Christian Universalism. What's not to like?

[Fervent]

Ah, a homework excuse! I've seen them all before comrade - the dog ate it, it was put in the washing machine by mistake, the Patristic fathers didn't agree on the fundamental dichotomy of the underlying metaphors etc. etc. Heard it all before and not impressed.

But give me an actual quote and I will be.

I told you exactly which work to look in. If you're too lazy to actually read the thinkers you try to claim and are satisfied with quotes without context then that's on you.

 

[Der Alte]

I told you exactly which work to look in. If you're too lazy to actually read the thinkers you try to claim and are satisfied with quotes without context then that's on you.

IOW you don't know what you are talking about. These ECF refute what you posted Polycarp, Irenaeus, Ignatius, Tertullian. go read them and you'll know.

 

[Fervent]

IOW you don't know what you are talking about. These ECF refute what you posted Polycarp, Irenaeus, Ignatius, Tertullian. go read them and you'll know.

What do Polycarp, Iranaeus, Ignatius, and Tertullian have to do with Gregory of Nyssa?

 

[Hmm]

If you're too lazy to actually read the thinkers you try to claim and are satisfied with quotes without context then that's on you.

This may explain why you think that Gregory of Nyssa was not a universalist. If you don't accept this then I give up.

"In passing over Gregory of Nyssa for condemnation, the church, which was fast becoming anti-Origenian, had to bring his work into line, for having such a high profile theologian “off message” was not good. Gregory’s ideas concerning the purifying nature of otherworldly suffering were applied to purgatory, rather
than Gehenna, to allow for the erroneous conclusion that Gregory admitted of the eternity of hell. Furthermore, the manuscripts that transmitted his works had interpolations and glosses intended to show that Gregory in fact did not support the doctrine of universal salvation, 353 clearly because it was highly embarrassing to have a saint in the church who proclaimed such a “heretical” theory. This embarrassment about having a universalist saint is the reason why Germanus of Constantinople in the eighth century expressed the widespread assumption that Gregory’s works were interpolated by heretics who “dared instill in the pure and most holy source of his writings the black and dangerous venom of Origen’s error, surreptitiously ascribing this foolish heresy to a man who is famous for his virtue and learning.” 354 In this way Gregory was remolded into a saint more acceptable to changing standards of orthodoxy. What is clear is that from the mid-sixth century onwards it became widely believed that apokatastasis was off limits (and an investigation into the causes of the rejection of apokatastasis in late antiquity is underway), even though only a specific version of it had been condemned, and this had a significant impact on the tradition. From now on theologians with such leanings had to find subtle and indirect ways of expressing them for fear of being branded as heretics.”

Excerpt From: Ramelli, Ilaria L. E. “A Larger Hope?,
Volume 1: [Apokatastasis] from Christian Beginnings to Julian of Norwich.”

 

[Saint Steven]

... "In passing over Gregory of Nyssa for condemnation, the church, which was fast becoming anti-Origenian, had to bring his work into line...

Nyssagate. - lol
The Universalism cover-up.

 

[Hmm]

Nyssagate. - lol
The Universalism cover-up.

It would make a good movie! The truth will always out though, as it did with Watergate.

@Cormack would make a good Deep Throat.

 

[Saint Steven]

This may explain why you think that Gregory of Nyssa was not a universalist. If you don't accept this then I give up.

Thanks for clarifying this.
I knew there was conflicting information out there on this subject, but didn't know why.
Your expose' helps to set the record straight.

Not hard to understand what happened on the Bible translation side when we see this sort of thing going on. Of course they tweaked the translation with a bias in their favor if they would do something like this about a Saint.

If you are aware of some solid evidence in this area, it would be good to publish here as well. Thanks.

 

[Hmm]

Thanks for clarifying this.
I knew there was conflicting information out there on this subject, but didn't know why.
Your expose' helps to set the record straight.

Not hard to understand what happened on the Bible translation side when we see this sort of thing going on. Of course they tweaked the translation with a bias in their favor if they would do something like this about a Saint.

If you are aware of some solid evidence in this area, it would be good to publish here as well. Thanks.

Here's the link to article I quoted from above, The Condemnation of Origen In The Sixth Century by Dr Illaria Ramelli: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1E4M1w-ogRqXlmbGyDDo1M_qaA975uaQK/view?usp=drivesdk

It shows how the supposed heretical declaration of universalism at the Second Council of Constantinople that we are constantly reminded about here is totally misconstrued, and the anathemas of Origen are actually regarding a radicalised idea that had nothing to do with Origen.

 

[Fervent]

This may explain why you think that Gregory of Nyssa was not a universalist. If you don't accept this then I give up.

"In passing over Gregory of Nyssa for condemnation, the church, which was fast becoming anti-Origenian, had to bring his work into line, for having such a high profile theologian “off message” was not good. Gregory’s ideas concerning the purifying nature of otherworldly suffering were applied to purgatory, rather
than Gehenna, to allow for the erroneous conclusion that Gregory admitted of the eternity of hell. Furthermore, the manuscripts that transmitted his works had interpolations and glosses intended to show that Gregory in fact did not support the doctrine of universal salvation, 353 clearly because it was highly embarrassing to have a saint in the church who proclaimed such a “heretical” theory. This embarrassment about having a universalist saint is the reason why Germanus of Constantinople in the eighth century expressed the widespread assumption that Gregory’s works were interpolated by heretics who “dared instill in the pure and most holy source of his writings the black and dangerous venom of Origen’s error, surreptitiously ascribing this foolish heresy to a man who is famous for his virtue and learning.” 354 In this way Gregory was remolded into a saint more acceptable to changing standards of orthodoxy. What is clear is that from the mid-sixth century onwards it became widely believed that apokatastasis was off limits (and an investigation into the causes of the rejection of apokatastasis in late antiquity is underway), even though only a specific version of it had been condemned, and this had a significant impact on the tradition. From now on theologians with such leanings had to find subtle and indirect ways of expressing them for fear of being branded as heretics.”

Excerpt From: Ramelli, Ilaria L. E. “A Larger Hope?,
Volume 1: [Apokatastasis] from Christian Beginnings to Julian of Norwich.”

No, I recognize Gregory of Nyssa isn't a universalist as you've categorized universalists because I've actually read Gregory of Nyssa's works, as well as works from his contemporaries and predecessors. I don't base my opinion off of quotes that lack context but actually try to recover the literary and historic context. As I mentioned earlier, Metropolitan Hierotheos has captured well both why people mistake Gregory of Nyssa's views as well as what his views are in his synopsis of Gregory's views of hell.

 

[Hmm]

No, I recognize Gregory of Nyssa isn't a universalist as you've categorized universalists because I've actually read Gregory of Nyssa's works, as well as works from his contemporaries and predecessors. I don't base my opinion off of quotes that lack context but actually try to recover the literary and historic context. As I mentioned earlier, Metropolitan Hierotheos has captured well both why people mistake Gregory of Nyssa's views as well as what his views are in his synopsis of Gregory's views of hell.

But you refuse to post what he says as I did with Ramelli so that everyone can discuss it.

 

[Der Alte]

What do Polycarp, Iranaeus, Ignatius, and Tertullian have to do with Gregory of Nyssa?

You made an unsupported reference to Gregory of Nyssa. I called your ECF and raised you 4; Polycarp, Iranaeus, Ignatius, and Tertullian. My references are just as valid as yours. Start reading.

 

[Der Alte]

This may explain why you think that Gregory of Nyssa was not a universalist. If you don't accept this then I give up.
"In passing over Gregory of Nyssa for condemnation, the church, which was fast becoming anti-Origenian, had to bring his work into line, for having such a high profile theologian “off message” was not good. Gregory’s ideas concerning the purifying nature of otherworldly suffering were applied to purgatory, rather
than Gehenna, to allow for the erroneous conclusion that Gregory admitted of the eternity of hell. Furthermore, the manuscripts that transmitted his works had interpolations and glosses intended to show that Gregory in fact did not support the doctrine of universal salvation, 353 clearly because it was highly embarrassing to have a saint in the church who proclaimed such a “heretical” theory. This embarrassment about having a universalist saint is the reason why Germanus of Constantinople in the eighth century expressed the widespread assumption that Gregory’s works were interpolated by heretics who “dared instill in the pure and most holy source of his writings the black and dangerous venom of Origen’s error, surreptitiously ascribing this foolish heresy to a man who is famous for his virtue and learning.” 354 In this way Gregory was remolded into a saint more acceptable to changing standards of orthodoxy. What is clear is that from the mid-sixth century onwards it became widely believed that apokatastasis was off limits (and an investigation into the causes of the rejection of apokatastasis in late antiquity is underway), even though only a specific version of it had been condemned, and this had a significant impact on the tradition. From now on theologians with such leanings had to find subtle and indirect ways of expressing them for fear of being branded as heretics.”
Excerpt From: Ramelli, Ilaria L. E. “A Larger Hope?,
Volume 1: [Apokatastasis] from Christian Beginnings to Julian of Norwich.”

Have you read where Ramelli said something to the effect that "Origen spoke many times about after eternal life?" Someone a Universalist " I presume "quoted" that to me some time ago. It was supposedly from Origen's commentary on the book of John. I bought the book Origen said no such thing. Therefore to me anything Ramelli says is supect.

 

[Fervent]

You made an unsupported reference to Gregory of Nyssa. I called your ECF and raised you 4; Polycarp, Iranaeus, Ignatius, and Tertullian. My references are just as valid as yours. Start reading.

Are you under the impression I'm arguing in favor of universalism? The discussion I've been having with Hmm is purely about what Gregory of Nyssa taught about hell as he mistakenly believes that Gregory of Nyssa denied the eternality of hell, what other ECF taught is irrelevant.

 

[Fervent]

But you refuse to post what he says as I did with Ramelli so that everyone can discuss it.

"Everyone?" This discussion is between you and I, there's no need to post for "everyone to see" when I have identified exactly where in Gregory of Nyssa's corpus you will find his most prominent(though by no means his only) references to the eternality of hell. You post other people's opinions and hold to cherry picked quotes that are entirely devoid of context, a miserable habit that is sure to distort what historical authors are saying. If you want to recover Gregory of Nyssa's philosophy you must read Gregory of Nyssa's whole writings, as well as develop an understanding of the prevalent philosophies of the day and where they differ from modern philosophy. Drive-by skimming of choice quotes is nothing more than seeking to confirm what you desire to say, rather than engaging with the authors you so wish to lay claim to.

 

[Der Alte]

Are you under the impression I'm arguing in favor of universalism? The discussion I've been having with Hmm is purely about what Gregory of Nyssa taught about hell as he mistakenly believes that Gregory of Nyssa denied the eternality of hell, what other ECF taught is irrelevant.

My bad. I'll show myself out.

 

[Hmm]

"Everyone?" This discussion is between you and I

More silliness. We are not in a personal discussion. We would do that via the Conversation feature. This is a member forum and that means if you have supporting evidence for your views that you wish to be discussed then you'll need to post it to the forum so that everyone can see it and can contribute if they so wish.

I've posted the research findings from Ramelli that I wished to bring up. If you have refuting evidence that you wish to discuss then obviously you'll have to post it too. Not much point saying you have a ball but you're not going to let anyone see it.

 

[Hmm]

Have you read where Ramelli said something to the effect that "Origen spoke many times about after eternal life?" Someone a Universalist " I presume "quoted" that to me some time ago. It was supposedly from Origen's commentary on the book of John. I bought the book Origen said no such thing. Therefore to me anything Ramelli says is supect.

Sorry, I'm not sure what you are saying.

 

[Der Alte]

Sorry, I'm not sure what you are saying.

You quoted Ramelli in the post I replied to and you referred to her again in post #1036 to @Fervent.
Here is something the UR high priestess Ilaria Ramelli said which is absolutely false. I might expect something like this from one of the anonymous posters on a forum but not a published professor.

"But even the aiónes will come to an end, Origen tells us: “After aiónios life a leap will take place and all will pass from the aeons to the Father, who is beyond aiónios life. For Christ is Life, but the Father, who is ‘greater than Christ,’ is greater than life” (Comm. in Io 13.3; quoted in Ramelli, p. 160)."
Sometimes Eternity Ain’t Forever: Aiónios and the Universalist Hope​

Here is what Origen actually said.

Origen Commentary On The Gospel Of John Book Thirteen[1]
"(18) For, as there, the bridegroom leaps upon souls that are more noble-natured and divine, called mountains, and skips upon the inferior ones called hills, so here the fountain that appears in the one who drinks of the water that Jesus gives leaps into eternal life.
(19) And after eternal life, perhaps it [the fountain] will also leap into the Father who is beyond eternal life. For Christ is life; but he who is greater than Christ is greater than life.20[2] Pg. 23"
[1] Origen. (1993). Commentary on the Gospel according to John Books 13–32. (T. P. Halton, Ed., R. E. Heine, Trans.) (Vol. 89, pp. 67–69). Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press.​

The only leaping here is the fountain and after the fountain leaps into eternal life perhaps it leaps into the father.
Origen said absolutely nothing about "all will pass from the aeons to the Father,"
This is from a writing of Origen that is still in copyright and not in public domain. A couple of years ago some UR sprang this on me on this forum so I had to shell out $60 to buy it.
In this same writing Origen does tell us what "aionios " means.

(60) And he has explained the statement, “But he shall not thirst forever,” as follows with these very words: For the life he gives is eternal and never perishes, as, indeed, does the first life which comes from the well; the life he gives remains. For the grace and the gift of our Savior is not to be taken away, nor is it consumed, nor does it perish, when one partakes of it.[1] Pg. 80
[1] Origen. (1993). Commentary on the Gospel according to John Books 13–32. (T. P. Halton, Ed., R. E. Heine, Trans.) (Vol. 89, pp. 81–82). Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press.​

The eternal life that Jesus gives "never perishes,[twice]""remains,""is not taken away,""is not consumed." I would say that is about as clear as it can be even to a country boy from Oklahoma.

 

[Cormack]

Not much point saying you have a ball but you're not going to let anyone see it.

It’s a very VERY special ball. An invisible ball. However, if you read this whole encyclopaedia Britannica, not skim reading or cherry picking its content, you’ll find the glorious heavenly secret of my secret special ball. Now, do your own homework! I’ve told you where to look.

 

[Hmm]

It’s a very VERY special ball. An invisible ball. However, if you read this whole encyclopaedia Britannica, not skim reading or cherry picking its content, you’ll find the glorious heavenly secret of my secret special ball. Now, do your own homework! I’ve told you where to look.

Thanks for the hint. I've done all the A's and B's now and just past Caring.