Biblical Universalist Discussion Forum

Zach

Aug 19, 07 - 10:51 PM

Revelation 21-22

"He who overcomes will inherit all this, and I will be his God and he will be my son. But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death.

...Nothing impure will ever enter it, nor will anyone who does what is shameful or deceitful, but only those whose names are written in the Lamb's book of life.

...Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city. Outside are the dogs, those who practice magic arts, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and everyone who loves and practices falsehood." (Rev. 21:7-8, 27; 22:14-15, NIV)

I realize that this does not say that the lake of fire is eternal. However, it doesn't offer any hope for those who aren't inside the city; Elhanan Winchester takes Rev. 21 to be set after the last of the rebellious creatures has been saved, but it seems to imply the opposite. The quote about those who are outside the city seems to suggest that there are those who are free to practice sin even when the new Jerusalem is around -- or am I misinterpreting it? Either way, it seems as if there are still people left out.

What's your perspective on these chapters?

Mike Burke

Aug 20th, 2007 - 2:23 PM

Re: Revelation 21-22

[Quote] I realize that this does not say that the lake of fire is eternal. However, it doesn't offer any hope for those who aren't inside the city [unquote]

Take a look at Young's Literal Translation:

he who is overcoming shall inherit all things, and I will be to him -- a God, and he shall be to me -- the son, and to fearful, and unstedfast, and abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all the liars, their part [is] in the lake that is burning with fire and brimstone, which is a second death.'...and he carried me away in the Spirit to a mountain great and high, and did shew to me the great city, the holy Jerusalem, coming down out of the heaven from God...and the nations of the saved in its light shall walk, and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it, and its gates shall not at all be shut by day, for night shall not be there; and they shall bring the glory and the honour of the nations into it; and there may not at all enter into it any thing defiling and doing abomination, and a lie, but -- those written in the scroll of the life of the Lamb....Happy are those doing His commands that the authority shall be theirs unto the tree of the life, and by the gates they may enter into the city; and without [are] the dogs, and the sorcerers, and the whoremongers, and the murderers, and the idolaters, and every one who is loving and is doing a lie. (Rev. 21:7-8, 10, 24-27; 22:14-15.)

I don't see where it says that there is no hope for those outside the city.

Verses 24-27 (of Ch. 21) say that nations will walk in the light of the city, the city's gates will be open day and night, "the honour of the nations" (presumably still outside the city) will be brought into it, and that nothing defiling may enter in.

I see nothing anywhere to suggest that there will always be a stronghold of sin, vice, and rebellion outside the city.

[Quote] Elhanan Winchester takes Rev. 21 to be set after the last of the rebellious creatures has been saved [unquote]

I'd like to see where he said that, and how he worded himself.

It's possible that he took 21:8 to mean that the wicked had already had their part in the lake of fire (and I noticed that "is" was bracketed in Young's), but I don't see why he would take it that way.

The verb tense of Ch. 21:5 is present active indicative, and should be translated "I am making everything new" (and the setting is not at the completion of the New Heaven and Earth, but during their creation.)

G-d Bless.

Zach

Aug 21st, 2007 - 3:09 AM

Re: Revelation 21-22

In the Universal Restoration, page 51 (see my link in the other topic), Winchester says that he believes the earth itself "shall become literally the lake of fire and brimstone" (a belief he derives from 2 Peter 3) and "that the new heaven and earth shall be created out of the substance of the old, dissolved by the fire." He also states, regarding Rev. 21:4, that "this state is contemporary with the new heaven and earth, after the lake of fire hath ceased" (page 96).

The problem I have is that we are not told of anyone having their name added to the book of life after being condemned to the lake of fire; it seems to me an unlikely conjecture to suppose that they can enter the city afterward.

Mike Burke

Aug 21st, 2007 - 7:20 PM

Re: Revelation 21-22

[Quote] The problem I have is that we are not told of anyone having their name added to the book of life after being condemned to the lake of fire [unquote]

Unless you believe that God keeps a literal book, with the names of the elect inscribed in letters, I'm sure you'd agree that "the book of life" is symbolic.

The question is what the book of life symbolizes.

If you believe it's a celestial list of the eternally blessed, I can only assume you're Arminian, because this same book of Revelation says:

And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. (Rev. 21:19.)

Does it seem "a reasonable conjecture" to you that an all knowing God would add names to the book of life, only to remove them later?

If so, what are we to do with the following passage?

They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us. (1 John 2:19.)

And consider the words of Moses (when interceding for Israel):

Yet now, if thou wilt forgive their sin--; and if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of thy book which thou hast written. (Ex. 32:32.)

In what sense did the carnal, sinning Israelites for whom Moses prayed ever have their names in a book, and in what sense could those names be blotted out?

The book of life is a symbol of those who in fact possess life (whether physical or spiritual), and to be blotted out is to have that life taken away.

What Mosses feared when he interceded for Israel was that God would strike them all dead.

Are some names blotted out of the book of life in this way?

Yes.

Will some of those raised before the Great White Throne suffer this fate?

Yes--but let's not forget:

The LORD killeth, and maketh alive: he bringeth down to the grave, and bringeth up. (1 Sam. 2:6.)

[Quote] it seems to me an unlikely conjecture to suppose that they can enter the city afterward. [unquote]

But why should it seem unlikely in the light of Col. 1:16-20, 1 Cor. 15:22-28, 1 Tim. 4:10, etc. (and even in the 21rst ch. of Revelation, isn't saying that the gates will never be shut a little out of place in your interpretation?)

And why should the apparent meaning of a passage in Revelation negate the apparent meaning of other passages (like Col. 1:16-20, 1 Cor. 15:22-28, 1 Tim. 4:10, etc.)

Perhaps we should allow such passages to shed light on the final chapters of Revelation, instead of using Revelation to try and limit the success of Calvary.

[Quote] In the Universal Restoration, page 51 (see my link in the other topic), Winchester says that he believes the earth itself "shall become literally the lake of fire and brimstone" (a belief he derives from 2 Peter 3) and "that the new heaven and earth shall be created out of the substance of the old, dissolved by the fire." He also states, regarding Rev. 21:4, that "this state is contemporary with the new heaven and earth, after the lake of fire hath ceased" (page 96). [unquote]

Perhaps you should have read a little more carefully.

He said (on the same page) "In this chapter we find, that all things are to be made new; and Death is to be no more, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither any more pain."

He's right here.

This is exactly what we find in this chapter--we do not find a New Heaven and Earth, we do not find all tears dried, we do not find Death wholly a thing of the past, and we do not find God saying He has made everything new.

The verb tense of Ch. 21:5 is present active indicative, and should be translated "I am making everything new."

God is in the process of creating a New Heaven and Earth, drying all tears, making Death, sorrow, and pain things of the past, and making all things new in the final chapters of Revelation.

It is entirely possible that the second death is concurrent with this process of creating a New Heaven and Earth "out of the substance of the old."

Zach

Aug 21st, 2007 - 11:37 PM

Re: Revelation 21-22

First, I'm actually a Calvinist, though I can see why you'd suggest that.

Thanks for the clarification on the "making new" part. I need to think this over more.

As for Elhanan Winchester, I notice that he seems to believe that those who are faithful in this life will have special blessings that unbelievers will never receive; he does not deny that "it is possible we may lose our parts in the holy city" (Universal Restoration, page 203). This seems to me to provide a good explanation of how such threatenings may be fulfilled without requiring the endless misery or annihilation of unbelievers. (His views on this are laid out more thoroughly on pages 201-207.)

Regarding the various texts you mentioned, I realize that. Perhaps we should discuss the positive arguments for universalism elsewhere? Though it's been rightly said that we should be cautious of using Revelation to formulate doctrine, I'd still like to discuss these texts to see whether the common ways of explaining them (from a traditional perspective) hold water. I must say, I find Colossians 1:15-20 to be the most convincing of them all, but there are a lot of passages and arguments to examine.

Mike Burke

Aug 22nd, 2007 - 7:51 PM

Re: Revelation 21-22

Thank you Zach.

I just read pages 201-218, and I found them very interesting.

I've also read page 96, but I haven't had the time to read more than that (and it may be a while before I do.)

I again thank you for bringing this book to our attention, as I believe it's well worth reading (and much better then some of the universalist teachings on the internet.)

Though you posted the url under another topic heading, I will again post it here (for those who may be interested.)

http://books.google.com/books?id=eg8b2ZJ5MwoC&printsec=titlepage

G-d Bless.

Zach

Aug 26th, 2007 - 4:18 AM

Re: Revelation 21-22

All right, I'd like to talk about the "ages of the ages" a bit. Does anyone have any particular insights about this phrase? I've seen some explanations of why it does not necessarily signify literal, endless torment, but nothing that's completely satisfied me.

I realize Elhanan Winchester points out places where "forever and ever" is used of things that have ends, but looking at YLT, they appear to be different phrases which were translated into the same one in the KJV.

One passage I've seen quoted occasionally is Hebrews 9:26, which seems to say that there will be an end of the ages; this would, of course, be a good argument against "the ages of the ages" being endless. However, it is saying that Christ has appeared (past tense) at the end of the ages to "put away sin" (KJV); I realize this could mean that it would be at the end of the ages that the blood of Christ would finally take away the sins of all the world, but it seems to me to be saying that the Incarnation took place at the end of the ages (whatever that means). Am I mistaken in my interpretation here?

Mike Burke

Aug 26th, 2007 - 6:26 AM

Re: Revelation 21-22

I think Heb 9:26 could be translated "at a conjunction of ages."

You might also find this interesting:

the reason why we sometimes read of "ages," and sometimes of "the age," when both seem to refer and speak of the same one great consummation, is, that the various "ages" are but the component parts of a still greater "age," as the seven Sabbatic years only made up one Jubilee. But because the mind of the Spirit is above them, men speak as if the varied and very unusual language of Scripture, as to the "ages" or the "age of ages," contained no special mystery. They will see one day that the subject is dark, not because Scripture is silent, but only because mens eyes are holden.

(NOTE: Every scholar knows that the expressions, "ages," "to the ages," "age of the ages," and "ages of the ages," are unlike anything which occurs in the heathen Greek writers. The reason is, that the inspired writers, and they alone, understood the mystery and purpose of the "ages." They, or at least the Spirit which spake by them, saw that there would be a succession of "ages," a certain number of which constituted another greater "age." It seems to me that when they simply intended a duration of many "ages," they wrote "to the ages." When they had in view a greater and more comprehensive "age," including in it many other subordinate "ages," they wrote "to the age of ages." When they intended the longer "age" alone, without regard to its constituent parts, they wrote "to an aeonial age"; this form of expression being a Hebraism, exactly equivalent to "age of the ages:" like "liberty of glory," for "glorious liberty," (Rom. viii. 21,) and "body of our vileness," for "our vile body." (Phil. iii. 21.) When they intended the several comprehensive "ages" collectively, they wrote "to the ages of ages." Each varying form is used with a distinct purpose and meaning.)

At any rate, and whatever the future "ages" may be, those past (and St. Paul speaks of "the ends" of some,) are clearly not endless; and the language of Scripture as to those to come seems to teach that they are limited, since Christs mediatorial kingdom, which is "for the ages of ages," must yet be "delivered up to the Father, that God may be all in all." (Compare Rev. xi. 15, and 1 Cor. xv. 24.)

http://www.auburn.edu/~allenkc/jukes2.html#p067

I can't find the exact quote now, but he elsewhere suggests that "age of ages" is equivalent to "holy of holies," and speaks of the greatest age of a series.

G-d Bless.

Mike Burke

Aug 26th, 2007 - 5:59 PM

Re: Revelation 21-22

I was just re-reading something Ed Smith posted under another topic heading (and I believe it's relevant here):

Here is a rather neat and beautiful idea for which I must give credit to George MacDonald:

The white stone of Revelation 2:17 is the name in the book of life. The name describes you in terms of what God actually had in mind when He made you. When He finishes making you what He intended you to be--when you overcome and you become that name--you receive that name. Some appearing before the great white throne will not yet have a name which is in the book of life. When they finally give up the self they have made themselves and agree that God should make them to be whatever He wants, they get a new name and that name has been in the book of life from the foundation of the world.

I had never considered it before I read it in MacDonald, but what better name is there to appear in the book of life than the one known only to you and God--the special name He gives you when you have become what you were meant to be?

--Ed

Zach

Sep 1st, 2007 - 8:10 PM

Re: Revelation 21-22

Today I was reading Gregory MacDonald's "The Evangelical Universalist," when I came across something interesting. I had been under the impression that "to the ages of the ages" is ONLY used when referring to God Himself, and hence it is only used in the context of literal endlessness.

MacDonald was kind enough to list all the occurrences of the phrase in Revelation, and when I took the trouble to look at all of them, I did indeed find that most of them were things like "[God] who lives forever and ever" (4:9-10, 5:14, 10:6, 15:7) and "to Him be glory and dominion forever and ever" (1:6, 5:13). Besides these, there are five uses of the phrase -- 14:11 ("the smoke of their torment ascends forever"), 19:3 (same image, about Babylon), and 20:10 ("they will be tormented day and night forever and ever"); and two that may or may not be endless.

These two are 11:15 and 22:5. Here is the Young's Literal Translation rendering of each of them:

(11:15)
And the seventh messenger did sound, and there came great voices in the heaven, saying, `The kingdoms of the world did become [those] of our Lord and of His Christ, and he shall reign to the ages of the ages!'
(22:5)
and night shall not be there, and they have no need of a lamp and light of a sun, because the Lord God doth give them light, and they shall reign -- to the ages of the ages.

Now, 11:15 is a bit difficult. It says "of our Lord and of His Christ," and then it only says that "he" shall reign. Does "he" refer to our Lord or to His Christ? If it does indeed refer to His Christ, then it clearly means a finite time (1Cor. 15:25-28). However, it is literally endless if we take it to mean that our Lord shall reign to the ages of the ages. As for 22:5, I find it difficult to believe that the faithful in the new Jerusalem will reign forever and ever if Christ will not; but the question to be asked here is whether or not this is yet the time when Christ "hath put all enemies under his feet" (1Cor. 15:25). I am not sure whether it is or not; there seem to be universalists on both sides of that debate here.

Any thoughts?

Mike Burke

Sep 1st, 2007 - 11:36 PM

Re: Revelation 21-22

[Quote] I find it difficult to believe that the faithful in the new Jerusalem will reign forever and ever if Christ will not; but the question to be asked here is whether or not this is yet the time when Christ "hath put all enemies under his feet" (1Cor. 15:25). [unquote]

I don't think it is.

G-d Bless.

Zach

Sep 2nd, 2007 - 1:28 AM

Re: Revelation 21-22

And I'm inclined to agree.

In that case, do you believe these two verses are truly referring to a limited period of time?

Mike Burke

Sep 2nd, 2007 - 5:48 AM

Re: Revelation 21-22

Yes I do.

Mike Burke

Sep 2nd, 2007 - 1:20 PM

Re: Revelation 21-22

P.S. Perhaps I should add that Scripture doesn't always speak of the Kingdom as external.

...the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. (Romans 14:17.)

When God is All in All there'll be no need for external rule and authority, but the internal kingdom of "righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit" will go on forever (so in one sense, the kingdom truly has no end.)

G-d Bless.

Zach

Sep 4th, 2007 - 8:56 PM

Re: Revelation 21-22

I looked again and I noticed that Rev. 21:4 says there will be "no more death." Now, since I don't believe the second death has yet ceased at this point, this is rather problematic. Granted, it says there will be no more death, not that there is no more death, but it also says that the "old things" (no doubt including death) have already passed away. Now, the trouble is that this appears to be the fulfillment of 1 Corinthians 15:26, "the last enemy that shall be destroyed is death," which has often been taken to include the second death; more than that, I had considered 1 Cor. 15:22-28 to be events that take place after Revelation, but if death has indeed been destroyed by Revelation 21, that interpretation becomes much more problematic.

Indeed, 1 Cor. 15:22-28 may have been fulfilled when death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire; though the text mentions the wicked being cast in after death and Hades were cast in, this does not prove that death and Hades were actually cast in first.

Mike Burke

Sep 4th, 2007 - 10:26 PM

Re: Revelation 21-22

Immediately after this (in verse 5) "He who is sitting upon the throne said, `I making (present, active, indicative) all things new..."

When He's done, the old order of things will "have passed away (aorist, active, indicative)," and "there will be no more death (future, middle, indicative)."

In Greek, there's something called "the futuristic aorist."

It's the use of an aorist tense-form to describe an event (usually the result of an actual or implied condition) which has not yet taken place--and that's exactly what you have here in Rev. 21:4.

G-d Bless.

Zach

Sep 4th, 2007 - 10:29 PM

Re: Revelation 21-22

Thanks for the answer. Do you know of any similar Biblical examples, offhand?

Mike Burke

Sep 4th, 2007 - 11:42 PM

Re: Revelation 21-22

[Quote] Thanks for the answer. Do you know of any similar Biblical examples, offhand? [unquote]

Rev. 10:7.

("Finished" is aorist, and without interpreting it as a futuristic aorist, a literal translation would read something like:

but in the days of the sounding of the seventh angel, when he is about to sound, the mystery of God was finished, as He declared to His servants the prophets.)

Rom. 8:30 is another example:

[Greek Grammar] Proleptic (Futuristic) Aorist

The aorist indicative can be used to describe an event that is not yet past as though it were already completed in order to stress the certainty of the event.

Rom 8:30 whom he justified, these he also glorified.

http://www.bcbsr.com/greek/gtense.html

BTW: What how do you understand this passage?

And he showed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding from the throne of God and of the Lamb. In the middle of its street, and on either side of the river, was the tree of life, which bore twelve fruits, each tree yielding its fruit every month. The leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations. (Rev. 22:1-2.)

If death, pain, crying, and the old order (presumably including physical and moral disease) are already fully passed away, what is meant by "the healing of the nations"?

Zach

Sep 5th, 2007 - 12:02 AM

Re: Revelation 21-22

Regarding the tree of life thing: clever. I don't know if it's conclusive, but that is definitely interesting.

Gregory MacDonald sees 21:24-26 as having universalistic implications; I'm not sure if he's correct or not (I should perhaps revisit that part of his book), but he claims that the kings and nations here have been condemned throughout Revelation, and are here escaping the lake of fire. The main objection I can see to this is that they are said to bring their glory and honor into the city.

Mike Burke

Sep 5th, 2007 - 5:25 AM

Re: Revelation 21-22

[Quote] The main objection I can see to this is that they are said to bring their glory and honor into the city. [unquote]

Which would imply that they're outside the city.

What was your objection again?

Zach

Sep 5th, 2007 - 1:58 PM

Re: Revelation 21-22

I meant the "glory and honor" part. I think of the lake of fire as being precisely that which destroys their glory and honor. It's not much of an objection, just something that seems a bit odd.

Unless, that is, the "glory and honor" are given to them by God once they have repented. And it appears that glory and honor are only attributed to God in Revelation (cf. 4:9-11); Babylon is said to have glorified herself (18:7), but neither she nor the unredeemed nations are said to have glory or honor. Very interesting.

Mike Burke

Sep 5th, 2007 - 11:02 PM

Re: Revelation 21-22

[Quote] I meant the "glory and honor" part. I think of the lake of fire as being precisely that which destroys their glory and honor. It's not much of an objection, just something that seems a bit odd.

Unless, that is, the "glory and honor" are given to them by God once they have repented. And it appears that glory and honor are only attributed to God in Revelation (cf. 4:9-11); Babylon is said to have glorified herself (18:7), but neither she nor the unredeemed nations are said to have glory or honor...[unquote]

The terms "glory" and "honor" can be used in more than one sense.

(They belong to God in their truest sense, but they're also used of morally flawed men and kingdoms.)

According to Strong, the word translated honor can refer to something "one has by reason of rank and state of office," and it's used in the following passage:

Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor. (Romans 13:7.)

Rome was an unredeemed nation, yet it's governors, magistrates, and centurions had a certain honor.

The word translated glory is found in the following passages:

...the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them (Matt. 4:8.)

And yet I say unto you, That even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. (Matt. 6:29.)

The kingdoms spoken of in Matthew 4 were corrupt, and Solomon was unrighteous:

This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind, Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart: Who being past feeling have given themselves over unto lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness. (Eph. 4:17-19.)

And after certain days, when Felix came with his wife Drusilla, which was a Jewess, he sent for Paul, and heard him concerning the faith in Christ. And as he reasoned of righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come, Felix trembled, and answered, Go thy way for this time; when I have a convenient season, I will call for thee. He hoped also that money should have been given him of Paul, that he might loose him: wherefore he sent for him the oftener, and communed with him. (Acts 24:24-26.)

And Solomon did evil in the sight of the LORD, and went not fully after the LORD, as did David his father. (1 Kings 11:6.)

Interesting?

	Biblical Universalist Discussion Forum Welcome to my forum. Feel free to post a message.
Return to Website