The verses I referenced from the passage, if you read them, show this to be NO assumption, i.e., it’s right there in the text.
I don’t assume… “that the church’s readers were to see it as inapplicable to them” — clearly Christendom didn’t see it as inapplicable to them; and… “that they constructed a narrative that could function as a handbook for their generations’ disciples” is IMO fine. But HOW those things were/are made to be applicable CAN be made to say anything WHEN said words are lifted out of their eschatological context; and therefore HOW such things were understood. Jesus wasn’t speaking in some ‘all things to all men’ nebulous vacuum, nor was he speaking over his audiences’ heads… he often spoke to their immediate future.
To appease an offended person (propitiate), in this case God, by the confession of and consequent abolition of sin (penance)… this is Don’s post-mortem repentance via the cleansing fires of ‘the lake of fire’ in order that said candidate (inclusive of all non-believers AND believers) might finally exit said burnings into the relief of Heaven. Until one grasps the fire insurer on a burning one shall go… IMO a load of religious BS. You’ll have to forgive my bluntness.
Neither Jesus nor any of the New Testament writers said nor wrote anything remotely in that direction. IF such had been the case Don would have slam-dunked this issue months ago with said Scriptures… he has not BECAUSE they are not! It is poor practice to bring a notion TOO a text and then summarily squeeze that notion into it.
It should also be noted that Don gives little to no credence to the OT and considers the end of the NT inappropriate and not relevant for issues around “doctrine” (even though he is quite happy to tag in the like of “the lake of fire” where convenient). So, that Don attaches his theological interpretation to Jesus’ “salted with fire” comment is to be taken as a given, and that’s fine, but some textual evidence would be more convincing.
It is interesting to note however that extra-biblical literature, something Don has indicated he does hold with some degree of credence, seems on the surface at least cut right across any notion of his post-mortem repentance…
If I have come across as overly critical of Don’s position and expressed such too harshly, then my apologies to you Don… we are after all brothers.