom Oh wow. Thanks. I did not know this.
@@OrthodoxWisdom So, how does a Christian avoid eternal torment/damnation?
@@EricBryantLook up what the Church Fathers teach on Salvation.
Read the Biblically relevant Texts on this matter, and look at how they are interpreted (!) by the Fathers, see if you find agreement, study what the Church teaches too, the Church Fathers are not infallible.
Finally, pray with an honest heart, for answers that are relevant to this life and be led by the Holy Spirit.
Talk to your Priest.
@@EricBryant
Podvig:
Baptism, Chrysmation, repentance (including regular formal confession to priest), prayerful consideration of every momentous decision, divestment from those things that world gropes at (political power, riches, renown, secular glory).
The idea of an all-knowing Supreme Being who would know in advance that mankind would fall into sin and by doing so, billions would suffer eternally, and yet would go ahead and create those beings, should HORRIFY anyone with a conscience. Would God, who is described as being love - that is, it is His very being to be love - do such a thing? If God foreknew that mankind would fall and as a result, billions would be condemned to eternal suffering by the action of His creation, and yet He went ahead and did it anyway, then the only conclusion you can come to is that this suffering was the entire purpose of creating these lost beings. That is terrifying beyond all expression and does not make me particularly feel that this the "God who alone loves mankind" as we say in Orthodoxy.
I see you have great zeal for this issue, which I commend and praise wholeheartedly. I also see you have felt the need to share many lengthy comments attempting to defend your position. The main message I get from what you have written is that you seem to think you are more loving and more just than the saints the Church has glorified and recognized as being in union with the One Who is Love. Do we dare act this way? Do we stand in judgment of the Saints? You quote from a book that says what the saints say, unless speaking in an ecumenical council, amounts to nothing more than a "only a theologoumenon, a privately held understanding or definition." Am I then to treat your words with more authority than the saints' so-called "theologoumenons"? This is foreign to the way of Orthodoxy and inevitably leads to views like yours that reject the Saints and assume to be more "loving" than they are, calling into the question the Holy Spirit at work in the Church to canonize saints and set them forth as example of righteousness.
Regarding the ecumenical councils, I recomend you listen/read again the Synodical Letter of St. Sophronius of Jerusalem that was accepted by the 6th Ecumenical Council. Key excerpts include:
“[Origen and other heretics] want an end to punishment”
“alleging the restoration of all rational creatures, angels, human beings, demons”
“we both speak of the consummation of the present world and believe that that life which is to come after the present life will last forever, and we hold to unending punishment”
Video here with link to full text in the description: ua-cam.com/video/3PxYWzYY6h0/v-deo.html&ab_channel=OrthodoxWisdom
I know you are convinced of your position and are probably not here to change my mind but rather the minds of those coming to this video who are not yet grounded in the truth. I respond here primarily for their sake. Are you more loving than the great St. Paisios, among countless others, some of which are commemorated in this video? St. Paisios, universally loved and recognized as a teacher of the faith, in unison with the other saints who are commemorated in this video, prophetically calls out to us, saying, "Struggle with all your power to gain Paradise. And do not listen to those who say that everyone will be saved. This is trap of Satan so that we would not struggle.”
@@OrthodoxWisdom Thank you for your irenic reply. No, I am not more loving than the saints. I am painfully aware of my shortcomings and sins, which is what makes this such a "hot-button" issue for me. I'm sure that you would agree that Orthodox soteriology deals with what we are ontologically, that is, we are not forgiven by some legal decree made in heaven, as Protestantism and, by extension, Roman Catholicism teaches. God deals with each one of us as we are, and according to Orthodoxy, the sins we hold to and love will be that which make the love of God to be experienced as torment.
In short, I am such a mess, even with the Sacrament of Confession regularly, that since Christ God deals with us ontologically, I fear for my soul. Somehow, despite all my efforts, I am stuck in sin. This means that either I am a false believer who is destined for eternal hell (according to you) or I am a very sick child who, if Universal Restoration is true, is in for a painful healing of these sins in the next life, but not for being eternally tortured.
Furthermore, I have dear children who want nothing to do with Christ because when I was a Bob Jones Fundamentalist of the worst and most dysfunctional kind, they did not see the love of Christ from me or the churches I attended, but rather saw nothing but condemnation and anger. They heard precious little of the love of God through Christ, but rather heard of this angry God who is returning someday to whup up on everyone. What child can love that? How is that God appealing. So my bad theological decisions, combined with the fact that God allows these heretics to spew their venom in the world, results in my children going to an eternal place of torment, if you are correct.
My final question would be this: are the saints, as good, loving, and holy as they are, infallible in what they believe? Is it possible to have personal background and cultural pressures mold and shape one's understanding of God, especially if the Scriptures have been so horribly mistranslated by Latin translators who did not know Greek?
These are deeply felt issues I wrestle with. My hope is in God's universal love, for as we say in the prayers of Orthodoxy, it is God alone who loves mankind. At the same time, as I look at the way that people run to sin, reject admonition, and refuse to repent, I do question in my heart Universal Salvation, not that God is not loving, but that we are so stubborn and determined in our sin.
Pray for me, a sinner!
St John Chrysostom "Someone may ask: “Why didn’t God get rid of the devil as soon as he deceived man in Paradise?” This was because of His great concern for us. If the devil had reigned by force, then there would be some grounds for this question. However, since he has been deprived of such power and was left only with the ability to persuade-and it is up to is if we choose to listen to him or not-why do you want to reject the opportunity to prosper and eliminate the cause for crowns?
Even if God had allowed the devil to exist, knowing that he would be unbeatable
and that he would defeat every single person, this still should not make you
skeptical. It would still be up to us whether or not we allow the devil to prevail,
and he would be unable to defeat anyone by force-only them who voluntary
submit to him.
Additionally, if there are already many people who overcame his power,
just as there are many who will defeat him in the future, why do you want to
deprive these people (who will advance in virtue and attain a glorious victory) of
such great honor? God allowed the devil to remain in order for man, who had
been previously defeated by him, to vanquish him in turn. This will constitute the
greatest hell possible for the devil and will bring upon him the worst
condemnation.
If one continues with this type of reasoning, one will end up blaming and
finding fault with God’s providence, and defaming God’s entire creation. One will
criticize God for creating mouths and eyes; for human beings use their mouth to
curse God and preach corruptive beliefs, and with their eyes they desire things
which they shouldn’t and fall into adultery. Does this mean that God should have
created people without a tongue and eyes? With this type of logic, we should also
cut off people’s legs and sever their hands, since legs are used to race toward a
variety of evils and hands are often covered in blood. Not even the ears can be
spared from this savage syllogism, since they accept unbeneficial sounds and
convey destructive teachings to the soul. Therefore, we should also cut off the
ears. If this were to happen, then we must also do away with food, drinks, the sky
and the earth, the moon and all the stars, along with all the genera of irrational
animals. What would be the need for all these things if man, for whom they were
all created, was cut to pieces and so pathetically dismembered?
Do you see how this lethal train of thought necessarily leads to a laughable
and absurd conclusion? The devil does evil to and harms himself, not us. On the
contrary, if we want, we can harvest innumerable good things on account of the
devil-without, of course, him realizing or desiring this"
@@OrthodoxWisdom How can you not at least hope that his position might be true? Are you not afraid to possibly find yourself amongst those eternally condemned? I do not find, that he is full convinced about his "position", he just fights with all means available to even beg anyone free from torments & you could - instead of seemingly being satisfied about an outcome of your "position" - join in to pray and beg pardon for everyone. 🤷🏿
There is no contradiction between praying for everyone’s salvation, both those on earth and those reposed, and upholding the dogmatic truth, as established by ecumenical councils and the exceeding majority of saints, that not all will be saved. I hope and pray for the salvation of all but I do not entertain any rejection or modification of the Holy Spirit’s teaching that He showed forth through the holy fathers of the 5th, 6th, and 7th ecumenical councils.
Second problem: translation of the Fathers:
From the book A LAYMAN INVESTIGATES UNIVERSAL SALVATION:
Another problem with using the early fathers as a reference is that unless they are speaking in an ecumenical council, the best you can say is their reflections are only a theologoumenon, a privately held understanding or definition. Such thoughts do not have the authority of being sacred scripture, nor a canon of an ecumenical council. Therefore, appealing to them has no weight in the search for truth. They may be, in fact, quite influenced by the culture in which they were developed. For instance, the one theological school which taught eternal torment was a Latin school with its emphasis on crime and punishment.
But there is a more fundamental problem. The writings from which he quotes are not in their original Greek language. What is posted on his site are Western translations, and as mentioned before, many of the linguists who took on the translation of the Greek into Latin were deficient in properly understanding Greek.
The first proof Wallace offers is from the Epistle of Barnabas: “The way of darkness is crooked, and it is full of cursing. It is the way of eternal death, with punishment.” The Epistle of Barnabas (70-130 AD).
In what language was the original written? That’s right-Greek! With a Google search, I found the original text. From our earlier discussion of the Greek word “aionios” you should realize there could be a problem with the translation of Barnabas from Greek to Latin, and then to the English we read today.
The Greek word which has been translated eternal in Barnabas is the same aionios which Dr. Ilaria Ramelli has noted, does not necessarily mean “eternal.” There is a specific word for eternal in Greek. The Greek word for eternal is “adidios.” But when you have been taught to translate aionios as “eternal,” you follow what you have been taught as an obedient member of the church. It is also interesting to note that in the full English text online, the English translation uses the words “thou” and “thee.” I discount the Epistle of Barnabas as being an indelible proof of eternal hell. This is more likely Medieval translation from the Greek-and a bad one.
Researching the next quote, from Ignatius of Antioch, I found more errors in translation. The New Advent translation of Ignatius’ letter to the Ephesians reads:
Do not err, my brethren. James 1:16 Those that corrupt families shall not inherit the kingdom of God. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10. If, then, those who do this as respects the flesh have suffered death, how much more shall this be the case with anyone who corrupts by wicked doctrine the faith of God, for which Jesus Christ was crucified! Such an one becoming defiled [in this way], shall go away into everlasting fire, and so shall every one that hearkens unto him.
This again is not what the Greek text says. It took me a few minutes to figure this out because in my research I was reading the New Advent mistranslation and trying to find it in the Greek text of Ignatius. Only when I went back to my friend’s paper did I realize my mistake. The translation in her paper is correct:
Those that corrupt families shall not inherit the kingdom of God. If, then, those who do this as respects the flesh have suffered death, how much more shall this be the case with anyone who corrupts by wicked doctrine the faith of God, for which Jesus Christ was crucified! Such an one becoming defiled [in this way], shall go away into unquenchable fire, and so shall every one that hearkens unto him.
That is exactly what the Greek reads. The Greek word for unquenchable is asbestos! What the translators have done here is to superimpose their own understanding on the text rather than look at the Greek words. Unquenchable does not mean eternal any more than red means green! The New Advent translation of Ignatius isn’t even in line with other Latin translations. It is profoundly dishonest to take the word asbestos and say it means eternal.
Hebrews 12:29 For our God is a consuming fire.
The early fathers taught that this unquenchable fire is the passionate love of God. It consumes all which is not like Him, cleansing us and making us pure. It can never be put out, never ended, never stopped. It is a love eternal, and thus is indeed the unquenchable fire. To try to make this the same as eternal punishment is reading into the text what Wallace desires to see and has been trained to see by those who have overseen his conversion to Christianity.
The same is true of the next quote we are given, which is from Second Clement 5:5.
If we do the will of Christ, we shall obtain rest; but if not, if we neglect his commandments, nothing will rescue us from eternal punishment. (“Second Clement” 5:5)
Once again, the word translated eternal is aionios. By now it should start to be clear there are legitimately serious concerns with any of the quotes from the early fathers used by Infernalists to try to prove eternal conscious torment.
You should also realize something else about the Early Fathers. These Greek-speaking men had great regard for the writings of the Apostles and St. Paul. If the word aionios in the Scriptures only meant eternal, then there is no way that the teaching of Apokatastasis would have hung around Christianity for five hundred years! It would have been early brought to a council, declared a heresy, and done with.
It was condemned at an ecumenical council. The book of Revelation uses the same word “aionios” to describe the punishment of the wicked as it does to describe God. Cope harder Origunt.
Eternal
Mark 3:29
"""but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit does not have forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin”""
No one thinks that this sin is Everlasting as though once you start blaspheming it never stops.
It is called an "eternal sin" because it is committed directly against the Eternal One.
Hebrews 6:2
"""of the doctrine of baptisms, of laying on of hands, of resurrection of the dead, and of Eternal Judgement."""
No one thinks that this Judgment is Everlasting as though Judgement Day never ends.
It is called Eternal Judgement because the judgement comes directly from the Eternal One.
Hebrews 9:12
""”Not with the blood of goats and calves, but with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption"""
No one thinks that redemption is Everlasting as though the redeeming never ends.
It is called Eternal Redemption because the redemption came directly from the Eternal One.
Ephesians 3:11
"""according to the eternal purpose which He accomplished in Christ Jesus our Lord,"""
No one thinks this purpose is Everlasting as though it was never be achieved and will always be the purpose.
It was called the Eternal Purpose because it was the purpose of the Eternal One.
2 Thessalonians 1:9
"""These people will pay the penalty of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power,"""
Neither should one think that this destruction is Everlasting as though destruction can never be achieved and therefore never ends.
It is called Eternal Destruction because the destruction comes directly from the Eternal One.
Matthew 25:46
"""And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”""
Neither should you think that this punishment is Everlasting as though the punishment never ends and justice is never satisfied.
It is called Eternal Punishment because the punishment comes directly from the Eternal One.
And it is called Eternal Life because the Life comes directly from the Eternal One.
So eternal life that comes from the Eternal One is eternal, without end, and unceasing but eternal condemnation is temporal, with and ending point, and stops because…well it just can’t be?! A few of the saints in this video talk specifically about this parallel, and how it just that, a parallel. The only humble way to read the Scriptures is to read them while living the life of the Church, submitting to a true spiritual father, and with the humble awareness that the Holy Fathers are enlightened and together reveal to us the truth of Christ, including the truth of the Scriptures.
@@OrthodoxWisdom
So you think Eternal Sin never ends? Once you start the eternal sin you never end it?
And eternal judgement is judgement that never ends? Once judgement day starts it never ends?
Its obvious that eternal life and eternal punishment means that the source is eternal but does not speak to the duration of the life or the punishment, otherwise you must treat eternal sin as a sin that never stops sinning and eternal judgement as judging that never ends.
The problem with your approach is it’s rationalistic and divorced from the holy tradition of the Church. It seems you think you can jump back to the Scriptures, connect to them and their meaning without being connected to the living tradition that produced and preserved such Scriptures and placed them in their proper place. You cannot be a faithful disciple of Christ and not be connected to the living saints and the most recent saints in time. In addition, do you take as authoritative the Ecumenical Councils? In this recording I read from the letter of St. Sophronius which was approved of by the fathers of the 6th Council. There is clear condemnation of hell being temporal and the doctrine of universalism.
These questions are more basic to this current issue than just looking at the Scriptures and arguing over their meaning. The question really is: who do you trust?
@@OrthodoxWisdom
I dont trust any Latinized church doctrine.
It seems that Augustine was not qualified to interpret the scriptures, yet he was such a good speaker and writer of Latin that his thoughts gained the most ground. I dont trust men who are charismatic in that way.
I also dont trust tradition just as Jesus did not trust tradition.
@@nicodemuseam
yes we should fast and pray as Jesus did.
I scorn the tradition of believing that people will suffer without end
For it is evident that God will in truth be all in all when there shall be no evil in existence, when every created being is at harmony with it
self and every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord; when every creature shall have been made one body. -Gregory of Nyssa, 335-390, who made significant contributions to the doctrine of the Trinity and the Nicene Creed. He was honored with the title of "Father of the fathers" by the Seventh Ecumenical Council.
St. Gregory of Nyssa was not impeccable despite his important contributions. God gives us a free will that we might choose Him rather than those things that did not give us and the universe being and gave man deified immortality. Those with faculty enough to make that choice (the unborn and infants excluded), who then choose the latter are the true designers and advocates of hell. Indeed, as Evdokimov stated:
"Hell can be conceived of as a cage surrounded by mirrors; nobody and nothing is reflected in these mirrors but the image of oneself multiplied ad infinitum."
Are persons not given sufficient time to deliberate between the imperatives of God and the premiums of the zeitgeist? The scriptures are clear that we are “without excuse” in this regard yet you strive to provide us with a clause. I understand how hard it is to imagine those we love suffering eternally. But were these deprived of a free will?
Since we are not predestinationists we must reply no.
Origen
Why should punishment and torment last forever? Correction is one thing, but it’s not an act of correction because there is no chance of repentance. Why when people’s eyes are fully opened to the reality of their sin and God are they now tormented eternally? It makes very little sense to me. Ignorance isn’t a good reason to torture someone forever. Also what happened to the orthodox interpretation that Gods love will burn people who reject him, and that God is not actively allowing people to BE TORTURED. It’s a state of being. Why would someone who never really heard the Bible and died be tormented forever instead of God giving them an opportunity to feel regret about sin. It seems like a convenient theology for elitists who think only they will inherit Gods love, and it’s not for all. I think the age is not eternal like many others, and its purpose is for correction and repentance so God can have His creation fully reconciled to him. The Greek simply does not state endless eternal torment. Ions is terrible enough and should be avoided, although it may feel eternal it’s not. Because God being Good can do more than this for His children. As he states numerous times. That’s the Good news. We can be reconciled to him and avoid hellish torments
The scripture is extremely clear that God wishes for ALL to come to the knowledge of Christ. Unfortunately, most people have a self important view and a rebellious heart. God sends no one to hell, and sacrificed His Son to stop them. In the end God deals with everyone's heart, it's their decision how they respond.
This should shut up David Bentley Hart. I doubt it, though.
Well it certainly didn’t shut up the hordes of Origenists in this very comment section.
Problem is, whenever you say "forever" in your quotes... the bible is saying
"Ages of Ages."
Which is not forever.
Funny because some universalists argue the exact opposite!
@@OrthodoxWisdom Aion is defined by a limited amount of time.
@@BoyKagome whether you can convince yourself of what you think the word means, the Councils and Fathers understood it to mean an unending amount of time when they used the phrase “unto ages of ages.”
@@OrthodoxWisdom So will God wipe away every tear or not?
Was Clement of Rome wrong, where did the apprentice of an apostle get the idea that all will go to heaven and not get corrected by the very apostle he trained under?
Why does the lake of fire have sulfure, a purifying agent - if there is no purifying going on?
My opinion is there are two main factors that underlie our disagreement thus far: 1) a distrust of the Saints, or at least a need to more thoroughly sit at their feet and learn from them, and 2) holding tightly to the truth that God will never violate a man's free will.
If we can hold on to these two things, not running to speculative academic theologians who are not purified and illumined like the Saints, then we will probably solve a lot of disagreements on this matter. Also, most importantly, we will both more eagerly repent and humble ourselves before Christ.
How will sinners continue sinning if the Devil/Satan is the source of temptations and by casting him away non will be tempted forever, we we're not made to love a person who fries and boils human people forever in lava, no-one could ever force thyself to love that, you would forever violate Christs first commandment to love God with all your heart. No amount of superficial distractions in gardens or singing hymns could make the heart content with billions burning infinitely beyond any number your can think of times itself. The human heart was not created for that to even be possible.
Daniel 12 does not say "everlasting." The Hebrew word is "olam" and it does not indicate an everlasting time without end. This same word was translated in the Septuagint as "aionios," which means "age-long" or "age-lasting." Thus, Matthew 18: 8-9 does not prove an "eternal fire" but rather, an "age-lasting" fire. Now this is nothing to scoff at and continue in sin because "all will be saved in the end." No, the presence of Christ to the wicked will be tormenting, painful, and chastening, but it will have an end. The purpose of the fire of God's love -- for this is what the fire is according to Hebrews 12:29, a consuming fire -- is to correct and cleanse. We see this in the mention of being "cast into a furnace of fire." The furnace spoke of in this verse (Matthew 13: 42 and 50) is a furnace for smelting. In other words, it is not a fire of hellish torment, but rather a furnace which purifies and cleanses.
I don't understand Orthodox who want to follow Roman Catholic pagan beliefs regarding who God is, His character, and how He treats sinners. Honestly, of what character would be our Father in heaven if He, knowing beforehand that mankind would fall and billions of sentient beings would suffer eternal an unending horror, went ahead with creation anyway? Have you ever really meditated upon that? It appears that many Orthodox, like most Catholics and Protestant, dig as deep as they can to try to find some patristic evidence that an eternal hell of torment really exists. Meanwhile, they have to ignore the Greek of the Scriptures, the fact that it was Western patristics, influenced by Roman Empire thinking, who promoted the pagan idea of hell, and the fact that for the first 500 years of the Christian faith, Apokatastasis was widely taught and yet there was not one single council called with the idea that this was a heresy.
I also don't understand why you are so in love with the idea of God punishing rather than healing His creation. So many people I speak with seem downright offended by the idea that God will cleanse all His children by fire and then shall "God be all in all." Do you sing "Christ has risen from the dead, by death He conquered death . . . " at Pascha? Well, if you believe that billions of souls will be locked in a state of death and torment forever, next Pascha, please refrain from singing that hymn as you really don't believe it. In your heart you believe that death wins, God locks souls into a state of eternal death (separation) and sin against Him, and that the Cross really wasn't all that big a victory.
I'll listen to the rest of your broadcast later, but you aren't off to a good start when you misquote Scripture.
St John Chrysostom
"If the evil are not punished, then another may say that the good are not crowned; and then where will the love of mankind and the righteousness of God be? So people, do not be fooled, deceived by the devil, - because all this is his (devil's) thoughts. If judges, gentlemen and teachers reward the good, and punish the bad, then how would it be appropriate if God would do the opposite, if the good and evil would be worth the same thing? When would you be evil and behind evil? In fact, if, while waiting for punishment, they do not lag behind evil, then, being free from this fear, not only not falling into hell, but also reaching the kingdom, where the evil would stop? I heard some sinners say that for fear, God threatened hell, as if it was impossible for Him, being merciful, to punish someone, especially one who does not know Him. Tell me, you, exposing God as a deceiver, who in the days of Noah poured waves over the whole universe, made that terrible shipwreck and arranged the death of our entire family? Who sent down those lightnings and thunders to the land of Sodom? Who drowned all of Egypt? Who destroyed six hundred thousand in the desert? Who burned the assembly of Avironovo? Who commanded the earth to open its mouth and devour the fellow practitioners of Korea and Dathan? Who at the time of David struck seventy thousand in an instant? Who during the prophecy of Isaiah killed one hundred eighty-five thousand in one night? But do you not see the everyday misfortunes that we sin? What would be the point if some were punished, while others were not punished? Genuine, if God is not unrighteous - and He is not just unrighteous - you will certainly be punished for sins; if God does not punish, because He is humane, then they should not be punished. That's even for these very words,"
@@mh7008 Of course there is punishment for evil doing. Both Jesus and St. Paul said we would receive for the deeds done in the flesh. No one escapes this. But the idea of an everlasting punishment which neither heals the sinner, nor accomplishes anything other than revenge, comes from paganism and not from God.
@@IrishEddie317 I am not one to disagree with the Orthodox saints or church fathers, I prefer to learn from them, rather than to question if they have it right or wrong. I thought it was paganism that taught that hell will not be eternal.
@@mh7008 If you will look at the history of Universal Restoration, you will see that it was predominantly the Eastern Fathers who taught it. The Western Roman Catholic Fathers appear to be the ones in love with the idea of God beating the hell out of people forever and never stopping.
There is a very strong reason for this difference. The Latin speaking Roman Empire of Roman Catholicism was consumed with the idea of law, law breaking, and punishment. Everything about the Roman mind was about Roman law and Roman punishment, and they easily transferred this to God and the Gospel. Punishment is not good news, being healed and forgiven is good news. The gospel is supposed to be good news. An eternal hell, where 95% of the people who ever lived go there and suffer torture forever, does not qualify as good news in any way.
@@mh7008 One other thing. If you're going to learn from the Early Fathers, why not learn from the ones that taught God's mercy instead of God's anger and judgment?
With over 43,000 confusing denominations scattered worldwide, *you are not the Christian you like to think you are.* And that brings us to- “how do you factually KNOW you are following the true Christ?”
You may claim the Bible as your belief source, well then which “correct” Bible- the Slave Bible, the Catholic Bible, the Protestant Bible, the Hebrew Bible, the Mormon Bible, the Jehovah's Witness Bible, the Gideon’s bible, or how about The Bishop's Bible from 1568? They all have a particular slant that expresses their preferred version of gospel.
Once you figure that out now your credibility problems have *only just begun* since you must also PROVE to all your Bible choice is *the one that Jesus Himself would embrace, damning all the others.*
Come on now, give it a shot, the world has been waiting 2,000 years for an answer.
The foundation of my faith in Christ and His Church, the Orthodox Church, does not rest on a set of God-inspired texts, but on the Body of Christ, "the Church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth" (1 Tim 3:15). It's the Church where Christ continues His incarnation, showing forth through the saints that he is and will always be "the Way, the Truth, and the Life" (John 14:6). My faith is not something that can be defined only by words, only by logic, or only by experience. My faith is solid, God help me, because He has shown Himself trustworthy to my entire being: my mind, my heart, and my soul.
As Philip said to Nathaniel who wasn't sure about Jesus Christ, "Come and see" (John 1:46). If you really want to know what the Orthodox Church is and is what we say is true, one thing you must do is come to our churches, spend time with our living saints wherever they may be, experience in a small way our life in Christ, and in this way you will, "Come and see."
We are the True ones since we've been here from the very beginning. Our Church Fathers were the Apostles disciples that lived together with them and heard about Christ directly from them.
St John the Apostle of Love died in 100-101 A.D. our St. Clement of Rome slept around the same time 101 A.D. St Ignatius of Antioch slept in 120 A.D and St. Polycarp another student of St. John the apostle martyred around 168 A.D.
Read the Bible and you'll find that the Apostles left successors to continue their word and these successors are what we call the Holy Fathers. So Orthodoxy didn't just pop-out of nothing but was handed over to us by those very Apostles that lived with Christ themselves.
If you don't consider the Apostles as fraudsters then I find it difficult to prove that Orthodoxy is something made up.
@@panagiotismakris8276 Very true, and the Orthodox faith IS the faith which was left to the world by the Apostles. Furthermore, it was passed down from faithful men to faithful men who guarded it at the cost of their lives.
How then, if this faith was passed down and came from the Apostles, did the majority of theological schools teach Universal Salvation? How was it that Augustine admitted that there was a "great number" of people who believed in it? And how did it exist for the first 500 years of the Church without a whiff of the word "heresy" ever being spoken, nor any of its teachers, such at St. Gregory of Nyssa and St. Isaac of Syria, being condemned as heretics?
Answer, please!
@@IrishEddie317 Let me answer in short:
1. St. Isaac never taught universal salvation. The writings that are attributed to St. Isaac of Syria and which are speaking of Universal Salvation and Nestorianism are not of St. Isaac. It's a mistake for Orthodox Christians to considered them as his.
2. St. Gregory of Nyssa teaching on universal salvation and apokastasis have been condemned by the Church Councils multiple times and other Church Fathers in their writings. Many times did the Fathers not recognize heresy in the beginning. St. Gregory of Nyssa was having debates with the heretic Apollinaris of Laodicea but he just considered them friendly debates. On the other hand, St. Basil the Great was asking for a Council to condemned Apollinaris and his ideas.
Guess what! Apollinarianism was condemned in the end by the 2nd Ecumenical Council. Of course, someone will not be considered a heretic just because of a wrong theory they formulated, that's what the followers of the Popes believe. Church Fathers are humans after all and only Ecumenical Councils and the Scriptures are considered infallible.
St. Augustine for example had expressed some wrong theories regarding salvation and he was criticized because of them, yet no Church Father regarded his as a heretic. However, because of those wrong theories the Church does not regard him as an authority on theology like other Fathers (St. Basil the Great, Gregory the Theologian, Gregory Palamas etc). It's exactly the same with St. Gregory of Nyssa.
3. Many times have heresies co-exist with the right teachings of the Church. Chiliasm was an idea that in the first centuries of Christianity was having massive influence, yet because the Holy Fathers fought against it, in the end it was condemned. The same can be said with Origen, though regarded a most respected teacher by many inside the Church, one man understood his heresies far before anyone else, that was Methodius of Olympus. He was writing against Origen heresies, while Origen was regarded by most as an authority on theology. In the end, Origen heresies where condemned by the Church.
Just because some Church Fathers supported a theory or because an idea had massive support in the Church for some time, doesn't mean that this theory was part of the Church teaching in the beginning. What is regarded as Church teaching is what is accepted by the Consesus Patrum. How are we supposed to accept Universal Salvation as part of the teaching of the Church, when most Fathers have condemned it in their writings and there have been Church Councils against it?
We accept only what has been accepted by the Fathers and that which has not been condemned by them. And universalism has been regarded as a heresy by many of them.
@@panagiotismakris8276 St Gregory of Nyssa has never been formally declared a heretic by the Church. You need to answer me this - HOW is it possible that the teaching of Universal Salvation existed from the very beginning of the Church? If it was a heresy that just popped up one day and started to get traction, like the Arian heresy, that would be one thing, but this goes back much farther than that.
And how could ANYONE teach it if the Scriptures are so clear that the next life is eternal torment for the wicked? The Greek-speaking Fathers taught it, yet you and other Infernalists claim that the Scriptures teach "eternal torment" (aionios kolasis). Either aionios does not mean "eternal" (as taught by Dr. Illaria Ramelli and other Greek scholars) or they were not saints, but liars!
Answer me this:
QUOTE: "The idea of an all-knowing Supreme Being who would know in advance that mankind would fall into sin and by doing so, billions would suffer eternally, and yet would go ahead and create those beings, should HORRIFY anyone with a conscience. Would God, who is described as being love - that is, it is His very being to be love - do such a thing? If God foreknew that mankind would fall and as a result, billions would be condemned to eternal suffering by the action of His creation, and yet He went ahead and did it anyway, then the only conclusion you can come to is that this suffer was the entire purpose of creating these lost beings. That is terrifying beyond all expression and does not make me particularly feel that this the "God who alone loves mankind" as we say in Orthodoxy."
How would such a God, who would so such a thing to sentient beings, be nothing more than an unspeakable monster. That is not our God. He is the one who "alone loves mankind." To create sentient beings you know will suffer eternally, when you have no need to create them, nor a plan to save them when they fall, is NOT LOVE! That is the heresy of Calvinism, that dark and demonic religion which ascribes to God that for His glory He creates the "non-elect" who will suffer forever without remediation.
And finally -- and I could go on for hours here -- how do we Orthodox sing "Christ is Risen from the dead, by death He conquered death . . . " at Pascha when, according to Infernalist teaching, death is not defeated at all, but is kept alive by the will of God, with billions of people maintained in this state of death forever.
THAT in no way to me sounds like conquering death.
I could not disagree any more with this whole pile of garbage! The video starts off with a misleading exclusion, the Bible verse actually says. "The smoke of their torment ascends unto ages of ages."not just "their torment ascends..." So whether these people ever get forgiven and released by God this smoke could keep going up, fulfilling this prophecy, until the "ages of ages" is over. Next is the fact that this translation, which is a correct literal translation, actually REFUTES everything else in the ENTIRE VIDEO! AMAZING! The entire "eternal torment" teaching hinges completely on the mistranslation of the greek word "Aion". Those who taught and believed in the eventual restoration of all God's children, His creation, were convinced that the word "Aion" should be translated as an age, or the english equivelent, an "eon". The adjective forms of this noun, "aionion" and "aionios" would be translated as something like "pertaining to the age", "enduring through the age", or "age enduring", but not as "eternal". Those who argued for eternal torment, the infernalists, believed this word "aion" could mean eternal, and the adjective forms could be translated as "forever and ever", even though they admitted that these words at other times should be tranlated as "age" or "world" or other terms not depicting eternality. For example Mat. 24:3 "What will be the sign of your return, and of the end of the 'aion'?" So they would admit it was up to the translators to choose which way to translate these words, but when they describe afterlife correction, they insisted the context requires the "forever" translation. But if you have no other reason to depict this afterlife correction as eternal, how does the context demand this? It becomes a form of "circular reasoning", as in "it must be translated as 'eternal' here because it describes afterlife correction, which we know should be eternal because of how we have translated "aionion". So this whole video is confusing because it uses the Universalist favored translation of this passage in the title, which actually defends the universal restoration position perfectly! If they are only punished for "ages" or even "ages of ages", then that may be a long, long, long time, but that does not depict eternal at all. All of the early church fathers who supported Universal Restoration through Jesus Christ would have agreed with this translation completely.
Anathema!
Sophistic nonsense. Your desperation is all too apparent, friend.
Hahaha if virtue is not necessary for salvation, I will go and do whatever with my life, even if I suffer 10000 years, God will eventually forgive me and in that way I will foolish God, right?
And that, boys and girls, is why Jesus rejected organized religion. Laying burdens on others that they themselves won't carry.
Guess the 12 apostles were wrong to keep the church going then.
@@byzantine1107seems the churches have traded the apostles creed for the pharisees'.
The Lord Jesus Christ established a Church which He promised that hell will not prevail against (Matthew 16:18). A Church that is the “pillar & foundation of the truth,” (2 Timothy 3:15), a “glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.” (Ephesians 5:27).
Do you deny these words as being holy & true? The Lord didn’t just come on Earth, preach moral truths & the way of salvation, and dip leaving behind only a Bible that can be misinterpreted thousands of ways.
The Lord didn’t even write anything Himself. He established a Church through His Apostles to continue to preserve His truth (true Gospel) and act as a vessel of His Grace for the salvation of mankind throughout the ages.
@@gravelroad1228Does God dwell in temples made by human hands? There's a spiritual church and then there are earthly churches. Only the latter smother the hope of universal salvation.
@@benc6537 I don’t see anything like this super holiness in these groups, just a great deal of conceit. It’s funny because you see the same people, Protestant fundies, trad Catholics, super conservative Orthodox who all think everyone else is damned besides them and really share the same spirit. The irony is If one of them is right, the other two groups are going to be roasting in hell
It's stories in old books. You don't know who wrote them. In the rare cases that the author's name is thought to be known, nothing else about the author's character, agenda, credibility, or state of mental health is known to any degree worth considering. Neither Jesus nor God wrote any part of the Bible. You worship stories. Hindu, Muslims, etc. Story worshipping. fi that's your thing fo for it, but be aware. That is what you're doing. Stories that you read and stories that people you about those stories.
you then discount all of history. for what would we know of what happened in the past if it was not stories in old books? this is how tradition is passed down. are you discounting the roman emperors, the middle ages, etc.? forgive me, your logic is faulty. you have to apply this thought to everything then, not just what makes you uncomfortable.
@@christophermessenger2262 of course we don't know anything about history but we have good reasons to believe it when we find both writings or archeological findings that confirm it. The Bible is not coherent nor with science nor in itself. The gospels are contradictory a lot of times. How do you know Bhagavad Gita is false then ??
@@christophermessenger2262 Let me clarify, old HOLY books. Most of which I suspect you discount without a 2nd thought also. As the saying goes there's lies, damned lies and history.
History books should always be believed with an appropriate degree of skepticism depending on what is claimed to have happened.
Nero eating an apple can be accepted or rejected with equal ease, Nero flapping his arms and flying around Rome should be doubted no matter how many times the author asks for Faith.
@@konyvnyelv. you're saying two different things. you affirm history/archeological findings but then you bring philosophy into your biased view against Holy Scripture. this is confirmation bias. you can not apply the philosophical 'law of contradiction' to Holy Scripture & not to everything else just because you choose to do so. you can not put the triune God in a box. the mind is not the generator of Truth. forgive me.
@@dimbulb23 dear RCW, you should not suspect anything about me because you do not know me at all. i appreciate & respect your words, but nobody is currently giving nor have they ever given their lives over to willing death for 2,000 years for a curated, specific claim such as Nero fiddling away at the burning of Rome. Though this has happened with Christ's claims through the Holy Orthodox Church. If you want to make your views more widely accepted by others that are reading, steer away from passive aggressive jabs after someone pushes back on your viewpoint. forgive me.
Ummmmmm @35:15 to the “mother of God”
Hmmm ummmm 🤨 this is WAYYYYYYYYY OFFFFFFFFF!!!
There is NO “MOTHER OF GOD”!
Hello my friend. I understand this way of thinking. I do not want to argue, but I just wanted to clarify this teaching in the way that I understand it. Please don't take this the wrong way. I am not attacking you or your faith.
The way I see it, we believe that Jesus is the word of God who "was with God and who was God" (John 1:1). If Jesus is God, then the Virgin Mary is His Mother. Not that she created Him. He existed before her. However, it is through her that He comes into the world. In that way she is the Mother of Christ, and the Mother of God the Son.
I'm sorry if I rambled on a lot. God bless you!
There is no mother of God incarnate into his creation?
Ohhhkaayyy
@@chanting_germ. lmfao
Mary is Jesus’ Mother, Jesus is God, so therefore Mary is the Mother of God
Christ derived His flesh from Mary via gestation. Christ was/is God. Hence, Mother of God. No one claims Mary created the second person of the Godhead.