The problem with 'proof-texts' in the Christian Bible to argue for an eschatological position

The problem with 'proof-texts' in the Christian Bible  to argue for an eschatological position 

Many Christians use an argument from 'parallelism' to argue that their escathological view is the correct one. In my opinion, though, this argument is problematic for the simple reason that by itself leads to an opposite conclusion depending on the text it is applied to. Consider these two following passages from the New Testament:

"Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life." (Matthew 25:46)

"Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people.  For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous." (Romans 5:18-19)

So, the supporters of the 'traditional' view of unending torments (and also, in their way those who believe that 'eternal punishment' is annihilation) quote Matthew 25:46 in support of their view: since the word eternal is applied to both life and punishment, punishment must be without end because life is without end and Jesus couldn't have used the same word in two different senses.

In contrast, the universalists quote the second passage (Romans 5:18-19) and note that just as condemnation/being made sinners applies to 'all people'/'the many' the same goes for justification/being made righteous and Paul couldn't have used the phrases 'all people'/'the many' in two different senses in the same sentence.  

To me this shows that using only Scriptural 'proof-texts' to prove any eschatological view leads to endless and fruitless debates. In fact, if one really wants to restrict oneself only to the Christian Bible, it seems to me that the texts are simply ambiguous (perhaps intentionally?) and hence a 'Scripture alone' approach at best leads to an 'apophatic' position with the regards to the eventuality that some people will be lost forever (and curiously enough something like this 'apophatic restraint' was championed by the Catholic theologian Hans urs Von Balthasar: https://ancientafterlifebelifs.blogspot.com/2026/06/quotes-from-hans-von-balthasars-dare-we.html). The ambiguity should be recognized by all parties in the debate. This doesn't mean necessarily that one can't prove an eschatological view in any way but that using the Bible alone isn't enough - the ambiguity should be recognized.   

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ancient and Medieval witnesses of the presence of ‘universalism’ in Diodore of Tarsus and Theodore of Mopsuestia

Ancient and Medieval witnesses of the presence of ‘universalism’ [1] in  Diodore of Tarsus and Theodore of Mopsuestia Introduction In this text, witnesses of Theodore of Mopsuestia’s and Diodore of Tarsus’ eschatological ‘universalist’ views, are reported.  As shall we see, the attestations of Diodore’s endorsement of a form of apokatastasis are always accompanied by an attestation of his disciple, Theodore, endorsing the same view. All these common testimonies are from Syriac sources, both Eastern-Syriac - Isaac of Nineveh (fl. 7 th century in his Second Part, 39.7-14; for Theodore only in his Second Part, 3.3.94 ), Solomon of Basra (fl. 13 th century in his book of the Bee, 60 ), Theodore bar Konai (fl. 8 th century in his Liber Scholiorum 2.63 ) - and Western-Syriac - John of Dara (fl. 9 th century in his On the Resurrection of Human Bodies 4.21 ). There is a brief comparison of a passage in Isaac’s Third Part (discourse 6) about eschatological punishments and the cont...
Read more

On the presence of universalism in East Syrian tradition

On the presence of universalism [1] in East Syrian tradition East Syrian theologians were influenced by Diodore of Tarsus (fl. 4 th century), his disciple Theodore of Mopsuestia (fl. 4-5 th century) who is called the ‘Interpreter/Exegete/Expositor’ in the East Syrian church (also called ‘Church of the East’), and Evagrius Ponticus (fl. 4 th century) [2] .  The point of this text is to show that there a was significant prevalence of the idea in this tradition (this doesn’t necessarily mean that it was a majority view). For more details about Diodore and Theodore see my previous post: https://ancientafterlifebelifs.blogspot.com/2026/01/ancient-and-medieval-witnesses-of_28.html An updated version of this post can be found here:  https://ancientafterlifebelifs.blogspot.com/2026/03/on-presence-of-universalism-in-east.html  A testimony of an opponent: Babai the Great (fl. 6 th century): Let me start with the testimony of an opponent of ‘universalism’ in the East-Syrian Ch...
Read more

On the possible presence of universalism in some ancient Christians Latin authors

  On the possible presence of universalism in some ancient Christians Latin authors Introduction In what follows, I’ll present some evidence for the presence of a doctrine or a sympathy of universalism (i.e. the belief that all human beings will be ultimately saved) in some Latin Fathers. There are some suggestive passages in the writings of Ambrose of Milan and John Cassian. Also, Rufinus of Aquileia, in his quarrel against Jerome of Stridon, while admitting that the fate of the wicked is a mystery shows a clear sympathy for the doctrine of universalism. However, it should be noted that none of the figures I quote in this post have been cited as universalists (as far as I know) before the 19 th century and, also, the interpretation of their texts never seem to have caused controversy among later writers (again, as far as I know) about the possible presence of genuine universalist beliefs or interpolations in their texts. While this fact alone doesn’t exclude an universalist...
Read more