On Universalism

[-Peacemaker-]

Point of clarity: do you assume eternal damnation when you use the word?

.

Indeed, it's what orthodox believers call the second death

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

A big part of it for me is simply acknowledging a need for justice as opposed to just sweeping it under the rug which is my big problem with universalism. Even forgetting damnation for a second, I don't see how God's love can surpass a need for justice. Unbiased justice doesn't seem like something that can be overcome by love. Anger, if we're simply talking about an emotion can perhaps settle due to an overflowing of love, but not justice.

Funny... injustice was one of my reasons for rejecting salvation by faith (and damnation by lack of faith).

 

[Storm]

Indeed, it's what orthodox believers call the second death

OK, then. Do you honestly believe that eternal hell is justice, or retribution? Because that is the premise Universalism rejects.

 

[Storm]

Funny... injustice was one of my reasons for rejecting salvation by faith (and damnation by lack of faith).

Penguin, with all due respect, Jungle and I agreed to certain ground rules via pm before starting this discussion. One of those was to keep the focus of the conversation on the doctrine of Universalism and not get sidetracked by comparison to the salvation/ damnation paradigm.

As I told him, some references are obviously unavoidable, but please don't tempt him.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Penguin, with all due respect, Jungle and I agreed to certain ground rules via pm before starting this discussion. One of those was to keep the focus of the conversation on the doctrine of Universalism and not get sidetracked by comparison to the salvation/ damnation paradigm.

As I told him, some references are obviously unavoidable, but please don't tempt him.

I didn't mean to drag the thread off-track. I guess what I was trying to get at is that to me, a sense of justice points toward universalism, not away from it.

 

[Me Myself]

As long as they dont have eternal hell, I am good with them.

I liked some of what I read from the excerpts

 

[-Peacemaker-]

OK, then. Do you honestly believe that eternal hell is justice, or retribution? Because that is the premise Universalism rejects.

I struggle with believing it but yes, I choose to believe it is just even if I can't fully comprehend it. Like I said though, I'm more curious to hear about how universalism deals with the idea of a God that needs justice. Does it reject that idea of God all together or does it simply disagree on what constitutes a just punishment? I can't count all the universalists that I've heard claim that God is too good to subject us to hell. What I don't hear them do is propose an alternative punishment that does fit their idea of justice. Is there an alternative? Perhaps a punishment that doesn't that doesn't include eternal damnation? Because as I've said, I don't see how love can overcome an unbiased need for justice.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

KOTJ, do you believe that human beings have innate value?

There's a view common among Quakers that each person contains within them the "Inner Light" of Christ, and that this fact demands that we respect and value each and every person.

Do you agree with this? If you do, do you think that this "Inner Light" goes away when a person has their earthly death?

If it doesn't, then I think that this demands that the good and just thing to do is to preserve that "Inner Light" somehow.

Or... in another way of looking at it, if Christ died for all of humanity, then damning human beings demeans Christ's sacrifice.

 

[Me Myself]

I struggle with believing it but yes, I choose to believe it is just even if I can't fully comprehend it. Like I said though, I'm more curious to hear about how universalism deals with the idea of a God that needs justice. Does it reject that idea of God all together or does it simply disagree on what constitutes a just punishment? I can't count all the universalists that I've heard claim that God is too good to subject us to hell. What I don't hear them do is propose an alternative punishment that does fit their idea of justice. Is there an alternative? Perhaps a punishment that doesn't that doesn't include eternal damnation? Because as I've said, I don't see how love can overcome an unbiased need for justice.

Justice is a means to an end. The end is well being. So there is no need for Justice if everyone has perfect well being.

There is simply no one to suffer the "injustice"

 

[Storm]

I struggle with believing it but yes, I choose to believe it is just even if I can't fully comprehend it. Like I said though, I'm more curious to hear about how universalism deals with the idea of a God that needs justice. Does it reject that idea of God all together or does it simply disagree on what constitutes a just punishment? I can't count all the universalists that I've heard claim that God is too good to subject us to hell. What I don't hear them do is propose an alternative punishment that does fit their idea of justice. Is there an alternative? Perhaps a punishment that doesn't that doesn't include eternal damnation? Because as I've said, I don't see how love can overcome an unbiased need for justice.

OK. I think there's a big difference between justice and punishment, and you're making an error conflating the two.

Like, for instance, on my knitting forum some time ago, there was a woman whose teenage son accidentally ruined a hand knit sweater (for you non-crafty people out there, that's an average of 2 HUNDRED hours' painstaking work, not to mention minimum $50 in materials, likely closer to $200) by throwing it in the washing machine instead of sorting properly. She posted asking for feedback on the "consequence" of taking away his his video games for a month, despite his profuse guilt. I replied that, while not outrageous, that wasn't a 'consequence,' but a punishment. The consequence was his guilt.

Justice, to me, is about consequences. Ideally, it's based on atonement and rehabilitation. As to how a theistic God might achieve that, I won't speculate. But I cannot believe that any God who gets any sort of gratification from eternal torture is God at all, and I WILL not believe that such an entity is worthy of my most cursory allegiance, much less adoration.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

I struggle with believing it but yes, I choose to believe it is just even if I can't fully comprehend it. Like I said though, I'm more curious to hear about how universalism deals with the idea of a God that needs justice. Does it reject that idea of God all together or does it simply disagree on what constitutes a just punishment? I can't count all the universalists that I've heard claim that God is too good to subject us to hell. What I don't hear them do is propose an alternative punishment that does fit their idea of justice. Is there an alternative? Perhaps a punishment that doesn't that doesn't include eternal damnation? Because as I've said, I don't see how love can overcome an unbiased need for justice.

I have only just noticed that you are coming from the standard Evangelical belief system which you see as "Orthodox" Which of course many other Christians do not.
You mentioned you had difficulty seeing the justice in damnation, but still you chose accept it. That is of course what one would expect in your situation.

Universalism does not deal with a God that needs Justice (punishment) It does not see God in that way in the first place. Very few universalists believe in a physical hell. Most would believe that God wants us to repent not punish us.

Most universalists do not believe every thing as written in the Bible to be "Fact".
all of the Bible is food for thought but is not dogma. Most Universalists or Unitarians reject Dogma. for some it is a statement of faith.
Universalist do not have a standard set of required beliefs...see below for one statement

Extract....

we are not bound by compulsory subscription to man-made creeds and doctrines of Faith.
We declare allegiance to the principle that:
the teaching of Christ must take precedence over the doctrines of a later time, and
Christian unity is to be sought, not in the uniformity of creed but in a common standard of duty and adherence to the commandments set out in the Holy Bible.
OUR FAITH
is governed by the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments of the Holy Bible
asserts and upholds the right of each and every individual to search these scriptural records for themselves and to use reason and personal conscience to discover God’s Divine Truth
removes Human Tests and Confessions of Faith that restrict private judgement and prevent free enquiry
upholds the beautiful simplicity of the great commandments as defined by Jesus Christ: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul and all your mind” and “You must love your neighbour as yourself”

 

[nazz]

This is not incompatible with Universalism. May I ask why you think it is?

It's simply a matter of observation. Consequences still follow action whether one is "saved" or not. For instance, the Bible says the "wages of sin is death". Christians still die just like everyone else.

There is no escaping karma.

ETA: Oh sorry, I misunderstood your question. I don't think it is incompatible with Universalism.

 

[Storm]

It's simply a matter of observation. Consequences still follow action whether one is "saved" or not. For instance, the Bible says the "wages of sin is death". Christians still die just like everyone else.

There is no escaping karma.

ETA: Oh sorry, I misunderstood your question. I don't think it is incompatible with Universalism.

Hee! I was about to ask....

Hate it when that happens.

 

[nazz]

Hee! I was about to ask....

Hate it when that happens.

I'm curious now though. How does the Univeralist view address the question of forgiveness for sin? I'm assuming it differs from the standard evangelical view?

 

[Storm]

I'm curious now though. How does the Univeralist view address the question of forgiveness for sin? I'm assuming it differs from the standard evangelical view?

Well, I can't answer for "the Universalist," of course. We're much too diverse. Adding the implicit assumption of belief in sin narrows it down a bit, but not sufficiently.

However, speaking in broad terms, we tend to believe that eventually the dead come to understand where they screwed up. Whether active atonement after that is necessary can't be fairly generalized.

 

[nazz]

Well, I can't answer for "the Universalist," of course. We're much too diverse. Adding the implicit assumption of belief in sin narrows it down a bit, but not sufficiently.

However, speaking in broad terms, we tend to believe that eventually the dead come to understand where they screwed up. Whether active atonement after that is necessary can't be fairly generalized.

I understand the UU is quite diverse and no longer even considers itself a Christian denomination per se. I guess I am thinking more of the historic roots of univeralism and whether they accepted the evangelical notion of vicarious atonement via Christ's death.

 

[Storm]

I understand the UU is quite diverse and no longer even considers itself a Christian denomination per se. I guess I am thinking more of the historic roots of univeralism and whether they accepted the evangelical notion of vicarious atonement via Christ's death.

Actually, I wasn't even limiting myself to UU, but thanks for confirming my point.

The trouble with generalizing Universalists is that Universalism is a single theological principle that's narrow enough to be applied to any and every organized religion, unorganized religion, spiritual non-religion (I think you get the idea) that assents to the existence of God. Granted, that assent is a requirement, but it's the ONLY requirement.

So, yeah. I can tell you my answer. I can tell you the answers of others I've known. I can make up answers that someone somewhere might believe coherently. I can't give you "the Universalist's answer," 'cause there ain't no such animal.

Sorry.

 

[nazz]

Actually, I wasn't even limiting myself to UU, but thanks for confirming my point.

The trouble with generalizing Universalists is that Universalism is a single theological principle that's narrow enough to be applied to any and every organized religion, unorganized religion, spiritual non-religion (I think you get the idea) that assents to the existence of God. Granted, that assent is a requirement, but it's the ONLY requirement.

So, yeah. I can tell you my answer. I can tell you the answers of others I've known. I can make up answers that someone somewhere might believe coherently. I can't give you "the Universalist's answer," 'cause there ain't no such animal.

Sorry.

No worries. Understood. So what's your answer?

 

[Storm]

LOL, I forgot the question, and have to go offline. Will respond when I come back. Later, doll.

 

[nazz]

LOL, I forgot the question, and have to go offline. Will respond when I come back. Later, doll.

No worries. My specific question would be do you personally believe there is some way we can avoid the consequences of our actions through an act of divine forgiveness.