The Way/Theosis/entire sanctification.
- Thread starter Hepzibah
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
What I mean by old self is the old man. But the new man is created after the image of Christ. We are a new creature and old things (old man and his ways) are passed away ie, we are renewed by the Spirit of Christ within. I take all this as being a manner of speaking...human language describing spiritual things......only knowing in part. Not in a strict literal concrete sense, so I don't think it is something to set our positions in concrete and argue about. I find it wearying too.
Amen. As if we could annihilate our self anyhow. Only God can (literally I think) annihilate the self in hell, as Jesus said to fear him who can destroy both body and soul in hell (Gehenna....lake of fire).
Let's take note what the ECF' wrote about this. Annihilation or no?
The early Church Fathers, who were key theologians and leaders in the first few centuries of Christianity, wrote extensively on various doctrines, including the concept of hell and eternal punishment. Their writings helped shape the understanding of these topics within early Christian thought. Below is an overview of what some of the prominent early Church Fathers wrote about hell, with an emphasis on everlasting punishment:
1. Ignatius of Antioch (c. 35-110 AD)
Key Writings: Epistle to the Ephesians, Epistle to the Smyrnaeans
Teachings: Ignatius, one of the earliest Church Fathers, did not provide detailed descriptions of hell, but he emphasized the reality of eternal punishment for the wicked. He warned against heresy and apostasy, stressing that those who live in opposition to God’s will would face judgment and be excluded from eternal life, implying a belief in everlasting separation from God.
2. Justin Martyr (c. 100-165 AD)
Key Writings: First Apology, Dialogue with Trypho
Teachings: Justin Martyr articulated a clear belief in eternal punishment for the wicked. He argued that the souls of the righteous would enjoy eternal bliss, while the souls of the wicked would suffer "everlasting punishment" in fire. He viewed this as a matter of divine justice, where those who reject God and live in sin would face unending torment after the resurrection.
Quote: "For if they repent not, and cease not from their evil deeds, they shall not escape the judgment of God; for their souls go to the same place, and remain there in everlasting fire and suffer eternal punishment." (First Apology 21)
3. Irenaeus of Lyons (c. 130-202 AD)
Key Writings: Against Heresies
Teachings: Irenaeus affirmed the resurrection of the dead and the final judgment, where the righteous would inherit eternal life, and the wicked would be cast into "eternal fire." He emphasized that this punishment would be eternal and that those who reject God and His truth would experience perpetual suffering.
Quote: "The eternal fire was not originally prepared for men, but for him who beguiled man and caused him to offend — for him I say, who is chief of the apostasy, and for those who have become his associates." (Against Heresies 5.26.2)
4. Tertullian (c. 155-240 AD)
Key Writings: Apology, On the Resurrection of the Flesh, Against Marcion
Teachings: Tertullian was one of the earliest Latin theologians who wrote extensively about the afterlife, including the concept of hell. He believed in the literal and eternal nature of hellfire, which he described as the fate of the wicked. Tertullian’s writings often contrasted the eternal life of the righteous with the eternal torment of the damned, seeing both as equally perpetual.
Quote: "The fire which did not spare the burning of the Sodomites, nor the Egyptians, nor the citizens of Sodom, that very same fire will be eternal for the ungodly. Eternal, because for the great things, there are great penalties; and nothing is greater than to be drawn back from God." (Apology 48)
5. Clement of Alexandria (c. 150-215 AD)
Key Writings: Stromata, The Instructor
Teachings: Clement of Alexandria had a somewhat more nuanced view of punishment. While he acknowledged the existence of hell and the punishment of the wicked, he emphasized the remedial and corrective nature of divine punishment. Clement suggested that punishment served a purpose beyond mere retribution, potentially leading to repentance and restoration.
Quote: "The very fact that punishment is meant to be remedial shows that it is not endless; for that which is everlasting does not cease. But the punishment does cease, and its cessation proves its purpose." (Stromata 7.16)
6. Origen of Alexandria (c. 184-253 AD)
Key Writings: On First Principles, Against Celsus
Teachings: Origen is one of the most complex figures among the early Church Fathers, particularly regarding his views on hell. While he acknowledged the existence of hell and the reality of punishment, he also entertained the possibility of apokatastasis, or the eventual restoration of all things, including the eventual salvation of all souls. This idea, however, was later condemned as heretical.
Quote: "The wicked will be punished, but not eternally. After they have been purified and corrected in the torments of hell, they shall obtain salvation and return to God." (On First Principles 1.6.3)
7. Cyprian of Carthage (c. 200-258 AD)
Key Writings: Treatises, Epistles
Teachings: Cyprian, a bishop of Carthage, held a firm belief in the eternal punishment of the wicked. He warned of the fires of hell that would consume those who turn away from God, emphasizing that this punishment would be unending. Cyprian stressed the importance of living a righteous life to avoid the dreadful fate awaiting the unrighteous.
Quote: "Oh, what a day that will be, and how great when the Lord shall come to disclose, to convict, and to judge the secrets of all hearts... the torment of the wicked, everlasting fire!" (Treatise 13, Exhortation to Martyrdom 21)
8. Augustine of Hippo (c. 354-430 AD)
Key Writings: The City of God, Enchiridion, Confessions
Teachings: Augustine is one of the most influential theologians in Christian history, and his views on hell have significantly shaped Western Christian thought. He strongly defended the doctrine of eternal punishment, arguing that just as eternal life is given to the righteous, eternal torment is the due punishment for the wicked. Augustine rejected the idea of universal salvation and insisted on the perpetual suffering of those in hell.
Quote: "The penalty, therefore, is everlasting. Whether one is good or evil, he will be in some sense eternal. For as those who are saved shall have an unending happiness, so the wicked shall have an unending punishment." (The City of God 21.23)
To sum this up @Lizbeth-
The early Church Fathers largely supported the doctrine of eternal punishment for the wicked, often described as everlasting fire or torment. While there was some variation in how this was understood—ranging from literal fire to more metaphorical interpretations, and from a focus on retributive justice to corrective punishment—the dominant view was that hell represents an unending state of separation from God, characterized by suffering and despair. This traditional view was solidified over time, particularly with Augustine’s influential writings, which became foundational for later Christian theology.
Give me your input-Annihilation, or everlasting existence away from the Christ and the Father?
To me we seem to be presented with two options, either eternal life or no eternal life (ie, perish/be destroyed like the beasts of the earth). But that second death is eternal in the sense that there is no coming back from it, how I'm looking at it. Dead animals and criminals were cast onto the garbage dump Gehenna fire....which seems to give us the picture. And that fire burned continuously, it was never extinguished.
Here is my question for you. IF Theosis is a spiritual state that is only given by God when He determines to do so, how do you mean this, "we are to partake . . ."? Do you mean, this is what happens after Theosis, we do as we were intended to do, to partake of Christ moment by moment? Or do you mean, We are supposed to be partaking of Christ moment by moment so we can maintain Theosis?
Or am I misunderstanding you, that we partake of Christ, in so doing showing forth His death, in our crucified life, that being Theosis?
Much love!
The most consistently applicable translations and interpretation, as I see it, speak of "eternal life" and "eternal ruin", that being the second death. Everlasting torment is also stated, in the same wording speaking of it being everlasting as is used to describe our everlasting life.
One of the Targums I read some many years ago in speaking of Isaiah 66, "the worm that never dies", this is the remains of a man who has been destroyed by God. As Jesus said, prophesied in Psalm 22, But I am a worm and not a man . . .
Much love!
Glad you have read the Targums/Plural.
--and look upon the carcasses of the men that have transgressed against me. The Targum is,
"against my Word;''
against Christ, whose person they blasphemed, denying him to be God; whose office, as a Mediator and Saviour, they rejected; whose doctrines they contradicted; and whose ordinances they despised: these are not the carcasses of the camp of Gog and Magog, the Jews so call, as Kimchi interprets it; though it may have reference to the carcasses of Gog's army, the Turks, that will be slain in their attempt to recover Judea, Eze_38:1 or else the carcasses of those that will be slain at the battle at Armageddon, Rev_16:16 or the army of Gog and Magog, at the end of the thousand years, Rev_20:8.
The Talmudists (t) observe from hence, that the wicked, even at the gate of hell, return not by repentance; for it is not said, that "have transgressed", but "that transgress"; for they transgress, and go on for ever; and so indeed the word may be rendered, "that transgress", or "are transgressing" (u); for they interpret it of the damned in hell, as many do; and of whom the following clauses may be understood:
for their worm shall not die; with which their carcasses shall be covered, they lying rotting above ground; or figuratively their consciences, and the horrors and terrors that shall seize them, which they will never get rid of.
The Targum is,
"their souls shall not die;''
as they will not, though their bodies may; but will remain to suffer the wrath of God to all eternity: neither shall their fire be quenched; in hell, as Jarchi interprets it; those wicked men, the followers and worshippers of antichrist, will be cast into the lake which burns with fire and brimstone; they will for ever suffer the vengeance of eternal fire; and the smoke of their torment shall ascend for ever and ever, Rev_14:10
Gill.
It was called the gehenna of fire, and was the image which the Saviour often employed to denote the future punishment of the wicked. In that deep and loathsome vale it seems to have been the common expectation of the Jews that some great battle would be fought which would establish the supremacy of their nation over all others.
Hence, the Chaldee renders this, ‘They shall go forth, and shall look upon the dead bodies of the sinners who have rebelled against my word; because their souls shall not die, and their fire shall not be extinguished; and the wicked shall be judged in Gehenna (בגיהנם begēyhı̂nâm from גי gay and הנם hinnôm, hence coming down into Greek as γέεννα geenna), until the righteous shall say, We have seen enough.’ It is, however, by no means certain that Isaiah refers here especially to the valley of Hinnom. The image in his mind is evidently that of a vast army slain, and left to putrify on the field unburied, and where fires would be kindled in part to consume the heaps of the slain, and in part to save the air from pestilential influences, All the enemies of God and his church would be like such a vast host strewed on the plains, and the perpetuity of his kingdom would be finally established.
Barnes
But I am not going to establish a doctrine on hell based on one or two verses-adding or subtracting. Since the Rabbis concept of the afterlife is different than the West.
Or am I misunderstanding you, that we partake of Christ, in so doing showing forth His death, in our crucified life, that being Theosis?
We are eating of His body and drinking of His blood, moment by moment, if we are in Christ, to my understanding, is to no longer showing forth His death, as He is living within us. The physical giving way to the spiritual.
To remain in Christ, I have found, is to be on guard against trusting once again in our own understanding. To be determined to see everything through the eyes of the spirit and to trust that He will keep us:
Jude:24 Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy,
I don't know about this, but I wonder, that we may see things more closely the same than our words seem to make it sound.
Much love!
I would advise you to exercise caution and conduct your own research. What you're reading here is akin to studying the Bible, where even a small amount of error can affect the whole understanding. She provided links to the church fathers, and Bible.org also offers a wealth of information. Keep in mind that you are only receiving part of the story.
Hence the constant miscommunication.
Johann.
Well, I think I'm separating these views from the Scriptures. I remain convinced that we are complete in Christ being reborn from God, His work in us though our faith in Him, by which the same faith allows us to stand in grace. I find this thought communicated in this, for instance:
He is able to keep us from falling, we are to trust in Him to do just that. Though for me, the words, "to remain in Christ", we are baptized into Christ and never leave Him, He never leaves us, though I understand her to be saying, "to continue in our walk in sanctification in Christ", though I may be taking liberties. I realize the difference in our views of rebirth. That actually seems more the fundamental disagreement between us.
To me it's not so much a matter of what the early commentaries say, it's more a matter of whether these ideas we are discussion are supported in the Scriptures, and I don't see that.
Much love!
Last edited:
@marks the main issue, is whether we can have the promises of God fulfilled in this life. From what l can see, you interpret scripture to mean that no, it is not until the next life but from your own experience, you get cognitive dissonance. Perhaps some western teachers of entire sanctification might help and aiming to avoid getting distracted by the minor points of contention.
That's not correct, in fact, I know otherwise. My view is that we live that way if we are walking in that faith.
Much love!
Yes, when are His promises fulfilled?
John 1:11-13 KJV
11) He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
12) But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
13) Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
Receiving Jesus, believing in His name, give us the right/authority (exousia) to be born of God, which is denoted in a past tense here, following "receive and believe".
So. Here's the question. Is rebirth given by God following our receiving of and believing in Jesus? OR is there some intermediary step or requirement between "receive and believe" and "born of God", that doesn't appear here, and if so, what is the Scriptural support for this?
Much love!
