Universal Salvation? (Jesus Christ, ritual, moral, testimonies, punishment)

[James the Persian]

Originally Posted by Victor

Universalism is not possible to the vast majority of Christians (Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant). The idea assumes that if given enough time everyone will choose God. It should be obvious to most of us that the most crystal clear evidence, logic, reason, etc. is not enough for some to still seek a relationship with God. They would deny Him even if He was right before their eyes.

~Victor

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

[sojourner]

I am a firm believer in universal salvation. I believe that God has made it quite clear that God intends for every person to be in union with God. And I further think that God has made it quite clear that God gets what God wants.

I also firmly believe that God's love for all of us is so perfect, and God's Oneness is so encompassing, that, once faced with that love and Oneness, no one will desire to live apart from it.

[Elvendon]

Originally Posted by JamesThePersian

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

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?

[Victor]

It's going to be difficult for me to respond without this turning into debate language.
Elvendon, do you care to have this thread moved to allow those from the outside to disagree and give their point of view?

~Victor

[Elvendon]

Certainly. A debate would be fun

[Ody]

Doesn't the Russian Orthodox church believe in eventual universal salvation?

[Katzpur]

Originally Posted by Elvendon

Nicely put. I'm not sure I agree with the spiritual afterlife - followed by resurrection (I tend to believe we are physically resurrected in heaven (what I believe is a real physical place)) but otherwise, I completely agree.

I'm not sure I follow what you're saying. Would you mind explaining your belief in just a bit more depth. Maybe you could address these questions as part of your answer:

1. When you die, what do you believe happens to your spirit/soul immediately after it leaves your body?

2. Do you believe in a physical resurrection, i.e. the concept that the physical body we had during mortality will somehow be perfected and be made immortal? If so, when do you believe this will take place?

3. When will you stand before God to be judged? Will it be right after you die or at the "Last Judgment" as described in the scriptures? Or will you be judged twice -- once as soon as you die and another time when Christ returns to begin His millennial reign?

[Katzpur]

Originally Posted by JamesThePersian

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.

Sounds like Origen should have been LDS. I know a lot of LDS scholars think he was right about a number of doctrines that he was condemned for. Interesting, huh?

[lunamoth]

Originally Posted by JamesThePersian

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

Very well said. I'm with you on this one James.

luna