Metropolitan Kallistos, David Bentley Hart, Universalism, and the Church of the East

[ArmyMatt]

He must mean "yahweh"...but was that the OT God? You also need to know what happened in Samaria in John 4:22 when the woman was told "we know what we worship". The Romans tried instituting their gods on Israel but ended up killing Jews because they would not institute them at the Temple. The Samaritans said their temple had no name and they said they did not care so Jove or IaBe was Joveh or Yoveh was Jupiter for the name of their Temple. This is in both 2 maccabees as well as written about by josephus.

I think it was El as the storm god if memory serves.

 

[The Liturgist]

Amusingly when someone dared to suggest the doctrine of Marcion on Archpriest Andrew Stephen Damick’s blog, Fr. Andrew replied deadpan “Tell me, how’s the shipping business?”

 

[The Liturgist]

I think it was El as the storm god if memory serves.

If that’s the case he might be referring to the theory that the Hebrew religion appropriated the name El or Elohim from another religion, which is related to the five-source hypothesis for the Pentateuch (wherein you have the Priestly Source, the Jahwist Source, the Deuteronomist Source, the Elohim Source and the Redactor, which I regard as one of those interesting but improbable ideas cooked up by textual critics that has no actual impact on the Christian religion) but since ALH or in the case of Hebrew, ELH, is the standard Semitic triconsonantal stem for “God” I doubt it. For instance, the Syriac for God is Aloho or Alaha and the Arabic is Allah.

 

[ArmyMatt]

If that’s the case he might be referring to the theory that the Hebrew religion appropriated the name El or Elohim from another religion, which is related to the five-source hypothesis for the Pentateuch (wherein you have the Priestly Source, the Jahwist Source, the Deuteronomist Source, the Elohim Source and the Redactor, which I regard as one of those interesting but improbable ideas cooked up by textual critics that has no actual impact on the Christian religion) but since ALH or in the case of Hebrew, ELH, is the standard Semitic triconsonantal stem for “God” I doubt it. For instance, the Syriac for God is Aloho or Alaha and the Arabic is Allah.

he specifically has said that it’s more than just the name. it’s actually a god he doesn’t claim to worship.

 

[The Liturgist]

he specifically has said that it’s more than just the name. it’s actually a god he doesn’t claim to worship.

Well then that’s some horrifying heresy.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Well then that’s some horrifying heresy.

yep

 

[The Liturgist]

yep

It is reminiscent of the tragic downfall of Tertullian when he allowed himself to be seduced into joining the Montanist Cult. Also if I recall Tatian was at least nominally orthodox before he founded his own Gnostic sect, although the Diatessaron is spectacularly boring compared to the four Gospels by themselves. I am opposed to Gospel harmonies; I really love the four canonical Gospels and the diatessaron probably delayed a Syriac translation of the four gospels by seventy years or so, until bishops in the third century became concerned about the possibility of heresy hidden in the editing and began disposing of it in favor of the Vetus Syra, which is an interesting translation in that it is related to the Vetus Latina.

 

[ArmyMatt]

It is reminiscent of the tragic downfall of Tertullian when he allowed himself to be seduced into joining the Montanist Cult. Also if I recall Tatian was at least nominally orthodox before he founded his own Gnostic sect, although the Diatessaron is spectacularly boring compared to the four Gospels by themselves. I am opposed to Gospel harmonies; I really love the four canonical Gospels and the diatessaron probably delayed a Syriac translation of the four gospels by seventy years or so, until bishops in the third century became concerned about the possibility of heresy hidden in the editing and began disposing of it in favor of the Vetus Syra, which is an interesting translation in that it is related to the Vetus Latina.

yep, hopefully he comes around

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Regarding what Christ our True God says about the Samaritans, the Orthodox Study Bible, which I feel obliged to regard as more reliable than Josephus, has this to say:

Salvation is of the Jews (v. 22): The Lord affirms that true revelation comes from Judaism. “The commonwealth of Israel was the school of the knowledge of God for all the nations” (AthanG). More importantly, Jesus is testifying that the Messiah, who was prophesied among the Jews, has risen from among the Jews. While the gift of salvation in Christ is to all nations, it has come from within Judaism. The hour (v. 21) refers to the death and Resurrection of Christ and to the outpouring of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, which inaugurates the worship of the new covenant.

How does what you wrote conflict with what I wrote?

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

I think it was El as the storm god if memory serves.

Hmmm....Elohim was in Torah long before this so I wouldn't think so

 

[ArmyMatt]

Hmmm....Elohim was in Torah long before this so I wouldn't think so

I am saying this is what DBH is saying

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

I am saying this is what DBH is saying

Yeah I know, I am saying if he is, he is wrong

 

[ArmyMatt]

Yeah I know, I am saying if he is, he is wrong

oh he is, and he is

 

[The Liturgist]

How does what you wrote conflict with what I wrote?

I didn’t write that, but copy-pasted it from the Orthodox Study Bible ebook on Scribd (I also own a print copy), and I don’t know if it does conflict with what you wrote, and I posted it so that you might know what the OSB said on the issue so you could compare notes, so to speak.

 

[rusmeister]

Kyrie eleison!

How is it that he hasn’t been anathematized? We simply can’t have Marcionists in the Church. I would assume/hope that at least some jurisdictions have told their priests not to communicate him, such as what happened with Archpriest Sergei Bulgakov?

Literally everywhere in the Church people are walking around believing and even teaching things contradicted by our Tradition, even here in TAW, and they aren't being anathematized. Neo-gnosticism runs amuck. “We know better”. It might be an understanding of biological science, the claims of modern psychology or anthropology, or here, of philology and translations.

 

[ArseniusTheSilent]

Seems like a relevant thread to ask.

I just discovered that Fr. Benedict Churchill was nominated to become bishop of New England for the OCA. The position has been vacant for 2-3yrs since AB. Nikhon reposed (Memory Eternal).

Where does Fr. Benedict land on the liberal/conservative spectrum (hate the wording but you get my drift)? Just curious.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Where does Fr. Benedict land on the liberal/conservative spectrum (hate the wording but you get my drift)? Just curious.

I’ve never heard any issues of his theology, so I think he’s pretty solid.

 

[har_habayit]

Admittedly as a total novice to Orthodoxy, I have to just note something: I have read some Orthodox authors over the years, and about a year ago, I stumbled across DBH's translation of the New Testament, because it said, "A New Translation". I thought, "well, that must be interesting. Maybe I'll learn something new." So I read it, and I came away with two conclusions:

1) His translation wasn't much different than any other I ever read.
2) He seemed to have a real animus and ax to grind concerning the concept of eternity in the Bible. He was attacking the use of Hebrew and Greek words to point to some kind of indefinite period of time when the words really mean "ages" and can refer to a long time without meaning eternity.

What struck me though was just how much of an agenda he seemed to be on. It seemed like he wrote the Bible translation just in order to share his own opinions on why there is no eternity in scripture and ESPECIALLY no hell.

I am not even Orthodox but I knew I was reading something that most Orthodox people would probably consider heretical.

 

[Light of the East]

Admittedly as a total novice to Orthodoxy, I have to just note something: I have read some Orthodox authors over the years, and about a year ago, I stumbled across DBH's translation of the New Testament, because it said, "A New Translation". I thought, "well, that must be interesting. Maybe I'll learn something new." So I read it, and I came away with two conclusions:

1) His translation wasn't much different than any other I ever read.
2) He seemed to have a real animus and ax to grind concerning the concept of eternity in the Bible. He was attacking the use of Hebrew and Greek words to point to some kind of indefinite period of time when the words really mean "ages" and can refer to a long time without meaning eternity.

What struck me though was just how much of an agenda he seemed to be on. It seemed like he wrote the Bible translation just in order to share his own opinions on why there is no eternity in scripture and ESPECIALLY no hell.

I am not even Orthodox but I knew I was reading something that most Orthodox people would probably consider heretical.

So what you are saying is that proper translation of the Sacred Scriptures is . . . meaaaaah . . . not all that important?

Look, this is not the only place in the Scriptures where the Latin translators did an atrocious job of translation. Let me give you a couple of examples, just so you won't accuse me the way you are accusing Hart.

Matthew 24:3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

Except that the word translated "world" is the Greek word "aion" which means "age." Why is this important? Because people have read this atrocious (yeah, I really, really don't like it!) translation and come up with the idea that Matthew 24 and 25 are speaking about the end of all things . . . i.e. the end of the world as we know it. This led to the incredibly stupid idea of a "Rapture of the Church" and you have Protestant nutjobs like John Hagee running around claiming that "Jaaaaaayzuz is coming any second now." Which may be true, but not in the context in which he is speaking, where you will have Israel restored, the animal sacrifices restored (an insult to the Blood of Christ . . . good grief, do these people even THINK????) and the who end times prophecy craziness abounding on the Internet.

Lest you think I have it in only for Protestants and the KJV Bible they bow down and worship every night, let's look at similar nonsense from the Douay-Rheims.

Matthew 3:2 And saying: Do penance: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Nope. The Greek word is "metanoeo" which simply means a change of mind. It does not mean beating yourself with belts, hairshirts, and other forms of self-abuse which go along with penance.

From Strong's online: μετανοέω metanoeō

1. to change one's mind, i.e. to repent
2. to change one's mind for better, heartily to amend with abhorrence of one's past sins

Why get all hot and bothered about all this? Because . . . words mean things!! Using the wrong word can send a person off into the weeds looking for snipes that don't exist. I think DBH has every right to be incensed. I'm incensed . . . especially at people who don't listen to FACTS and just cannot let go of their beloved pet agendas, such as the Supremacy of the Bishop of Rome, which comes from a bad understanding of Matthew 16.

 

[The Liturgist]

So what you are saying is that proper translation of the Sacred Scriptures is . . . meaaaaah . . . not all that important?

Look, this is not the only place in the Scriptures where the Latin translators did an atrocious job of translation. Let me give you a couple of examples, just so you won't accuse me the way you are accusing Hart.

Matthew 24:3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

Except that the word translated "world" is the Greek word "aion" which means "age." Why is this important? Because people have read this atrocious (yeah, I really, really don't like it!) translation and come up with the idea that Matthew 24 and 25 are speaking about the end of all things . . . i.e. the end of the world as we know it. This led to the incredibly stupid idea of a "Rapture of the Church" and you have Protestant nutjobs like John Hagee running around claiming that "Jaaaaaayzuz is coming any second now." Which may be true, but not in the context in which he is speaking, where you will have Israel restored, the animal sacrifices restored (an insult to the Blood of Christ . . . good grief, do these people even THINK????) and the who end times prophecy craziness abounding on the Internet.

Lest you think I have it in only for Protestants and the KJV Bible they bow down and worship every night, let's look at similar nonsense from the Douay-Rheims.

Matthew 3:2 And saying: Do penance: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Nope. The Greek word is "metanoeo" which simply means a change of mind. It does not mean beating yourself with belts, hairshirts, and other forms of self-abuse which go along with penance.

From Strong's online: μετανοέω metanoeō

1. to change one's mind, i.e. to repent
2. to change one's mind for better, heartily to amend with abhorrence of one's past sins

Why get all hot and bothered about all this? Because . . . words mean things!! Using the wrong word can send a person off into the weeds looking for snipes that don't exist. I think DBH has every right to be incensed. I'm incensed . . . especially at people who don't listen to FACTS and just cannot let go of their beloved pet agendas, such as the Supremacy of the Bishop of Rome, which comes from a bad understanding of Matthew 16.

All of this is true, but I am deeply troubled by DBH’s universalism, and I hadn’t noticed a Universalist bias in his new translation, but I wasn’t looking for it as at the time I was not aware of the extent to which he is pushing this agenda, which is contradictory to the Orthodox faith.

To quote Metropolitan Kallistos Ware, memory eternal, it is acceptable to hope all may be saved, but wrong to say all must be saved, because the one thing God cannot do is force us to love him (or at least, love him voluntarily, which I propose that love must be in order to be truly genuine), and because some people hate God, as C.S. Lewis wrote, the gates of Hell are locked on the inside. I like the Patristic and Orthodox concept that the outer darkness is a mercy in that the close proximity to God in the New Jerusalem would be a torment for those who are not aligned to receive His love, but instead hate Him and would experiencee the consuming fire that is the Love of God as the burning Wrath of God. But as St. John Chrysostom pointed out, it is missing out on the joys of the life of the world to come that is the greatest loss for those who are not saved.