The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Free Willism or God's Soeveignty in Salvation of All

Evangelical Universalism
#414

Jeff,

A mystic is one who goes by their intuition and experience (heart). They are into poems and stories. Jesus told many stories and parables. To say He never made a mystical statement is absurd. Mystics share their experiences. Moreover when you read the Bible you see teachings that can only be understood from experiencing them within a certain frame of reference or context and then read an opposite teaching that can only be understood within another certain frame or context. Jesus Himself is the template of total paradox. It’s the glory of the lion/lamb paradox. I know the Bible is God’s word by this self authenticating glory. This glory is revealed not only through Christ in the Gospel but is interlaced throughout the Bible as well as reality. The evidence brings a transformation of mind and heart:

“Beholding the glory of the Lord, we are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another.”~~ 2 Corinthians 3:18

This intuitive awareness and knowledge is mediated through the words of the Bible. It’s not in the words themselves but the meaning of properly understood revelation. The brightness of the beauty of the diamond is in the face of Jesus Christ. That is to say, the nondual paradox and mystery for Christians is a living Person (Christ). He is 100% God and 100% human. Masculine and feminine in soul. In Him all cosmic opposites are reconciled. It’s about becoming open to the opposites we find in Christ. It is here that we can begin to hold the opposites together in our self. A few more examples:

We admire Him for His transcendence, but even more for His condescension

We admire Him for His uncompromising justice, but even more because of His mercy

We admire Him for His majesty, but even more because it is a majesty in meekness

We admire Him for His equality with God, but even more because as God’s equal He nevertheless has a deep reverence for God

We admire Him because of how worthy He was of all good, but even more because this was accompanied by an amazing patience to suffer evil

We admire Him because of His Lordship over the world, but even more because this was clothed with a spirit of obedience and submission

We love the way He stumped the proud scribes with His wisdom, and we love it even more because He could be simple enough to spend time with children

We admire Him because He could still the storm, but even more because He refused to use that power to strike the Samaritans with lightening and He refused to use it to get Himself down from the cross

The purest and most exalted image of Christ is the fused together of extreme opposites. This is the highest expression of the Beautiful. It is a splendor arising out of unity in diversity. The greater the diversity the more profound the unity and the more extraordinary the Beauty. Reality is filled with paradoxes. The universe is both beautiful and damaged, we are both living and dying, God is both 3 and 1, we are both good and evil, the Bible is both human and divine. The list could go on into science and astrophysics (paradox of quantum mechanics and relativity). Likewise predestination and free will.

#415

He served as a priest until his physical death, and he died at peace with the Orthodox Church. His writings get pretty speculative, but he nowhere said anything like, “The Orthodox Church is wrong and I am right.” There are a lot of things he wrote that I disagree with, but none reached the level of craziness of never-ending Hell. (A great many of the “Bulgakov was a heretic” crowd believe in the aerial toll houses, which [astoundingly] manage to make the never-ending Hell eschatology even worse! The inventor of the toll houses was probably mentally insane.)

Bulgakov’s theological system is contained in the following books:

His little trilogy:

  1. The Friend of the Bridegroom (1927) [on John the Baptist]
  2. The Burning Bush (1927) [on the Theotokos]
  3. Jacob’s Ladder (1929) [on the holy angels]

His great trilogy:

  1. The Lamb of God (1933) [on Christology]
  2. The Comforter (1936) [on pneumatology]
  3. The Bride of the Lamb (1945) [on ecclesiology and eschatology]

I would guess that The Bride of the Lamb contains his fullest statements regarding universalism.

#417

  1. Does the sacrifice of Christ REMOVE every blemish so that the man actually righteous? Or is the man merely positionally righteous so that the blemishes are still actually there?

  2. Does the sacrifice of Christ merely make the man righteous in God’s eyes, whereas the man still retains the propensity to do wrong?

  3. Is God blinded to the unrighteousness of the man so that when He looks upon him, He not longer sees his sin, but Christ’s righteousness?

#418

The ugliest thing that calls itself Orthodoxy. In a nutshell and from memory:

When a non-Orthodox dies he goes straight to Hell and will stay there forever. When an Orthodox dies his soul flits around on earth for three days. After that the soul ascends into the atmosphere where it is cross-examined by invisible demons. (Well, invisible to us. The dead can see them.) There are 20 booths/stages/toll-houses/whatever, each one with its own demon. At each toll-house, the demon accuses the soul of a particular type of sin (lethargy, let us say). If the soul during life acquired more energy points than lethargy points, he pays the demon and moves up to be cross-examined for another sin by another demon at the next toll-booth. If the soul manages to thus pay-off each of the 20 demons, then he gets to go to Heaven. But if at any point a demon gets the better of him, he gets immediately cast down into Hell where he will stay forever. Even great saints (with a capital “S” Saint in front of their names) barely get by all 20 demons. Even the Theotokos (i. e., the Mother of God, the Virgin Mary, who the Orthodox Church teaches is the highest being in all creation) trembled on her death bed with fear of the aerial demons. As is obvious, therefore, virtually everyone goes to Hell. Unless you’ve met an Orthodox Saint (again, upper-case S), everyone you’ve ever met is Hell-bound. Every Orthodox I’ve ever met is Hell-bound. It’s pretty much hopeless for way over 99% of humanity. To cap this all off, it’s part of the “Good News”. :cry:

Some of the proponents of toll-houses would like to try to smooth things over a bit, using the word “metaphorical”. The bottom line, however, is that almost everyone gets sent to Hell, regardless of metaphors. The above piece of blasphemy is one of the most horrific pieces of nonsense I’ve ever had the displeasure to come across. It seems to me that it would produce only three types of people: atheists, holier-than-thous, and catatonics. If you ever want to try to inoculate yourself from ever becoming Orthodox, read the toll-house stuff. It’s the most effective scandal I’ve ever come across.

In the nearly 1,700+ pages of liturgies I’ve read, I’ve never come across a toll-house. In the many hundreds of pages of Church Fathers I’ve read, I’ve never come across a toll-house. In the various histories of Christianity I’ve read, I’ve never come across a toll-house. Etc. The only places you’ll ever come across them is in the assertions of the toll-house cult (which unbelievably claims the toll-houses to be the undisputed teaching of the Church through all of history).

#419

I am sure you know how I will answer :slight_smile:. Our positional righteousness before holy God is 100% perfection because Holy God no longer sees our sin, but instead sees the righteousness of Christ. We are safely hidden INSIDE of Christ. I understand that all mankind is positionally perfect in Christ, but only believers believe it. Now a Christian is also someone whom has Christ INSIDE of them. So Christians are empowered by God living inside of them to do good and live righteously, though still well short of perfection in this life. So all mankind is IN Christ, but CHRIST is not (yet) IN all mankind.

Certainly, whether Christian or non-Christian we are all still tempted to sin. Now you say ‘propensity’ to sin. I don’t know if you mean before Christ living in someone they scored an average of 49% or less, but as a Christian they now score 51% or better? I don’t think we can measure things that way. It is certainly a great advantage against sin to have the power of Christ living within. However, I also know that the power he gives us to do good and avoid evil is still governed by his sovereign will. So even Christian can sin greatly.

Certainly, same question and answer as above.

Could you quote a statement from Jesus or Paul that you define as mystical? Perhaps we agree but have different definitions of ‘mysticism’.

The word ‘mystery’ is used numerous times throughout the NT. However, in each case the subject is that Christ explained or uncovered a mystery. He did not introduce mystery. Do you agree? I understand mysticism to claim to know things about God apart from reason or the Scriptures or communication with God. Or many, whether they are mystics or not, also claim that one cannot know what the Scriptures have plainly said, but instead they say it is a mystery. I am in too many conversations where people say the gospel itself is a mystery and one cannot know if all mankind is finally saved. Yet at the same time they boldly say they are 100% sure they are saved. So these mystics part from reason when they neglect to see the connection between their own salvation and the salvation of others.

#420

Jeff,

A Christian mystical statement from Jesus is in Matthew:

The way of the mystic is to detach from the worldly. So much so that one finds it’s joy in God. The mystic shrinks into nothingness as the ego is deflated and then united to Christ. It’s a death to self and emptying of oneself so that the beauty and love of God may flow through. Christ gave us the example:

The two gates are always open to us but the narrow gate is unattractive to the world. It doesn’t have the fame and glitter that the world craves. It lacks the shiny bright new things of status and fame. The narrow gate opens to the path of discipline and material deprivation. The mystics don’t want great riches, power, praise, attention, a private jet, fame, recognition, or a place in history. They care little for a large circle of friends. Instead they want the pearl of great price - bliss, true happiness and peace of mind that comes from detachment. They want a heart open with love and compassion. This is the narrow gate of the Christian mystic. Which brings me to another mystical teaching of Christ:

And you are right. As I stated in the above post - mystics don’t go by as much of a rationalizing with logic. They go by their intuition and experience. That is - their heart. They are more into poetry and stories. They share their experiences.

#421

Jeff, in reference to what you said in your post: “So all mankind is IN Christ, but Christ is not (yet) in all mankind”, I think this is backwards. I believe Christ is already in all mankind as we are all made in God’s image. Also John states that “All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.” However, many have not yet come to live in Christ, or they have left and have not yet returned.

#422

Notice the words:

,in the NIV. Or

, in the ESV.

I think a distinction must be make between someone seeking mysticism and visions coming to people. Visions are very important, on the Red Road (Native American spirituality). For example, in Red Road Spirituality, we find this:

So how did Got reveal himself to Native American and indigenous people? In visions. And let’s examine George Fox and Jakob Böhme again:

George Fox was trying to obtain answers. This is related in his Quaker journal:

Then he had a vision of Christ, as the inner light. What’s little known, is that George Fox, also had the gift of healing.

Jakob Böhme was a shoe cobbler and a Lutheran. He didn’t pursue mystical experiences. But as Wiki Mentions:

George Fox had a vision. Jakob Böhme had visions. The contemporary Old Catholic Church mystic had visions. Visions are gifts from God, as long as they are in harmony with Holy Scripture and Sacred Tradition - as we understand it.

Yes, visions can be from Evil Spirits, Demons, insanity, imagination, etc. But they would not be in harmony with Holy Scripture and Sacred Tradition - as we understand it.

Oh, Yes. To Jeff’s statement that Christ, Paul, Apostles and Old Testament folks are not mystics. Or St. Michael’s statement that some were - or might be. We do **not **have enough information, in their written words, to make that determination. Therefore, we will never know, whether they were mystics or not - until God finally answers that question. So I am an agnostic, regarding that topic. :smiley:

On a lighter note, let me share some humor - from a recent Sunil Bali newsletter. :exclamation: :laughing:

Well, I am watching TV evangelist Joel Osteen. He’s taking today about asking big. We normally ask small and if we receive anything - it is small. Afterwards, it’s off to the church service. :smiley:

#423

Holy Fool’s quote of Acts 2:16-17 makes me want to underscore something.

The last days began in A. D. 30.

#424

Do we pick what’s behind door #1, Door #2 or Door #3 :question: :laughing:

or

youtube.com/watch?v=mhlc7peGlGg

Anyway, there are three Christian positions on that at When did the last days begin?

So no matter what door you choose (or position you take), you can win a car (i.e. have a vision), rather then win a goat (whatever that is to you). :exclamation: :laughing:

Interesting, Geoffrey. Even if the last days began in A.D. 30 (Position 2," Mankind has been living in the last days for 20 centuries".), God didn’t put a “shut off value”, on his “vision producing machine”. Same goes for gifts of the spirit (i.e. prophesy, miracles, healing, etc.) :exclamation: :laughing:

#425

We probably need to more clearly define ‘mystic’ and ‘mystery’ before disagreeing any further :slight_smile: For example, I understand that detaching from the wordly is the standard course for anyone claiming to be Christian and not reserved for a special class of ‘mystic’. Further, the Matthew quote above does not have any subjective or mystical elements evident to me, but instead is a statement of objective fact. If you follow Christ you will find life. If not you will find destruction. I do not find relationship with Christ to be ethereal or mystical, but instead solid and definite.

This article en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_mysticism defines mysticism as “That part, or element, of Christian belief and practice that concerns the preparation for, the consciousness of, and the effect of …] a direct and transformative presence of God.” The concern with such a belief system is the omission of God’s primary form of communication to mankind, his Holy Word. Without God’s word as anchor, meditative paths to God are too often lead astray. This article gotquestions.org/Christian-mysticism.html says that “Christian mysticism aspires to apprehend spiritual truths inaccessible through intellectual means, typically by emulation of Christ.” Of course the obvious error in this path to God is that the Christian faith always involves the whole man. So even if our commune with God emphasizes the emotion, understanding cannot be absent.

So bringing it back to the thread title, an objective question has been raised. Is God’s sovereignty praised for the salvation of all mankind, or is the free will of man? The mystic often loves to bring ambiguity into the question and instead say things like, it is a mystery, or one cannot know, or I know but I cannot explain it or explain it to you, or you will know when you know, etc. So why hover with mystery when we can fly with objective answers from Scripture?

#426

The problem with God’s Holy Word as the final answer, is that it is a Protestant answer. And they have many answers, as to what it means - from the Protestant canon of scripture. Which we can’t agree upon - even on this forum. Even a simple question like When did the last days begin?, can start a war here.

And the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches, have different canons. And different ways, for interpreting scripture. For the Roman Catholic Church (of which St. Michael likes), it is the Magisterium. For the Eastern Orthodox (which Geoffrey likes), Holy Scripture and Sacred Tradition, is one holistic element. For the Quaker, Christ communicates via the inner light, as well as Holy Scripture. And for the Pentecostals, the Holy Spirit can communicate truths - as long as they are in harmony, with Holy Scripture.

Our thread starter - for example - believes the Protestants, got the canon right. But all the Protestant reformers, got the understanding wrong.

I’ll run with Everyl Underhill’s definition of mysticism, as found at web.csulb.edu/~plowentr/underhill.htm

Even if the final union, will take place after death.

Mysticism is really the topic of mystical theology. And Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox and Protestant theologians, who study the subject, say it is a valid process. As long as it is accordance, with Holy Scripture and Sacred Tradition. And Wiki defines Mystical Theology this way:

And from my perspective, Eastern Orthodoxy and Quakerism, both put a heavy emphasize - on mystical theology. And I am very sympathetic, to both these Christian traditions.

I like to emphasize the words:

In case you haven’t guessed by now, I’m a big fan, of both Mystical and Philosophical Theology :exclamation: :laughing:

#427

All the mystics I have read, Sufi, Hindu, Roman Catholic all say that union is achieved though meditation and contemplation. For the Catholics closer union is achieved through acts of service and charity. Here’s St. John Of The Cross describing meditation:

It’s also been my experience at the church where I attend OSHO meditation that this is whet they are doing. They are emptying themselves. If you like I can give quotes from mystics around the world. They are all saying the same thing. It’s the way of negation where everything is stripped to where you are left with nothing but the energy of love. There is understanding but it through experience not reasoning.

#428

Check these out from the Roman Catholic Friar - Richard Rohr:

#429

Thomas A. Kempis:

If God’s words could be understood easily by human reason, they would not be considered wonderful and beyond human expression.

God walks with the simple, makes Himself known to the humble, and gives understanding to the poor in spirit…Human reason is weak and easily deceived; but true faith cannot be deceived.

#430

I think, St. Michael, folks know about your mystical orientation - mine also. The best thing to say, is that folks here have different perspectives. Some see mystical theology as valid. Some see the Preterit understanding as valid. Some like Sola Scpritura - especially from the Protestant canon. Wars only start, when someone tries to invalidate - an establish theological position. I was even trying to be diplomatic, with when the final days started. :laughing:

#431

Well, you’re simply wrong Randy. Whether it’s a different perspective or not. I realize people disagree but to say Jesus wasn’t a mystic is absurd.

#432

You may be right, Michael. You may be wrong. I said I was agnostic on the topic. I would suggest opening up a separate thread - on the topic.

#433

Will do my good buddy! Grace to you Randy! :smiley:

#434

Wow! And here it is over 2000 years later, and they still haven’t ended!

Or do the full preterists think they ended A.D. 70? In that case, the “last days” from A.D. 30 to A.D. 70, couldn’t have been the last days, since there have been an awful lot of days in the two millenia since then!