II Thessalonians 1:8-9

Here Tom will occasionally introduce a topic for discussion and invite others to discuss it with him.

Moderator: tomtalbott

Re: II Thessalonians 1:8-9

Postby JasonPratt » Sat Sep 06, 2014 3:45 pm

Obviously the two ideas are not mutually exclusive, since I myself agreed there was an excommunication. :roll: I even talked about how excom'ing the guy is itself evidence, in several ways, that Paul meant for the congregation not to consider his case hopeless.

Consequently, going on to discuss the excommunication I already acknowledged does not count against Paul expecting the SSG (and possibly Hym and Alex) to die from being handed over to Satan.


But say it is a metaphor (which I seem to recall also allowing): being immersed in depravity is not something which in itself has any inherent tendency to destroy a person's sinful propensities, no more than Satan attack only the sinful propensity. The prodigal son doesn't repent of his life of whoring away his father's money until he has been reduced by painful starvation to eating the leftovers of swine, and "joining" himself to the owner of the pigs. :shock: (A euphamism often overlooked, but part of the shock value of the situation to a rigorous Jew no less than literally living with swine: there being no way surely the father would accept him back now.)

Until the evil passes a threshold of inconvenience in its results, the SSG would think being immersed in depravity was amenable! The phrase is much more likely to be a polite way of talking about being cursed with a painful and likely fatal result of his sins. Then being cut off from the church would be meaningful to the SSG; so would his horrific pain be explained if 2 Cor's pity and reconciliation refers to him. So would the term, olethron, synch better with Paul's OT citations of prophetic expectations of what will happen to people olethron'd by God (whether directly by divine power or indirectly by pagan armies).
Cry of Justice -- 2008 Novel of the Year (CSPA retailer poll).
Sword To The Heart -- metaphysical argument to orthodox trinitarianism (and thence to universalism)
Trinitarian universalist exegetics, on internet radio, or here in forum posts.
User avatar
JasonPratt
Administrator
 
Posts: 9713
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 5:08 pm
Location: Dyer, TN

Re: II Thessalonians 1:8-9

Postby lancia » Sat Sep 06, 2014 5:25 pm

JasonPratt wrote:Obviously the two ideas are not mutually exclusive, since I myself agreed there was an excommunication. :roll: I even talked about how excom'ing the guy is itself evidence, in several ways, that Paul meant for the congregation not to consider his case hopeless.

Consequently, going on to discuss the excommunication I already acknowledged does not count against Paul expecting the SSG (and possibly Hym and Alex) to die from being handed over to Satan.

But say it is a metaphor (which I seem to recall also allowing): being immersed in depravity is not something which in itself has any inherent tendency to destroy a person's sinful propensities, no more than Satan attack only the sinful propensity. The prodigal son doesn't repent of his life of whoring away his father's money until he has been reduced by painful starvation to eating the leftovers of swine, and "joining" himself to the owner of the pigs. :shock: (A euphamism often overlooked, but part of the shock value of the situation to a rigorous Jew no less than literally living with swine: there being no way surely the father would accept him back now.)

Until the evil passes a threshold of inconvenience in its results, the SSG would think being immersed in depravity was amenable! The phrase is much more likely to be a polite way of talking about being cursed with a painful and likely fatal result of his sins. Then being cut off from the church would be meaningful to the SSG; so would his horrific pain be explained if 2 Cor's pity and reconciliation refers to him. So would the term, olethron, synch better with Paul's OT citations of prophetic expectations of what will happen to people olethron'd by God (whether directly by divine power or indirectly by pagan armies).


I see so much in your reply that suggests we agree even more than you acknowledge!

I agree that “being immersed in depravity is not something which in itself has any inherent tendency to destroy a person's sinful propensities.” I also agree that “Until the evil passes a threshold of inconvenience in its results, the SSG would think being immersed in depravity was amenable.” The prodigal son’s depravity passed that threshold of inconvenience through circumstances unique to his case. Perhaps Paul saw that immersion in depravity would indeed cause the SSG to pass that threshold of inconvenience through circumstances unique to his case, too, even if it does not inherently or necessarily do that in all other cases. I mean if we are ready to say that Paul had the power to place an effective curse on someone, is it not as likely, or even more likely, that Paul had the power of perception sufficient to judge that an immersion in depravity would cause the SSG to pass the threshold of inconvenience?

But, despite that, I like your suggestion that there was a curse involved. I do have a question about a conclusion you drew, though. You said, “The phrase is much more likely to be a polite way of talking about being cursed with a painful and likely fatal result of his sins,” followed by “Then being cut off from the church would be meaningful to the SSG.” How exactly does being cursed with a painful and likely fatal result of his sins make being cut off from the church more meaningful to the SSG any more than would immersion in depravity, which itself could cause pain and death, despite superficial and temporary pleasure?
lancia
 
Posts: 181
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 11:51 am

Re: II Thessalonians 1:8-9

Postby ChrisB » Sat Sep 06, 2014 10:42 pm

Just a quicke question. What does SSG mean?
How much more will those receive God's abundant provision of grace and the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ Rom 5 vs 17
User avatar
ChrisB
 
Posts: 255
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 2:30 am
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: II Thessalonians 1:8-9

Postby lancia » Sun Sep 07, 2014 4:32 am

ChrisB wrote:Just a quicke question. What does SSG mean?


I think we are going to have to wait for a definitive answer from Jason on this one because he was the first to use the abbreviation in this thread. I used it because he used it to describe the sexually deviant man who is the reason for Paul's "deliver to Satan" message in 1 Corinthians 5:5.

But SSG is known to mean "super stud guy."
Last edited by lancia on Sun Sep 07, 2014 7:39 am, edited 2 times in total.
lancia
 
Posts: 181
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 11:51 am

Re: II Thessalonians 1:8-9

Postby Paidion » Sun Sep 07, 2014 5:51 am

Oh. I thought it meant "sad, sick gigolo".
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 76 years. I am now in my 80th year of life.
User avatar
Paidion
 
Posts: 4010
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 5:38 pm
Location: The Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: II Thessalonians 1:8-9

Postby Jonny95 » Sun Sep 07, 2014 7:06 am

ChrisB wrote:Just a quicke question. What does SSG mean?

Step-mum sleeping guy

Just a quick question - what does 'quicke' mean? ;)
John 13:34-35 “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.”
User avatar
Jonny95
 
Posts: 351
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2014 4:06 pm
Location: London

Re: II Thessalonians 1:8-9

Postby JasonPratt » Mon Sep 08, 2014 8:35 am

Indeed, "the Step-mom Sleeping Guy". ;) I'd use an actual name for him if Paul gave one, but since he doesn't and that's the final straw for Paul, I go with that for a humorous convenience.

I'll have to get back to the rest of the thread later this afternoon, if possible. I think we're pretty much in agreement about the underlying concepts; whether Paul expected the SSG to die or not is, to me, fairly minor.
Cry of Justice -- 2008 Novel of the Year (CSPA retailer poll).
Sword To The Heart -- metaphysical argument to orthodox trinitarianism (and thence to universalism)
Trinitarian universalist exegetics, on internet radio, or here in forum posts.
User avatar
JasonPratt
Administrator
 
Posts: 9713
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 5:08 pm
Location: Dyer, TN

Re: II Thessalonians 1:8-9

Postby JasonPratt » Wed Sep 10, 2014 4:39 am

lancia wrote:How exactly does being cursed with a painful and likely fatal result of his sins make being cut off from the church more meaningful to the SSG any more than would immersion in depravity, which itself could cause pain and death, despite superficial and temporary pleasure?


Death by veneral disease (named after Venus) would be a result of immersion in depravity, so I'm not distinguishing the two categories.

But anyway, the difference is that the church, unlike society at large, had an active reputation for merciful acceptance and treatment of people whose ills would be feared and rejected by society. Back before he became a Christian, sociologist Rodney Stark, studying why and how Christianity survived and thrived under a few centuries of rejection and persecution, inferred one reason being that they not only took better care of each other medically (leading to a couple of sharp population spikes after Empire wide calamities, since Christians didn't die off as much from those), but also took better care of non-Christians, helping to socially offset tendencies to persecute them.

Consequently, any socially revolting disease suffered by the SSG (not necessarily veneral, but that would be thematically appropriate) would give him strongly positive reasons to appreciate the fellowship he had lost.


It might be also topically relevant that, in a general resurrection of the good into transformed unperishing bodies, and of those who are still doing evil things into bodies still perishing (though now kept alive despite the perishing nature of their bodies), all impenitent rebels in the Day of the Lord to come would be in much the same position as the SSG to the church. By the same token, just as it will be important to the salvation of the impentient that the mature flock joins the Good Shepherd in ministering to the least of His flock, it would be important for the Corinthian church, and for St. Paul himself, to do their duty and kick into gear for ministering to the SSG once his condition had advanced (even if, this being before the general resurrection, he still eventually dies from it. But if not, great!) The perfected Church won't (presumably) have to be chivvied out by the Holy Spirit to minister to the impenitents suffering from fondling their sins, but the Corinthian church and even the often-prickly St. Paul might lag more than they should, and so Paul might have to get them (including himself) up and going to help the SSG -- if 2 Cor refers back to that situation.

Isaiah 4, however (getting back to the main topic a bit more ;) ), shows the same concept the other way around: those who don't survive (in some fashion) seek reconciliation, in their misery, with the the righteous who did survive the coming of YHWH in the Day of the Lord, and so are cleaned of their filth by YHWH with the spirit of crisis (exactly the same term in Greek used by Paul for the judgment at 2 Thess 1) and the spirit of burning.
Cry of Justice -- 2008 Novel of the Year (CSPA retailer poll).
Sword To The Heart -- metaphysical argument to orthodox trinitarianism (and thence to universalism)
Trinitarian universalist exegetics, on internet radio, or here in forum posts.
User avatar
JasonPratt
Administrator
 
Posts: 9713
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 5:08 pm
Location: Dyer, TN

Re: II Thessalonians 1:8-9

Postby lancia » Wed Sep 10, 2014 7:04 am

JasonPratt wrote:Death by veneral disease (named after Venus) would be a result of immersion in depravity, so I'm not distinguishing the two categories.

But anyway, the difference is that the church, unlike society at large, had an active reputation for merciful acceptance and treatment of people whose ills would be feared and rejected by society. Back before he became a Christian, sociologist Rodney Stark, studying why and how Christianity survived and thrived under a few centuries of rejection and persecution, inferred one reason being that they not only took better care of each other medically (leading to a couple of sharp population spikes after Empire wide calamities, since Christians didn't die off as much from those), but also took better care of non-Christians, helping to socially offset tendencies to persecute them.

Consequently, any socially revolting disease suffered by the SSG (not necessarily veneral, but that would be thematically appropriate) would give him strongly positive reasons to appreciate the fellowship he had lost.


It might be also topically relevant that, in a general resurrection of the good into transformed unperishing bodies, and of those who are still doing evil things into bodies still perishing (though now kept alive despite the perishing nature of their bodies), all impenitent rebels in the Day of the Lord to come would be in much the same position as the SSG to the church. By the same token, just as it will be important to the salvation of the impentient that the mature flock joins the Good Shepherd in ministering to the least of His flock, it would be important for the Corinthian church, and for St. Paul himself, to do their duty and kick into gear for ministering to the SSG once his condition had advanced (even if, this being before the general resurrection, he still eventually dies from it. But if not, great!) The perfected Church won't (presumably) have to be chivvied out by the Holy Spirit to minister to the impenitents suffering from fondling their sins, but the Corinthian church and even the often-prickly St. Paul might lag more than they should, and so Paul might have to get them (including himself) up and going to help the SSG -- if 2 Cor refers back to that situation.

Isaiah 4, however (getting back to the main topic a bit more ;) ), shows the same concept the other way around: those who don't survive (in some fashion) seek reconciliation, in their misery, with the the righteous who did survive the coming of YHWH in the Day of the Lord, and so are cleaned of their filth by YHWH with the spirit of crisis (exactly the same term in Greek used by Paul for the judgment at 2 Thess 1) and the spirit of burning.


Yes, it seems that both a curse and an immersion in depravity can make being cut off from the church more meaningful. Thanks for the thorough explanation.
lancia
 
Posts: 181
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 11:51 am

Re: II Thessalonians 1:8-9

Postby Paidion » Wed Sep 10, 2014 7:38 am

I just don't understand why so much is made of the SSG being cut off from the church. He was cut off out of love so that he might repent. Satan didn't destroy the SSG by giving him an early death. The SSG repented, was forgiven, and restored to the church. End of story.
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 76 years. I am now in my 80th year of life.
User avatar
Paidion
 
Posts: 4010
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 5:38 pm
Location: The Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: II Thessalonians 1:8-9

Postby Caleb Fogg » Wed Sep 10, 2014 9:57 am

Paidion wrote:I just don't understand why so much is made of the SSG being cut off from the church. He was cut off out of love so that he might repent. Satan didn't destroy the SSG by giving him an early death. The SSG repented, was forgiven, and restored to the church. End of story.


Agreed.
User avatar
Caleb Fogg
 
Posts: 225
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 12:04 pm

Re: II Thessalonians 1:8-9

Postby ChrisB » Thu Sep 11, 2014 11:08 am

At least it wasn't a stupid question :? Thanks for all the earlier info Jason and co re the passage in 2 Thes.
How much more will those receive God's abundant provision of grace and the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ Rom 5 vs 17
User avatar
ChrisB
 
Posts: 255
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 2:30 am
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: II Thessalonians 1:8-9

Postby JasonPratt » Sat Sep 13, 2014 6:37 am

Paidion wrote:I just don't understand why so much is made of the SSG being cut off from the church. He was cut off out of love so that he might repent. Satan didn't destroy the SSG by giving him an early death. The SSG repented, was forgiven, and restored to the church. End of story.


So much is made out of it due to (1) the SSG not being clearly the guy whom Paul is recommending be restored in 2 Cor (nor does his story clearly have a happy ending even if 2 Cor is included -- we don't know what happened with the SSG afterward, whether he accepted the offer or even whether he lived or died after accepting the offer), and;

(2) because Paul strongly contrasts two expectations: the SSG's sarx being olethron'd by Satan, using a term Paul elsewhere connects directly to people being physically killed; and the SSG's spirit being saved in the Day of the Lord to come.

The two stories aren't mutually exclusive, but do require Paul to be wrong (though in a good way) about when he expects the salvation to happen and wrong (in a good way) about what he expects to happen before the salvation.


But the key point is that Paul can expect someone to be olethron'd (even by Satan, though with the authoritative permission of God -- through an apostle in this case), and yet still be saved in the same Day of the Lord Paul is talking about other evildoers being olethron'd in 2 Thess 1:8-9, even with eonian olethroning.
Cry of Justice -- 2008 Novel of the Year (CSPA retailer poll).
Sword To The Heart -- metaphysical argument to orthodox trinitarianism (and thence to universalism)
Trinitarian universalist exegetics, on internet radio, or here in forum posts.
User avatar
JasonPratt
Administrator
 
Posts: 9713
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 5:08 pm
Location: Dyer, TN

Re: II Thessalonians 1:8-9

Postby Jonny95 » Mon Sep 15, 2014 8:32 am

Could you not compare SSG being handed over to Satan to Job being handed over to Satan in Job 2:6? It's different circumstances of course; SSG man is obviously not righteous and is being handed over to Satan as some sort of remedial punishment, whereas Job is 'blameless and upright' and seems to be being handed over to Satan more for Satan's benefit than his own. At the same time, there is some sort of sanctification within Job, shown most clearly in the first six verses of chapter 42.
John 13:34-35 “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.”
User avatar
Jonny95
 
Posts: 351
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2014 4:06 pm
Location: London

Re: II Thessalonians 1:8-9

Postby ChrisB » Mon Sep 15, 2014 9:00 am

Could the phrase "hand over to Satan" be a figure of speech? Such as we might say "leaving someone to their own devices"? I just wonder if we are being a bit too literal over this question? :roll:
How much more will those receive God's abundant provision of grace and the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ Rom 5 vs 17
User avatar
ChrisB
 
Posts: 255
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 2:30 am
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: II Thessalonians 1:8-9

Postby Gabe Grinstead » Mon Sep 15, 2014 9:19 am

ChrisB wrote:Could the phrase "hand over to Satan" be a figure of speech? Such as we might say "leaving someone to their own devices"? I just wonder if we are being a bit too literal over this question? :roll:


Good question. Didn't AE Knoch partner with someone who wrote a book on figures of speach?
Gabe Grinstead
 
Posts: 703
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 4:55 pm

Re: II Thessalonians 1:8-9

Postby davo » Mon Sep 15, 2014 8:49 pm

ChrisB wrote:Could the phrase "hand over to Satan" be a figure of speech? Such as we might say "leaving someone to their own devices"? I just wonder if we are being a bit too literal over this question? :roll:

This gets my vote too… I think we might be on a similar page . 8-)
“...the power and mercy of God’s grace is NOT limited to man’s ability to comprehend it...”
User avatar
davo
 
Posts: 1693
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:10 am
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: II Thessalonians 1:8-9

Postby Melchizedek » Tue Sep 16, 2014 3:37 pm

davo wrote:
ChrisB wrote:Could the phrase "hand over to Satan" be a figure of speech? Such as we might say "leaving someone to their own devices"? I just wonder if we are being a bit too literal over this question? :roll:

This gets my vote too… I think we might be on a similar page . 8-)


Agreed. I think we take many statements of scripture like this far too literally, because that's how many of us have been taught to think about them.
Belief doesn't change what is true, it only puts one in line with what is already true.
User avatar
Melchizedek
Moderator
 
Posts: 1751
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:08 pm
Location: Diagonally parked in a parallel universe.

Re: II Thessalonians 1:8-9

Postby Paidion » Tue Sep 16, 2014 5:57 pm

...and yet still be saved in the same Day of the Lord Paul is talking about other evildoers being olethron'd in 2 Thess 1:8-9, even with eonian olethroning.


Of course the "olethroning" of evildoers is an "eonian olethroning" (lasting destruction). This destruction has its source "from the presence of the Lord and the glory of his might". (The word "away" is not in the Greek as you know, and, in my opinion, has been inserted by some translators in order to set forth a particular exegetical bias as scriptural.)

Again this destruction is the destruction of the self-life (or flesh), and it is as LASTING destruction. It is not merely a temporary measure.
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 76 years. I am now in my 80th year of life.
User avatar
Paidion
 
Posts: 4010
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 5:38 pm
Location: The Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: II Thessalonians 1:8-9

Postby TheSpaghettiKid » Mon Nov 10, 2014 11:42 am

Hi guys. I've been away for a while but came back looking for some more info on the scary ;) 2Thess passage and got caught up reading most of the thread here... and its wanderings. :lol:

2 things.

1) I just really love the intelligence and accommodating attitude that I find here at EU. SO refreshing.

2) "But anyway, the difference is that the church, unlike society at large, had an active reputation for merciful acceptance and treatment of people whose ills would be feared and rejected by society." WOW!!! Could it be that the Gospel is responsible for injecting into culture the notion that - "people can change"!?! AND that it is unjust to be forever defined by our most egregious fault(s). "Once a thief, always a thief." "Once a cheat, always a cheat." NOT SO IN THE GOSPEL!!

Surely the notion of personal reform wasn't completely absent before the Gospel. There are many examples of repentance and reform in the OT - to use a Bible example. Surely the idea of personal reform was not unheard of before the Gospel. However, The Gospel and The Church, operating as all that it's meant to be - as Gospel, ought to be a gigantic beacon reminding society - "You may reject, label and cast out, but God does not. Transformation is possible, even expected and demonstrated by 'Gospel Power'. There is hope, expectation of transformation, for ALL." Once again, the Gospel subverts the conventional wisdom of society that is so quick to draw lines and scapegoat.
TheSpaghettiKid
 
Posts: 22
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2012 1:56 pm

Re: II Thessalonians 1:8-9

Postby Origen; » Mon Oct 30, 2017 1:22 am

pilgrim wrote:Hi again Caleb
I have studied the second part now and I wish I could say that I was thoroughly convinced by the UR arguments. Note that they are plural (eg Paidion's differs markedly from Tom's). This plurality is always (to me) a warning flag, an indication of the straining needed in order for a text to comply with one's belief (or with other scriptural passages). I think Tom, in his replies, indicates as much and that we do have to live with the tension of texts which appear to be at odds with other texts.
I am glad to say that I am perfectly happy with the 'coming from' rather than the 'away from' interpretation. But as for the eternal destruction of (whatever), I generally ask myself (of any particular interpretation) "is that how the author would naturally write the passage if the proposed interpretation was what he was wanting to convey, or would he obviously have written it differently?"
For me, if Paul had intended to convey eternal annihilation of the person, then he could well have written in that manner. However, if Paul had intended to convey destruction of the wicked element in order to purify the person, I have a little difficulty in believing that he would have constructed the sentence in that manner.
However, the thread has helped to some degree. Perhaps it is TRUE that Jesus came to destroy the world, to destroy us. I am being serious. I have heard that Jesus does not want to make us better people, He wants to destroy us completely and make us anew. If only Paul had included that latter part in this text!
Oh well, I'll have to live with that, and I'll have to live with the tension of clearly seeing UR texts elsewhere whilst having to acknowledge (to any ECTers) that I see difficulties with the text in Thessalonians.
Thanks once again for your help.
John


The text is not a difficult one to reconcile with the Scriptural teaching of universal reconciliation(UR).

Simply put it speaks of an indefinite duration (=aionian, often deceptively rendered eternal/everlasting) of destruction:

http://www.hopebeyondhell.net/articles/ ... /eternity/

Therefore, whatever you understand by the word "destruction" - whether death, annihilation or ruin - the text is perfectly harmonious with UR passages of the Bible. Problem solved.

Now you can rejoice in the Good News!

9 Who, indeed, a penalty, shall pay—age-abiding destruction from the face of the Lord and from the glory of his might— (Rotherham)

9 who shall incur the justice of eonian extermination from the face of the Lord, and from the glory of His strength" (CLNT)

9 who shall suffer justice -- destruction age-during -- from the face of the Lord, and from the glory of his strength, (YLT)
Scholars Corner:
http://www.tentmaker.org/ScholarsCorner.html

Minimal Statement of Faith for Evangelical Universalists:
viewtopic.php?f=41&t=57
Origen;
 
Posts: 594
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: II Thessalonians 1:8-9

Postby Origen; » Mon Oct 30, 2017 2:58 am

Jonny95 wrote:Could you not compare SSG being handed over to Satan to Job being handed over to Satan in Job 2:6? It's different circumstances of course; SSG man is obviously not righteous and is being handed over to Satan as some sort of remedial punishment, whereas Job is 'blameless and upright' and seems to be being handed over to Satan more for Satan's benefit than his own. At the same time, there is some sort of sanctification within Job, shown most clearly in the first six verses of chapter 42.


Yes, God handed Job over to Satan for the destruction of Job's body, yet Satan was not allowed to take his life. Similarly the sinner of 1 Cor.5:4-5 was delivered by God's power to Satan for destruction of the flesh that he may be saved in the day of the Lord. Both may refer to a destruction of the body by Satan.

If (1) the goal of this destruction (1 Cor.5:5) was the annihilation of the sinner's fleshly nature, and if (2) destruction means annihilation again in 2 Thess.1:9, then it follows that 2 Thess.1:9 teaches the aionian annihilation of the - persons - of 2 Thess.1:9. For 2 Thess.1:9 refers to persons, not just the "flesh" of a person as in 1 Cor.5:5. Moreover, if this annihilation is so complete that it includes the entire person - spirit, soul & body - can it be harmonious with universal reconciliation (UR)? Not if UR requires the resurrection of the same body that ceases to exist, unless God recreating it counts as the same body & is not against Scripture.

A related matter is: did the salvation of this sinner ( Cor.5:1-5) require the total & 100% destruction/annihilation of his flesh nature? Or just repentance from a single type of sin that he was committing? Do the saved no longer have "the flesh" nature? If they still do, then the "flesh" to be "destroyed" in 1 Cor.5:5 does not refer to a sin nature being annihilated out of existence. https://www.gotquestions.org/two-natures.html

An alternate view is that the "flesh" of the sinner (1 Cor.5:1-5) refers to his body. To destroy (i.e. ruin) his body could be referring to weakness, sickness, disease, even death. Compare what Paul says a few chapters later:

1 Cor.10:29 For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body eats and drinks judgment on himself. 30 That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep.

Taking this understanding of "destruction" (1 Cor.5:5) as ruin or death to 2 Thess.1:9 the latter passage refers to aionion ruin or death. In the case of 1 Cor.5 it was for the purpose of salvation. So why not likewise with 2 Thess.1:9?
Scholars Corner:
http://www.tentmaker.org/ScholarsCorner.html

Minimal Statement of Faith for Evangelical Universalists:
viewtopic.php?f=41&t=57
Origen;
 
Posts: 594
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 6:43 pm

Previous

Return to Tom's Forums

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest