Universalism and Death

[nimblewill]

patheos.com/blogs/jesuscreed … jeff-cook/

Anyone read this?

[Holy-Fool-P-Zombie]

Yes, I have read Universalism and Death (by Jeff Cook). I read Patheos all the time. And the author is an Annihilationist. I will comment on a few statements.

Article author

Now, as an Annihilationist, I would affirm the purgatorial world is the world God created.

My response

Not if we take the Eastern Orthodox view of heaven and hell as states. See Basic Orthodox teachings on hell

The Eastern Orthodox Church teaches that heaven and hell are relations to or experiences of God’s just and loving presence[36][37] There is no created place of divine absence, nor is hell an ontological separation from God.[38] One expression of the Eastern teaching is that hell and heaven are dimensions of God’s intensifying presence, as this presence is experienced either as torment or as paradise depending on the spiritual state of a person dwelling with God.[36][39] For one who hates God and by extension hates himself as God’s image-bearer, to be encompassed by the divine presence could only result in unspeakable anguish

Given that expression and my views as an inclusivist

. Wiki - inclusivism would define inclusivism like this:

Inclusivism, one of several approaches to understanding the relationship between religions, asserts that while one set of beliefs is absolutely true, other sets of beliefs are at least partially true. It stands in contrast to exclusivism, which asserts that only one way is true and all others are in error.

And Got Questions - inclusivism like this:

Inclusivism is the view that people actually appropriate God’s gift of salvation only on the basis of Jesus Christ’s atoning work, but that the sinner need not explicitly believe the gospel in order to actually receive this salvation.

, one could have both a purgative and an annihilation viewpoint that could coexist:

How do we experience God’s love in hell?

Origen taught that this fire was purifying and that eventually no one would hold out against God’s love. Origen believed that all would eventually be reconciled to God.

or

Some annihilationists (e.g. Seventh-day Adventists) believe God’s love is scripturally described as an all-consuming fire[2] and that sinful creatures cannot exist in God’s presence.

So we might have all being saved or a majority being saved - and free will is preserved.

Article author

No, the conversation about hell in the 21st century among those who study will shift and the debate will focus on two morally-coherent views of hell: annihilationism and universalism.

My response

Actually, there are three, if we take the position of Joshua Ryan Butler.

Or (in the The Mercy of Hell? A Review of The Skeletons in God’s Closet (Part 1))

Eventually, they will be removed and placed into their own self-appointed exile: “God’s mercy is … seen in his treatment of the impenitent: he does not torture or kill them, but rather hands them over to their desire.”

More on this in the interview Facing the Skeletons in God’s Closet or A Response to Joshua Ryan Butler’s The Skeletons in God’s Closet

Article author

First, though I am passionate about the intellectual and ethical failures of the Traditional View of Hell, I do not feel the same way toward the Purgatorial View.

My response
I’m glad you are considering it.

[Jonny95]

Yeah I saw this earlier today. I’ve been having a couple of discussions in the comments section actually.

[nimblewill]

I am having a hard time following the idea that life on earth is purgatorial and the idea that annihilation is the “wider arms” as he put it.

[Eaglesway]

The eastern orthodox view of heaven and hellis great. love it.

I dont see how anyone could hold that in an anihilationist reality a majority could be saved and freewill presrved. An anihilationist who believes the fire will bring repentence for some is not really an anihilationist, hes a quasi-somethng or another )

The only issue I have with inclusivism as you described it is that every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father, so while other ways may have some truth, some more some less, at the point they glorify any other name they are adversaries, and at the point where they may contain some wisdom- all that wisdom and truth will be subsumed in Jesus on that Day when the veils are removed and the “ephiphania” of Christ happens to all.

[Holy-Fool-P-Zombie]

The problem, Eagles Way, is we really don’t know how folks will react to God’s overwhelming love. That’s where free will comes in. God doesn’t force that choice.

If we are Christian and/or fully forgiven, we might experience God’s love fully.
If we cooperate with it and are not fully redeemed or Christian, it might be purgatory.
If we continue to resist it, it might consume us (i.e. annihilation).

Scripturally, one can argue on both sides, for a purgatory and an annihilation view of fire. Why can’t fire be both, depending on how we respond to it? God doesn’t force that choice on us. In fact, if we are Open Theists, he might not even know the final outcome.

Let’s look at this Orthodox View of Heaven and Hell

Eastern theology views that we all return to God. It is our experience of God that will differ. Those who died in friendship will God will receive eternal bliss from God. Those who lived rejecting God (living in sin) will experience pain and suffering from God’s very presence, and this is the gnashing of teeth that Jesus spoke of. It is not that we are in a place totally separated from God, we cannot be separated from God as his creation lest we cease to exist. So hell is not a place, but rather the painful experience of God’s love for those that cannot accept it.

Imagine this, you are in a dark room and you step outside to a sunny day. The light temporarily blinds you and may even give you a headache. Such is the experience for those who are living in darkness (sin) and they step into the presence of God (light). And this feeling doesn’t last for a few seconds or minutes, it lasts for eternity.

Those who died rejecting God might experience him differently - like the Catholic purgatory and the Protestant annihilation. Although the purgatory aspect could be much different from what Roman Catholic theologians envision. It could be akin to the Robins Williams movie What Dreams May Come (film).

Let’s return to Orthodox View of Heaven and Hell

The light temporarily blinds you and may even give you a headache

Or think of this in terms of alchemy

the medieval forerunner of chemistry, based on the supposed transformation of matter. It was concerned particularly with attempts to convert base metals into gold or to find a universal elixir.

and refiners fire

to bring to a fine or a pure state; free from impurities: to refine metal, sugar, or petroleum. 2. to purify from what is coarse, vulgar, or debasing; make elegant or cultured.

Maybe the matter is already gold and no fire is needed. If a refiners fire is needed, it refines the impurities, in order to transform matter into gold. But if the matter resists the fire and the temperature is too hot, it destroys it.

This is how we differ. But this difference is not overwhelming, compared to those who are exclusivists and have a traditional view of eternal hell. How does Toy Story 3 end theologically? See Toy Story 3 and the Afterlife by 2 Friars and a Fool.

[Jonny95]

Here’s his next article - Universalism and Our Subpar World? patheos.com/blogs/jesuscreed … jeff-cook/

[Nicholas]

[tag]Randylkemp[/tag] I’ve got few questions for you. Today I’ve read an article by George Metallinos about the Orthodox view of heaven
and hell. He says (I’m abbreviating a lot) that after death everyone is exposed to God’s presence, and it is either everlasting joy or everlasting
anguish, depending on whether we love God or hate him. No mercy after death, just heaven or hell (which Metallinos says are both the same
uncreated place) immediately and forever.

Do you think I might have the right end of his view?
Do Orthodox vary much in their views of the afterlife?
Do any of them allow the possibility of universal restoration?
I think that’s enough to spoil your Sunday. (smiley needed but don’t know how!) Simple answers if possible please. (ditto)

Nick Hawthorn

[Holy-Fool-P-Zombie]

[tag]Randylkemp[/tag] I’ve got few questions for you. Today I’ve read an article by George Metallinos about the Orthodox view of heaven
and hell. He says (I’m abbreviating a lot) that after death everyone is exposed to God’s presence, and it is either everlasting joy or everlasting
anguish, depending on whether we love God or hate him. No mercy after death, just heaven or hell (which Metallinos says are both the same
uncreated place) immediately and forever.

Do you think I might have the right end of his view?
Do Orthodox vary much in their views of the afterlife?
Do any of them allow the possibility of universal restoration?
I think that’s enough to spoil your Sunday. (smiley needed but don’t know how!) Simple answers if possible please. (ditto)

Nick Hawthorn

Hi, Nick. Let me answer your questions with simple answers. If you wish some references, I can also provide them.

The Eastern Orthodox look on heaven and hell as being in God’s presence. Hence, they see heaven and hell as states - not places. This is a viewpoint I agree with.
If by varying you mean their conceptions of heaven and hell? Then their views about what it’s like is as varied as any Protestant or Roman Catholic. Or perhaps any member on this forum.
Yes. Eastern Orthodoxy is probably the Christian branch most open to universal restoration as a possibility. It’s based upon the works of some early church fathers, their view of God’s mercy and sin, etc. In fact Geoffrey on this forum also belongs to Eastern Orthodoxy. And in a recent article I’ve found, it says most Eastern Orthodox scholars embrace inclusivism.

Perhaps Geoffrey would like to add to my input?

[Paidion]

Hany Mina Mikhail is my favourite Orthodox teacher. He is Coptic Orthodox.
He teaches the Orthodox understanding of divine justice as opposed to the Catholic and Protestant position. He opposes the penal substitution theory. Here is the first in a series of 12 lectures:

youtube.com/watch?v=D28MWNYGYAU

[Nicholas]

Thanks Randy. *Varied" views on the afterlife must be the norm everywhere.

Thanks Paidion. I haven’t started on that 12-lecture series, at least not yet.

[anon47460357]

Do Orthodox vary much in their views of the afterlife?

Sadly, yes.

Do any of them allow the possibility of universal restoration?

Happily, yes.

I am Eastern Orthodox, and I have read over 1,700 pages of the Orthodox Church’s liturgy. The words of the liturgy are the words of the Church. Universalism is all over the place in those 1,700 pages. I would bet good money that I could pick any page at random, start reading, and come to an affirmation of universalism within 10 pages (at most). In fact, sometimes the affirmations occur several times on a page, and/or on several consecutive pages. The overall tone and tenor of the liturgy is universalistic. There isn’t much there to hang non-universalism on. There are some (comparatively few) harsh passages in the liturgies of the Great Fast, but none of them is a clear teaching of non-universalism. Universalism is baldly and bluntly stated in the liturgies so many times that it must be in there literally hundreds of times in those 1,700 pages.

I therefore conclude that the teaching of the Orthodox Church is universalism. This isn’t to deny that there are plenty of non-universalist Orthodox believers, both today and in the past. But none of them (even the very greatest of saints) is the Church. We are each merely sons of the Church, and therefore each of us is fallible. In any case, the Orthodox liturgies are the only “official” teaching of the Orthodox Church. Every other Orthodox writing is only the opinion of the author.