I love The Bible Project. Truly, it’s the best online Bible resource I’ve ever come across. I’ve been a monthly supporter since the early days, I’ve watched most of their 134 videos and soon will have listened to all of their podcasts. Jon Collins and Tim Mackie are easy to listen to, full of interesting insights, and express a genuine curiosity and desire for truth. I particularly love the way their work paints a beautiful, grand, biblical metanarrative showing God’s wonderful intentions for humanity in Eden, the amazing lengths He’s gone to throughout history (and especially through Jesus), and anticipating an exciting, joyful, glorious future with God in the New Creation.
However, I find that the clearer the biblical metanarrative is presented, the more jarring Eternal Conscious Torment becomes… So I was intrigued when Jon Collins and Tim Mackie discussed this in their Day Of The Lord Part 6 podcast episode. The context is that they have been discussing and comparing the OT warrior savior images (e.g. Isa 63) and modern movies (e.g. The Magnificent Seven), with the NT warrior savior images (e.g. Rev 19:11) and the Cross. They conclude that:
Tim: [In Revelation, John is] constantly taking aggressive, violent, Old Testament “Day of the Lord” imagery and saying the Cross was the Day of the Lord. It was the fulfillment of those images and it did not involve God killing his enemies—it actually involved the Son of God allowing Himself to be killed by them.
I think it’s inescapable. This is why readings of the book of Revelation that, I don’t know, help people look forward to some future cataclysm of violence, where Jesus comes of the sword cutting people apart—to me it’s not just a misreading of Revelation, to me it’s a betrayal of Jesus. Because what you’re saying is, “Oh, Jesus used the means of the cross but that was just like his way of being nice for a little bit but really he’s…”
Jon: “Ultimately he will use [death and] the threat of death as his true power to bring justice.”
Day Of The Lord Part 6 (24m 8s)
(As an aside, this is similar to what William Cavanaugh said to me in Was God Violent To Jesus? Is Jesus Coming Back Mad As Hell?—Cavanaugh Interview)
What they discuss next is what I’ll focus on as it raises many questions.
Tim: Yeah. And I’m not saying that there isn’t a reality to final justice, where people suffer the consequences of their decisions if they don’t yield to Jesus—I’m not saying that. But what I am saying is the New Testament is transforming these violent images of the Day of the Lord in a really important way—that had gone largely unnoticed by the modern Western Church. Because we love Denzel Washington [hero in The Magnificent Seven] strangling the bad guy to death.
Jon: Yeah, it feels good.
Tim: Yeah, it’s satisfying.
Day Of The Lord Part 6 (25m 29s)
I believe strongly in the reality of final justice (indeed it’s one of the reasons I started this blog) and that there are unpleasant consequences to giving our heart to anything other than our loving Father. I think seeing evil being stopped is satisfying, and rightly so. However, an issue arises when the method of stopping an evil (e.g. a “bad guy”) is evil (e.g. strangling someone). Our conscience should make us feel conflicted about that “solution”. Thankfully, there is a method of stopping evil that isn’t evil—that method is love—doing good to those who sin against you, melting their hearts, transforming them from foe to friend—rebel to follower of Jesus.
Do not repay evil with evil or insult with insult, but with blessing, because to this you were called so that you may inherit a blessing.
1 Peter 3:9, BSB
If your enemy is hungry, feed him. If he is thirsty, give him something to drink. For in so doing you will be heaping fiery coals on his head [melting his opposition?]. Do not be conquered by evil, but conquer evil with good.
Romans 12:20-21, CSB
Anyhow, that’s how the Day of the Lord comes to its completion in the last book of the Bible. It’s this paradox. Here he defeats the armies of evil and then (in chapter 20) Babylon, Death, the Beast (the dragon), they’re all cast into the Lake of Fire. They are assigned—they’re quarantined—to a place of eternal self-destruction, and that’s the defeat of evil. And you could say that’s a violent image, but it’s interesting, it’s people being consigned or handed over to what they’ve chosen, something that they’ve chosen, which is destruction.
Day Of The Lord Part 6 (26m 4s)
Respectfully, there’s a huge difference between quarantining something and defeating it. Quarantine may be a necessary step to stop the spread of a plague but it’s only when it’s completely eradicated that it is defeated. Leaving evil quarantined is even worse than quarantining a plague and walking away:
- it’s an affront to God’s holiness.
- it’s a thwarting of His good purpose for humans, their telos, that He first articulates in Genesis 1-2 and ultimately in Christ.
- it’s a denial of the praise and honour God rightly deserves.
- it’s a failure to bring restorative justice, leaving countless broken relationships festering, unhealed forever—victims never receiving apologies, nor closure.
Eternal self-destruction is even worse than suicide, it’s never a rational choice, it’s a sign of a severe, unhealthy delusion about what is good and what is evil. It’s what God has been working to fix since Genesis 3, which they seem to acknowledge in other episodes:
Tim: … the Old Testament becomes a story of the family of Abraham but all within that larger story of what is God going to do to rescue the world from itself…
The Bible as Divine Literary Art (35m 3s)
But back to the episode I’m focusing on:
Jon: Yeah, how did how did Butler talk about it? He talked about it as creating a place for that to exist but not inside of creation.
Day Of The Lord Part 6 (26m 50s)
A very confusing suggestion, because far as I know, there’s only one thing outside of creation, and that is God Himself… everything else is part of, within the category of, God’s creation. “Creating a place”, surely makes it creation?
Tim: Yeah, if somebody refuses, like Pharaoh, to acknowledge Jesus as their Lord (using Pharaoh as an icon or Babylon), then God will honor the dignity of that decision and allow people to exist in that place.
Day Of The Lord Part 6 (27m)
Pharaoh’s “refusal” is a contentious issue—I highly recommend reading Talbott’s discussion of Romans 9:17-18, in light of Romans 11:32 (p19 of chapter 5 of his book, which is freely available here). Anyway, even assuming Pharaoh freely rejected God, I don’t think it’s honoring to let someone essentially put themselves into a state of neverending suicide. I don’t think it’s a real, informed, rational decision. So I don’t see it having any “dignity.” Again, it’s a topic that Talbott has comprehensively addressed in his book, The Inescapable Love of God, but if you don’t have time to read or listen (there’s a great audiobook!), then I encourage you to read his Free-will Theodicies of Hell post (which I drew on in Engaging Orr-Ewing: How Could a Holy/Loving God Send People to Hell?).
Jon: Yeah, “confinement”, I think was the term.
Tim: Confinement, yes. But what God won’t allow is for that evil to pollute or vandalize his creation anymore. And so the end of Revelation is the New Jerusalem and then outside the city are… “So wait I thought they were in a Lake of Fire?” (in chapter 20) But then (in chapter 22) the wicked are just outside the city… So these images are that God will contain those who choose evil. And the point is that he won’t allow them to ruin his world anymore.
Day Of The Lord Part 6 (27m 17s)
I’m really not convinced that evil can be adequately confined in that way because humans (and God) are so deeply interconnected, we’re relational beings. When loved ones suffer, we suffer, God suffers. That suffering is polluting and vandalizing—it’s ruining any chance of harmony—of the promised Shalom. How can someone possibly be happy while their son, their mother, their husband, or their best friend is still destroying themselves? (And for some believers, all their family and loved ones are non-believers) If they are just outside the open gates, they can probably see, hear, and smell(?!) their torment.
At the end of Revelation, the only thirsty audience the Spirit and the bride (Christians) have are the wicked outside the gates. Perhaps, when the Spirit and the bride say, “Come!”, everyone who is thirsty actually comes!
13 thoughts on “Tim & Jon: Is Hell really outside creation & rationally chosen?”
The Book of Revelation pertains to Israel, not to the body of Christ. We are not “the bride of Christ” – an unscriptural term. We are the ecclesia which is His body. Our destiny is celestial, not terrestrial. Israel’s future is on this earth. They are “the bride, the wife of the Lambkin” (Revelation 21:9). If you don’t have it, I highly recommend the Concordant Literal Translation with Keyword Concordance. http://www.concordant.org
In my book “A Truer God: The Supreme Spirit of Light and Love in the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures,” I examine each of the five eons (we’re living in “the present wicked eon” – Galations 1:4), and God’s glorious “purpose of the eons” (Ephesians 3:11). Please see http://www.atruergod.com and keep up the good work.
I agree we are the ecclesia, Christ’s body but I think there’s plenty of support for us also being “the bride of Christ” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bride_of_Christ has Bible references). I also think everyone will be united with God on the renewed earth in the New Creation.
I read quite a bit of the CLT a few years ago and while it’s sometimes helpful, I’ve concluded that language is more complex and that it’s better to try to learn the nuances of the original languages.
I think there are eons, although defining them is tricky.
If you read Revelation 21:9-14, you’ll see that one of the seven messengers is plainly pointing to Israel as “the bride, the wife of the Lambkin.” You have the names of the 12 tribes and the 12 apostles of the Lambkin. Paul and the body of Christ are nowhere in view here. The Book of Revelation is all about Israel.
Competent teachers today – and there are very few – teach exactly what Paul taught (“the ideal teaching” – I Timothy 4:6) using his exact words translated concordantly:
“And what things you hear from me through many witnesses, these commit to faithful men, who shall be COMPETENT to teach others also” (II Timothy 2:2). and . . .
“Have a pattern (literally, stencil) of sound words, which you hear from me, in faith and love which are in Christ Jesus” (II Timothy 1:13). “Bride of Christ” is not a pattern of sound words. We certainly didn’t hear it from Paul.
Our destiny as Christ’s body is celestial – we have an expectation reserved for us in the heavens (Colossians 1:5). Figuratively, God the Father now blesses us with every spiritual blessing among the celestials, in Christ . . .” (Ephesians 1:3).
http://www.atruergod.com Another interesting book: “Genesis Characters and Events in Ancient Greek Art.” http://www.genesisingreekart.com
So I read your blog post and I was just wondering what your final conclusion was. I’m sure you explained it well enough, I just got a little confused at the end. I was just wondering if you could help me understand. So is what the article saying is that there is an eternal, conscious torment for those who don’t have Christ as Saviour? And the end of the discussion is where I got a bit confused. So What was the end meaning again? Don’t worry I’m not looking to argue or anything, I just want to be clear so I’m not misunderstanding you. I’m going to go back and re read it just to make sure I got it clearly. Thanks!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for commenting Chris! My conclusion is that in the ages to come, God doesn’t need to hide evil people out of sight from the saints (nor annihilate them, nor let them cease to exist) but that instead, God will continue to pursue the lost/sick/deluded until each and every created being is rescued.
This rescue is something everyone will freely accept because the further someone walks away from the Source of all that is good, worthwhile, robust, and lasting, the more unstable their life becomes. The Good brings life, joy, & meaning, whereas evil is inherently unstable, it collapses, it shatters, it falls apart, revealing that it’s utterly pointless, boring, disappointing, unattractive, undesirable, & repulsive—utterly unchoosable. As the Prodigal Son shows, delusions take time to break but break they must as darkness cannot withstand Light, ignorance & lies cannot withstand Truth, hate cannot withstand Love, death cannot withstand Life, and evil cannot withstand Good.
So while there probably will be a period of conscious torment for most people (primarily self-inflicted, although I think God is also actively disciplining like a good parent, “pruning” like a diligent gardener, “purging” like a skilled metalworker, correcting like a wise teacher, “operating” like an experienced surgeon, “shaping” like a creative potter, & punishing like a just judge), that will finish when God becomes “all in all” (1 Corinthians 15:28).
Hmmm…… So hell is more a purgatory/limbo state and all will eventually come to Christ? That would be awesome. But it’s just not biblical.
Daniel 12:2 says, “And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.”
Matthew 25:31-46 says, “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. And he will place the sheep on his right, but the goats on the left. Then the King will say to those on his right, “Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.” . . . Then he will say to those on his left, “Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. . . . And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.””
2 Thessalonians 1:5-10 says, “This is evidence of the righteous judgment of God, that you may be considered worthy of the kingdom of God, for which you are also suffering—since indeed God considers it just to repay with affliction those who afflict you, and to grant relief to you who are afflicted as well as to us, when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might, when he comes on that day to be glorified in his saints, and to be marvelled at among all who have believed, because our testimony to you was believed.”
Revelation 14:9-11 says, “If anyone worships the beast and its image and receives a mark on his forehead or on his hand, he also will drink the wine of God’s wrath, poured full strength into the cup of his anger, and he will be tormented with fire and sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever, and they have no rest, day or night, these worshipers of the beast and its image, and whoever receives the mark of its name.”
Thanks Michael for taking the time to read my post and engage with it.
I wouldn’t describe hell as “purgatory” as for many people that word implies some sort of “cleaning yourself up” or “earning entry into heaven”, whereas I think that hell is a place where the Holy Spirit continues to work in people to draw them to Christ—like He has worked in you in this age. Jesus is the only way in every age—no one can ever earn salvation.
I agree that everyone eventually coming to Christ would be awesome. While “awesome” is what we expect from God, I agree that what is biblical isn’t that subjective and simplistic.
Determining what is biblical is hard as we are trying to interpret each part of Scripture within the context of the whole canon of Scripture, while simultaneously trying to form a good interpretation of the whole of Scripture built from all the parts. I think The Bible Project does an excellent job, particularly in sketching out the meta-narrative from page 1 of Genesis through to the end of Revelation. I don’t think we can do the verses you’ve mentioned justice without fitting them into that context (books like https://www.koorong.com/search/product/the-evangelical-universalist-second-edition-gregory-macdonald/9781620322390.jhtml do that). However, for what it’s worth, I’ll make a few comments on each of the passages.
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/daniel/12-2.htm I think that “everlasting” is a poor translation of the Hebrew “olam”, which is a far less precise word (see http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/vocabulary_definitions_eternity.html and https://www.quora.com/What-does-the-Hebrew-word-olam-mean). The wide range of this word (and where translators agree that it can’t mean “everlasting”) is demonstrated in passages like: https://biblehub.com/text/psalms/143-3.htm , https://biblehub.com/text/proverbs/22-28.htm , https://biblehub.com/text/proverbs/23-10.htm , https://biblehub.com/text/jeremiah/6-16.htm I think “beyond sight” or “no end in sight” as in https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jonah+2%3A6&version=CEB is a far better translation. I think that was why the LXX chose the broad Greek word “aionios”, rather than the narrow “aidios” (https://reforminghell.com/2016/04/11/is-aionios-eternal%E2%80%95engaging-burks-view-of-hell%E2%80%95part-4/)
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/apostolic/matthew/25.htm I think that “eternal” is a poor translation of the Greek “aionios”. I also unpack why think “aionios” isn’t the focus of the parable in https://reforminghell.com/2015/12/20/jesus-parable-of-the-sheep-the-kids/
I engage 2 Thessalonians in https://reforminghell.com/2016/04/23/ruin-from-god%E2%80%95engaging-burks-view-of-hell%E2%80%95part-6/ and Revelation 14 in https://reforminghell.com/2016/05/09/fire-brimstone%E2%80%95engaging-burks-view-of-hell%E2%80%95part-8/
May God bless you brother.
I came across this post and thought it was interesting. We ought to help each other understand and know the truth. I hope as Christians we could have peaceful dialogue about our faith to grow together. I thought I would share my view with no disrespect to the Alex I respect his view. I just thought I would express some thoughts..
“Beyond the horizon”
“Beyond the horizon” in relation to time actually implies the nature of eternity. The description of the word “olam” you provided by Jeff on (Ancient-Hebrew.org) stated the word is used to describe a “time that is difficult to know and perceive”. That’s essentially the language we use to speak about “eternity”. It cannot be simply left at the concept of “beyond the horizon”. It’s not easy to manipulate the word when it’s used in reference to “time”. It’s appropriate to define it as “everlasting” since it is the only thing that is beyond the horizon of “time”.
Now, I’m not denying the word of various meaning but to state that it has a “wide range” of meaning is a bit misleading. It is used to mean the following…
In comparison to these it’s wise for us to consider the majority use of the word over the minority. Therefore using everlasting is not a “poor translation”. It’s in fact a far more precise meaning to use since most of the word’s meanings connotes something lasting for ever.
Let’s move to context.
Determining what is biblical is not as difficult as you say. The meaning (everlasting) fits the context, for example in Daniel 12:2 Since we take “everlasting life” to mean something eternal we take “everlasting contempt” to mean something eternal as well. We don’t assume the word to mean “a particular time” to fit our preferences. If we take “everlasting life” to mean something eternal, why then would we change the word’s meaning in the same verse to mean a certain amount of time? That’s twisting it’s meaning. The same thing occurs with Greek words in the New Testament.
What we cannot do is conclude that Heaven with God is eternal, and Hell is temporal when the same word is operating in the same text to describe an eternal state.
I would argue it’s either/or. The word either means eternal or temporal in regards to designation. Here’s where I think universalist find conflict, if we use it to mean something temporal we have to assume our time in heaven with God is temporal. Yet that is not what scripture teaches. I personally don’t subscribe to the liberty of changing the word’s meaning due to it’s ramifications of eternity in Heaven.
Your statement, “The Holy Spirit continues to work in people to draw them to Christ”, is not an idea derived from scripture. That idea neglects passages like Hebrews 9:27 which states, “it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgement.” There is no other age in which God is pursuing us but in this life.
I believe universalist get this idea from the presupposition that all men will come to love God at some point. The fact is that men are not in relationship to God because they haven’t been convinced, but because the genuinely hate him.
Romans 2:4-5 sheds some light on God’s patience. His patience is not eternal it would be unrighteous if it was. If God were eternally patient of evil it would make him an accomplice. Ongoing patience of evil eliminates the purpose of patience in the first place. God’s patience, in some cases runs out even of people while they are currently on earth. We see this in the book of Romans where God turns people over to a reprobate mind. Patience is not an everlasting opportunity; wrath is waiting. God is a pursuer not a beggar. He’s a savior not a stalker.
“4 Points of Quarantine”
I thought I would touch on the 4 points of Hell you mentioned above. I would agree with you on your points if Hell was indeed described as some kind of quarantine. I agree that theres a huge difference between quarantining something and defeating it. However, the Bible doesn’t deal with sin the same as with a pandemic. The word “quarantine” carries the notion that sin is simply dealt with geographically, when the Bible teaches that sin is something God deals with legally.
Therefore evil can be defeated, it is defeated legally by it’s indictment and judgement. Jesus words at the cross were “it is finished”, which meant sin was paid for in full. Sin’s defeat was the cross. The problem of sin was not it’s existence,(God gave man the freedom to commit it), the problem was a way of reconciliation to a holy God in spite of it.
You see, Hell is not a place where people are quarantined, hell is a place where people are condemned. Hell shouldn’t be viewed as something like a biohazard container, it’s better described as a prison for sin loving souls.
So in light of Hell described as a place of judgement, your points above fall apart. Here are my replies…
Hell’s existence is not an affront to God’s holiness, it compliments it. It is out of holiness that this judgements take place. Just as prisons are not an insult to humanity, they are expressions of humanity’s idea of justice.
Hell does not thwart God’s good purpose for humans, because his good purpose included that humans would have the “freedom” to choose it. His good purpose is not exclusive for the saved, it’s both accomplished by salvation or damnation.
Hell is not itself a “denial” of praise to God, it is a place for “people” who denied giving God what he rightly deserved. Besides he doesn’t “need” our praise, if we all shut our mouths the very rocks would cry out.
On point 4 I’m not sure completely what you mean by restorative justice, but I would describe hell as “perfect justice”. Your fourth point seems to sound like God is incapable of restoring hearts himself, which greatly belittles the power of his presence.
“In your presence is the fullness of joy”-Psalm16
God’s restoration doesn’t require men’s apologies. God alone is sufficiently capable of healing me and perfectly redeeming me with himself. He alone fills the voids and mends the fragments.
Now we are indeed deeply connected emotionally with others, but Jesus was explicit about the ramifications of our faith in him. He stated the cost in Matt 10:37 “He that loves father, mother, daughter, son etc… more than me is not worthy of me”. This implied the possibility of losing these relationships when coming into a relationship with Christ.
God is not loved as he deserves if he is not loved to the point where he is worth losing everything. It would help to realize that in Him we find everything we need. That’s what makes him God. Nevertheless, there’s a high cost to pay to be a disciple, but Jesus is worth it.
“Hell Heavy Emotions”
I sympathize with the emotions behind hell and eternal damnation. I so long for the salvation of close loved ones. My heart’s desire is that they would come to Christ, that they would “seek him while he may be found”, but like God I have to love people enough to respect their decision.
We naturally measure the severity of a crime against the idea of “value”. The most severe punishments deal with the violation against “people”, because we believe that the most sacred thing on earth is the inherent value of human life.
We understand that justice is what equates punishment with an offense, and we also see that the more valuable a thing is the greater is it’s violation, therefore the severer the punishment.
Now, if we took that same principle and applied it to the “infinite value” of God, what level of severity should God judge sin committed against him?
Eternal damnation only makes sense when we truly understand the severity of sin. And the severity of sin is something measured against the holiness of God. If God is “infinitely valuable” the punishment of an offense against him must be “eternal”. If the punishment of sin is any less than eternal, we lower the view of God’s worthiness. It also compromises the worth of Christ’s blood which he provided “eternally” after the order of Melchizedek. (Hebrews 7:2-3)
Jesus having offered himself a sacrifice provided blood of eternal quality capable of redeeming us from eternal punishment.
Now if we take it further and calculate the severity of rejecting this kind of grace, what severity do you suppose God would punish those who have trodden underfoot the Son of God?
I believe Hell is better understood from God’s standpoint. If the tables are turned and we feel the emotions of the Father over impenitent sinners who feel no remorse over the death of his most beloved, I believe we’d come to a greater understanding of His grace.
Thanks for engaging Timothy and sorry about the delay in responding. I agree that it’s good to peacefully seek to know the truth.
I think olam is describes things that are/were indefinite and that it’s our modernistic bias (particularly in the West) to measure and categorise things in a scientific fashion—to “nail things down”. Out of the list of words you shared, I’d suggest that “Ancient” and “Old” retain the original Hebrew understanding, whereas most of the other English words add too much precision/certainty.
I think CEB translating olam as “no end in sight” (Jonah 2:6) is a better approach. Sure, “no end in sight” could be forever but it doesn’t have to be. If we used “no end in sight” in Dan 12:2, it doesn’t diminish our life with God—there would be no end in sight for our life with God. Conversely, for the perspective of the person experiencing God’s contempt, there would be “no end in sight” for them either. In both cases, peoples’ experiences are dependent on God and how He’s shaping us.
Hebrew 9:27 helpfully makes it clear that death and judgment are certain for everyone. At the same time, I don’t see how it indicates how God will judge each person, nor the ultimate outworkings on His judgments.
Re: free will, you may be interested by https://reforminghell.com/2018/05/01/checkmate-c-s-lewis/
Hello! Just had a proposed understanding of this aspect of Revelation.
Perhaps in the Telos, this army (or perhaps this legion), Babylon, Death, & the Beast are images which are meant to represent aspects of humanity (when they separate themselves from God, when they choose for themselves, when they choose bad, in addition to the good God provides).
In this understanding, there may be a day when our hearts have turned completely from TURNING from God, we will return to Him & walk in His ways, the world will abandon bad & good for good alone, when we repent.
I think it’s a poignant image that Adam in Hebrew means, & so represents, humanity, yet Isha (literally the woman/the wife in Hebrew) appears to represent humanity too, throughout the old testament & new, a bride, a woman, at our worst, a prostitute.
But we, Adam the Isha, humanity the bride/woman, will return to our husband & true soulmate, God, & so rule & reign over the earth as was originally intended, alongside Him, yet as His physical embodiment here.
What I’m saying & what I believe, is that all of Adam will one day return to the One who Loved us first, & when we come to Him we will leave our own badness (in Hebrew ‘Ra’ – evil, destruction, calamity) behind & it will be destroyed completely, eternally, or I’m other words, gone forever, destroyed forevermore.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks, that’s an interesting take 🙂
Do you think Tim and Jon are univerilists? Or you just agree with most with what they say and not the stuff about eternal seperation.
No, but I think much of their theology should push them towards universalism. For example, most of their content portrays God loving each and every human ever created and, in other videos, they show God achieving His desired good purposes (reconciliation, purification, sanctification, etc) even with the most stubborn and rebellious people.