Universal Salvation?

[James the Persian]

Thanks for clarifying that position. I am probably somewhere between you and Origen on this issue - I believe firmly it will happen, but I don't think God will force anyone to repent - given an infinate period of time, it is a statistical certainty that a changeable being will decide against prolonged suffering.

About reincarnation - I personally believe there is some kind of link between souls in different time periods. I don't believe in transmigration, but I do feel that there is a reason for people having visions of "past lives" and the feeling of "deja vu" when you go to places you have never been before. I believe that souls that are similar in spirit, in mind or in bloodline are influenced by one another, through God's spirit.

I haven't found anything that expressly condemns any such beliefs (and the Celtic tradition even emphasises it, drawing on pre-Christian ideas of the circular nation of time and the link between gods and saints), so what would your feelings on this be?

I've never thought about it to be honest. As long as you avoid a belief in transmigration of souls (or their preexistence) then it sounds like we would consider any such belief a theologoumenon: a personal belief which is consistent with/not in opposition to the faith but is not part of official teaching.

James

 

[Quiddity]

I don't think it's quite that clear cut. Opposition to apokatastasis is generally based on the idea that it violates free will, which God will not do. Origen's ideas do indeed seem to do this and so they are generally considered incompatible with Christianity. Others, however, did not take so strong a view and hence do not seem to cause the same problems Origen does. St. Gregory of Nyssa, for instance, merely believed that everyone, once confronted with the Truth, would wish to reconcile with God and that as God wills that all be saved, such reconcilliation would be accepted. In effect, then, St. Gregory of Nyssa's view is more of a strongly held hope, undoubtedly motivated by love for mankind, that all would eventually find salvation. I would share his hope, but I agree that this should not, ever, be taught as doctrine. It seems like a perfectly compatible theologoumenon, however.

It's also worth noting that apokatastasis was never directly and specifically condemned (hence why St. Gregory of Nyssa's beliefs have not been condemned). Origenism was, but as Origen's teachings included also the pre-existence and transmigration of souls, it is perfectly possible to believe in or (as I do) hope for universal salvation without falling under the anathema leveled at Origenism. Now, I doubt that everyone will actually be saved because some people will stubbornly persist in their ways even if it causes them harm, so I guess you could say that I do not believe in apokatastasis, but I most certainly do hold the beliefs of St. Gregory of Nyssa to be completely Christian and, even if he (and by extension, I) has erred, at least he erred on the side of love, which surely is the best possible motivation for such an error.

James

Unless I'm missing something, I'm not really sure we disagree. In fact I think we agree on a theologoumenon level. I was giving my personal view that is not in opposition to RC official doctrine. Many RC theologians feel comfortable just saying "it's a mystery". I tend to swim on deeper waters while being conscious of the boundaries. Origen swam to far. We both agree that there is no second chances after death. How someone manages to get saved outside the visible Church is an absolute mystery.

I think people can get themselves in such a deep psychological state of opposition that eternal rejection is possible. I know this comes hard to many people but I don't see this as being unrealistic in light of having more then my fair share of family criminals. My cousin for example is fully aware of what he is doing and has told me "I know what I'm doing is wrong in the eyes of many, but it fulfills me and I like it." He is one scary and conscious criminal. Not that I have lost hope in him (he's my family) but this conscious opposition is in itself mind blowing. "Why would anyone do that?" I ask myself. But clearly they do and have no interest in changing.

How many of you would share an ounce of space with such a person?

The vast majority of people won't think twice about locking up such a person. Many with life terms.

Peace be with you,
~Victor

 

[James the Persian]

We both agree that there is no second chances after death.

I'm not sure we do (or at least that we can be so certain). Purgatory as taught by the RCC seems like a second chance to me. Prayers for the dead imply some second chance. Some Fathers (such as St. Gregory of Nyssa) are explicit that there is such a second chance when we finally see the Truth (necessarily after death). We certainly can't know for certain and we absolutely must not live our lives relying on second chances, but hoping for them seems perfectly consistent with the mind of the Church. I don't know if there is a second chance after death, but out of concern for my fellow man and belief in a loving God I can't honestly see how I can do other than hope that such a chance exists.

James

 

[Elvendon]

Wow, lots of replies! Forgive me for not replying, I got lost

Katzpur: I'm not sure my sentiments now will be the same as when I posted, as I've recently done a-lot of thinking, but...

1) I believe my spirit becomes part of the spirit world - a universe that is the realm of the Holy Spirit, that interconnects all things. It is basically spiritual heaven and hell, depending upon what sort of life you have lead and your attitude to God. The exact form this world is, is in my view a mix of the phsical and the spiritual - one can be a spirit or have some semblance of physical form. It is during this period that the majority of people will, I hope, repent and reconcile themselves with God.

2) Yep. The last judgement, when the world is ended. It's when we will get our real (perfected) physical forms back - the total fusion of heaven and hell, and when God will become physically inescapable - no illusion of seperation between man and God will continue to exist.

3) Not twice, but twenty times twenty times We will be "judged" immediately upon death, when we become aware of God's nature, and when/if we repent, we will join his side. At the last judgement, all those who have repented and reconciled with God become part of the kingdom, while the rest become tormented by it's fulfillment and the guilt of their unrighteousness in the ever-presence of God. Even here, after time has ended, they will be able to repent. Whether they will or not, is quite another matter.

I've never thought about it to be honest. As long as you avoid a belief in transmigration of souls (or their preexistence) then it sounds like we would consider any such belief a theologoumenon: a personal belief which is consistent with/not in opposition to the faith but is not part of official teaching.

Souls definately are not preexistent - we (can) partly share in God's nature through Jesus' death upon the cross which returns us to being the image of God, but we do not partake of his eternal, atemporal nature. I don't think they transmigrate, but I can't discount any link between the ages - I felt some very strange things when I went to Rome and Pompeii, and there were just too many coincidences, for me to discount some form of link between myself and figures in the past.

Interestingly though, I recently read something in Matthew that seems to indicate some form of link between kindred souls - Jesus referred to John the Baptist as Elijah in Matthew 17:10-13

And His disciples asked Him, saying "Why then do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?" Jesus answered and said to them, "Indeed, Elijah is coming first and will restore all things. But I say to you that Elijah has come already, and they did not know him but did to him whatever they wished. Likewise the Son of Man is also about to suffer at their hands." Then the disciples understood that He spoke to them of John the Baptist.

Interesting no? I don't think it's enough to go all in for transmigration, but it is definate evidence of links between the prophets at least.

 

[Quiddity]

I'm not sure we do (or at least that we can be so certain). Purgatory as taught by the RCC seems like a second chance to me. Prayers for the dead imply some second chance. Some Fathers (such as St. Gregory of Nyssa) are explicit that there is such a second chance when we finally see the Truth (necessarily after death). We certainly can't know for certain and we absolutely must not live our lives relying on second chances, but hoping for them seems perfectly consistent with the mind of the Church. I don't know if there is a second chance after death, but out of concern for my fellow man and belief in a loving God I can't honestly see how I can do other than hope that such a chance exists.

James

I assure you that purgatory is not a second chance (atleast official RC theology says so). I would have thought this rampant misunderstanding would have been something you got clarification on moons ago. Is this really what many EO's think purgatory is?

On another note I see nothing wrong with holding that hope. That is definately siding with on the side of Love.

~Victor

 

[joeboonda]

While universal salvation would be wonderful, and folks go to great lengths to try to show the Bible teaches it, the Bible also teaches that not all will be saved.

7:13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: 7:14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
(King James Bible, Matthew)
13:23 Then said one unto him, Lord, are there few that be saved? And he said unto them, 13:24 Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able.
(King James Bible, Luke)

It also teaches of a remnant that will come out, a small group. Yet salvation 'the strait gate' IS Jesus Christ. It is free to all who will accept it. And yes, this means to folks who never heard of Jesus! Not all, but those who worship God as best they know Him and follow their conscience, which is God's laws written in all our hearts, I think of Cornelius, they will fall under Christ's cleansing blood. (for those it could be a bit like how Katzpur described) But, although salvation is free, and "whosoever will, let him take of the water of life freely" (Rev. 2:17), there will be many who, "will not come to me that ye may have life" (John 5:40).

I have to go, ugh. Um, I would just say that whoever wants to be saved, it is free, simply by trusting in Christ. For more info. on the subject, I submit the following 2 links:
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-r002.html
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aiia/godfair.html

Peace,
Mike

 

[Ody]

Meh. Its interesting in the least. http://www.christian-universalism.com/

 

[EnhancedSpirit]

The Mystery of Universal Salvation

Page way too big to post all, here are some interesting highlights . . .

The gospel of John presents Jesus as the "Cosmic Christ," who is one with the Father, and called "Word", "Light", "Water of Life", and "the Way." The emphasis has shifted from the teaching to the Teacher, in light of his embodiment of the love of God. This Love is called Christ. When Jesus says, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life, no one comes to the Father except by me," (Jn 14:6) he is speaking of his nature as the love of God made visible. It is only by being filled with Divine Love that we can "come to the Father." By whatever name it is given by followers of whatever religion or no religion, it is the same, and it is "the narrow gate" through which all must come. The human identity of its bearer is not what's important; the essential thing is following his example in loving unconditionally, becoming Christ. As he said: This is my commandment, love one another as I have loved you. (Jn.15.12)

There is the idea that God is love, but will also torment forever all who "do not accept Jesus". The resulting image is not only monstrous, but an impossible contradiction. It's inconceivable to imagine any person causing the pain of another forever. Maybe a a day perhaps. Maybe a few years, if I'm exceptionally evil. But who among us would torture even Hitler forever? If he were tortured a year for every person who died in World War II, that's 530,000,000 years. And as some would gladly remind you, that's not even a second as far as forever is concerned.

The word in the Greek NT most often translated as "forever" or "eternal" is aion which means an age, and the adjectival form, aionian, means age-long. This is the source of the English word eon. The corresponding Hebrew term is olam, "age" or "world." Both these terms indicate conditions with an indefinite, but not an infinite, duration.

 

[Elvendon]

While universal salvation would be wonderful, and folks go to great lengths to try to show the Bible teaches it, the Bible also teaches that not all will be saved.

Interestingly, it also teaches that all people will be saved. Here is a choice few of many, many quotes that support a universalist position.

When I am lifted up from the earth, I will draw all men to myself John 12:32

he gave himself as a ransom for all, to be testified in due time. — 1 Timothy 2:6

As one man's fall brought condemnation on everyone, so the good act of one man brings everyone life and makes them justified. As by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by one man's obedience many will be made righteous. —Romans 5.18-19

Doozy of a problem isn't it?

7:13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: 7:14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
(King James Bible, Matthew)

This says "and few will find it". This could indicate that few people will discover the way for themselves, they need to rely upon Jesus to show them the way. It was Jesus' job to fix this issue.

My favoured explanation however is a contextual study: 7:13 comes as part of the Sermon on the Mount - A big lump of ethical teaching. The above quote therefore is in the context of ethics rather than Jesus' own nature and the salvation that we gain through it. So, this quote rather than say that "few will be saved", it says that "few will be saved according to their own personal adherence to my ethics." We have all called people fools, thought lustful thoughts and so on - but we Christians don't pracice amputation and lobotmies as a means to escape the evils that the Sermon warns us against, so according to the Sermon, we deserve hellfire. Jesus is setting up his own sacrifice by showing why it is needed - effectively " afew of you can be righteous enough in your deeds and thoughts to be saved by your own acts, but not many - that is what the rest of you need me for!"

13:23 Then said one unto him, Lord, are there few that be saved? And he said unto them, 13:24 Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able.
(King James Bible, Luke)

The context of this however is rather problematic. It appears to be referring to the soteriological teachings that surround it. This does indeed seem to say that not everyone will be let in. However, this passage is at the end of the "Narrow Door" section -

29 People will come from east and west and north and south, and will take their places at the feast in the kingdom of God.
30 Indeed there are those who are last who will be first, and first who will be last.

Not exactly an exclusive club is it? I think, when you bear in mind that Jesus was walking to Jerusalem at the time - the Jewish heartland (and he mentions the damned saying "We ate and drank with you, and you taught in our streets", suggesting that it was people that knew and witnessed him first hand) it well could be that this is a condemnation of the Jewish authoritites, especially since in this self-same chapter, Jesus rebukes a pharisee for condemning healings on the Sabbath.

We must bear in mind that neither of these quotes seem to put a time-frame on this. Neither says that anyone will be punished forever, they just say they will be punished. When you bear in mind many other quotes, such as the Parable of the Prodigal Son, the ones I have provided you with and logic itself (how can a loving God condemn someone for eternity?), it seems likely that this is merely a reference to the prime judgement of sinners - who will need to pass through weeping and gnashing of teeth to reach atonement, unlike those who repent.

It also teaches of a remnant that will come out, a small group. Yet salvation 'the strait gate' IS Jesus Christ. It is free to all who will accept it. And yes, this means to folks who never heard of Jesus! Not all, but those who worship God as best they know Him and follow their conscience, which is God's laws written in all our hearts, I think of Cornelius, they will fall under Christ's cleansing blood. (for those it could be a bit like how Katzpur described) But, although salvation is free, and "whosoever will, let him take of the water of life freely" (Rev. 2:17), there will be many who, "will not come to me that ye may have life" (John 5:40).

I'd agree with this.

I have to go, ugh. Um, I would just say that whoever wants to be saved, it is free, simply by trusting in Christ. For more info. on the subject, I submit the following 2 links:
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-r002.html
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aiia/godfair.html

Peace,
Mike

This seems to contradict what you said previously, could you explain it a bit more? I believe that the Logos is expressed in all things and everywhere, though it's shining light may be obscured by unrighteousness. The Logos is a Cosmic Saviour, for all mankind who choose to accept it. And eventually, I hope that all men will. Jesus does not save us from God's punishment (what agency can work against itself and still stand?) but from ourselves.

 

[James the Persian]

I assure you that purgatory is not a second chance (atleast official RC theology says so). I would have thought this rampant misunderstanding would have been something you got clarification on moons ago. Is this really what many EO's think purgatory is?

I think most of us have a hard time understanding just what purgatory is meant to be. In what way isn't it a second chance? I'm afraid you've confused me now. I'm not saying that those who utterly reject God will get a second chance via purgatory, but it does seem that those who love God but die in some sin will (which you'll probably appreciate makes the whole idea look completely superfluous to me, given my understanding of heaven and hell).

On another note I see nothing wrong with holding that hope. That is definately siding with on the side of Love.

~Victor

I'm glad to hear that you think that.

James

 

[Heneni]

. 17For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.

Ok so Jesus came to save the world.

18Whoever believes in him is not condemned,

If you believe you are not condemned? Why because you believe.

but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.

If you dont believe you are condemned ALREADY though Jesus did not come to condemn the world but to save it.

And this is the verdict:

19This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil.

You condemn yourself by loving the darkness more than you love the light. So in that respect, jesus did not come to condemn the world, he was a light to the world, but the world loves the darkness more than they love they light. So even though Jesus is the way the truth and the life...you condemn yourself by loving darkness more.

You condemn yourself in other words. Why would people love the darkness more than they love the light? because the light reveals evil.

The world does not want to stop doing evil because it likes doing it. Jesus is a thorn in their flesh, yet he came to save them. It is not possible for those that love darkness more than they love the light, to live with the light. I guess that means you go/remain where you are most comfortable.

Heneni

Heneni

 

[Wandered Off]

If you believe you are not condemned? Why because you believe.

but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.

How much control do you think we have over what we believe?

 

[Heneni]

Interesting question.

What excuse is there for loving the darkness more than the light? He came to save the world, nothing reasonably wrong with that, wouldnt you agree? So i have to conclude that whether you believe in him or not is entirely your choice. And i know that god will make sure that before the END comes everyone would have made that choice. Be it in this life or the next. My personal opinion is that you made the choice when he was lifted on the cross and he drew all men unto him. But anyway, i think that the END of this age is close. Few people havent heard about God. So few are left to testifiy to the truth.

Heneni

 

[Wandered Off]

So i have to conclude that whether you believe in him or not is entirely your choice.

In that case, please choose to believe - really believe - that Odin is the chief among all deities, and that what you believe now is all bunk. Just do this a few minutes. After that, revert back to what you believed before.

I can't do it, regardless of how much I try. That tells me it's not entirely my choice. Can you? Should others have eternal consequences based upon conditions beyond their direct control?

 

[sojourner]

. 17For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.

Ok so Jesus came to save the world.

18Whoever believes in him is not condemned,

If you believe you are not condemned? Why because you believe.

but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.

If you dont believe you are condemned ALREADY though Jesus did not come to condemn the world but to save it.

And this is the verdict:

19This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil.

You condemn yourself by loving the darkness more than you love the light. So in that respect, jesus did not come to condemn the world, he was a light to the world, but the world loves the darkness more than they love they light. So even though Jesus is the way the truth and the life...you condemn yourself by loving darkness more.

You condemn yourself in other words. Why would people love the darkness more than they love the light? because the light reveals evil.

The world does not want to stop doing evil because it likes doing it. Jesus is a thorn in their flesh, yet he came to save them. It is not possible for those that love darkness more than they love the light, to live with the light. I guess that means you go/remain where you are most comfortable.

Heneni

Heneni

Just as one's mortality is not forever, so is one's condemnation not forever. If we will be raised to new life in a new body, and if, as Paul says, even though we now see dimly...but then will see face-to-face, those of us who are stubborn now, may very well be open to God in the resurrection.

 

[Heneni]

In that case, please choose to believe - really believe - that Odin is the chief among all deities, and that what you believe now is all bunk. Just do this a few minutes. After that, revert back to what you believed before.

I can't do it, regardless of how much I try. That tells me it's not entirely my choice. Can you? Should others have eternal consequences based upon conditions beyond their direct control?

Who is odin? LOL. Surely you must know that god was smart enough to distribute the knowledge of himself through many civilizations. If god reveals himself to you as ODIN, please dont put yourself through strain and try to convert to my god, even though they could possibly be the same.

Wandered off. God is aware of our limitations, he is not unfair. He knows what each persons situation is. He knows we are born into different cultures and different countries. And he finds a way to reveal himself to everybody. In some way. He has many names. Surely god is good. And so i stil stand by my point. It is your choice to believe in him. GOD/ODIN

 

[Katzpur]

In that case, please choose to believe - really believe - that Odin is the chief among all deities, and that what you believe now is all bunk. Just do this a few minutes. After that, revert back to what you believed before.

I can't do it, regardless of how much I try. That tells me it's not entirely my choice. Can you? Should others have eternal consequences based upon conditions beyond their direct control?

What you've said makes a lot of sense to me. I think certain of our beliefs were formed when we were taught certain things at an early age. Other of our beliefs were formed when we reached a sufficient level and maturity to reason things out and make choices on the basis of what feels right to us, and what seems logical. But there are also beliefs that we seem to have very little power to change. It's not as if those ideas were ingrained in our minds before we were too young to resist them or remember it happening. It's almost more as if we were born believing them, that they are part of our being.

 

[Somkid]

That seems a little more fair than what most people would have you believe.

 

[Azakel]

Who is odin? LOL. Surely you must know that god was smart enough to distribute the knowledge of himself through many civilizations. If god reveals himself to you as ODIN, please dont put yourself through strain and try to convert to my god, even though they could possibly be the same.

Wandered off. God is aware of our limitations, he is not unfair. He knows what each persons situation is. He knows we are born into different cultures and different countries. And he finds a way to reveal himself to everybody. In some way. He has many names. Surely god is good. And so i stil stand by my point. It is your choice to believe in him. GOD/ODIN

No you see Odin is way different then your God, been around a lot longer too ^_^. He's is own individual being. Just try to believe in him. Oh and Odin is the Chief God of the Norse pantheon. Just go for it.

 

[Scott1]

In case anyone wants to read S. Gregory of Nyssa: NPNF2-05. Gregory of Nyssa: Dogmatic Treatises, Etc. | Christian Classics Ethereal Library

.... scroll down to #100 on the left margin.