- Oct 2, 2020
- 27,715
- 15,108
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Single
That seems a lot closer to the UR position than the view that 99% of humanity will be sentenced to eternal torment.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
It's something that has to be taken from his complete body of works, but the closest he comes to outright explaining the concept is in his works on baptism. It's a fairly common philsophical position from the Alexandrian school refining just a bit on Clement's writings in the same vein.
"Know for sure?" No, it's history nothing is ever certain. But to hold modern theories based on inferences from an extremely limited body of documentation over the claims of those closer in history to the event seems rather unwarranted. Modern skeptical inquiry often does little but cast doubt on our ability to reconstruct history as there are always scholars willing to undermine historical records, especially if it means they can remove a stain from their pet theory. The anathema's against origenist universalism are pretty secure, with those attacking them only attacking at what point in the precedings they occurred in order to try to render them neutered.Have you studied it thoroughly enough to know for sure that Fr Aidan Kimel is incorrect about what transpired?
Not really, because it upholds the reality of an eternal hell. There are compatible forms of "universalism" with Christianity, but the modern notion that everyone eventually is saved isn't the same thing as the historic views of universalism that upheld the Scriptures regarding the eternality of judgment against the wicked.That seems a lot closer to the UR position than the view that 99% of humanity will be sentenced to eternal torment.
Not really, because it upholds the reality of an eternal hell. There are compatible forms of "universalism" with Christianity, but the modern notion that everyone eventually is saved isn't the same thing as the historic views of universalism that upheld the Scriptures regarding the eternality of judgment against the wicked.
And as I said, they're not really close at all. Modern universalist theories begin with the notion of discarding hell and questioning its justice, holding philosophy over revelation. The Alexandrian schools view was a means of coming from Biblical revelation and synthesizing it. It's not really close to modern universalism at all, except superficially.I said closer to. Not the same as. You seem a bit trigger happy.
And as I said, they're not really close at all. Modern universalist theories begin with the notion of discarding hell and questioning its justice, holding philosophy over revelation. The Alexandrian schools view was a means of coming from Biblical revelation and synthesizing it. It's not really close to modern universalism at all, except superficially.
No, I'm no confusing anything. The universalism pushed by individuals in this thread often undermines the reliability of Scripture in favor of human philosophical musings. Now, I'm not speaking of someone like Lazarus Short who came to the conclusion through Scriptural studies but of individuals who have accused the Bible of being edited into a damnationalist text, or who have compiled a list of contextless snippets from ECF without actually reading the source material to understand the nuance of the positions and latch on with a modern universal frame. Certainly, there are forms of universal reconciliation that are compatible with a broad Christian tradition but the one that is becoming common in liberal Western circles tends not to be and often ends in attempts to denigrate Scripture.It sounds like you're confusing other types of universalism with Christian universalism. Christian universalism comes from Biblical revelation via a thorough study of scripture, koine Greek, church history and patristics. Well known Christian universalists are respected theologians. They're the ones who cite Gregory of Nyssa, Clement and others as well as the Alexandrian schools.
No, I'm no confusing anything. The universalism pushed by individuals in this thread often undermines the reliability of Scripture in favor of human philosophical musings. Now, I'm not speaking of someone like Lazarus Short who came to the conclusion through Scriptural studies but of individuals who have accused the Bible of being edited into a damnationalist text, or who have compiled a list of contextless snippets from ECF without actually reading the source material to understand the nuance of the positions and latch on with a modern universal frame. Certainly, there are forms of universal reconciliation that are compatible with a broad Christian tradition but the one that is becoming common in liberal Western circles tends not to be and often ends in attempts to denigrate Scripture.
Not really, because it upholds the reality of an eternal hell. There are compatible forms of "universalism" with Christianity, but the modern notion that everyone eventually is saved isn't the same thing as the historic views of universalism that upheld the Scriptures regarding the eternality of judgment against the wicked.
No, I have not said that. Modern scholarship is valuable, but must be kept in proper perspective especially when dealing with history. Critical histories are more likely to lean towards skepticism over things that need not be skeptical about. The proceedings of the ecumenical councils are far more likely to have been understood by those immediately contemporary while simultaneously being poorly documented.
individuals who have accused the Bible of being edited into a damnationalist text
No-one in this discussion as far as I'm aware has ever suggested that the Bible has been edited into a damnationist text. On the contrary, the point that has been made over and over again in this and other threads is that the Bible is not a damnationist text but that it is widely perceived as such that because of very basic mistranslations, in particular the mistranslation of "anionios kolasis" to "eternal punishment" instead of its true meaning of something like "corrective punishment lasting for an age". You can keep repeating that universalists "denigrate" the Bible but they are actually honouring the Bible and trying to regain it by pointing these facts out.
From a UR point of view, the biggest issue is about the character of God. Is he really a cosmic tyrant? Something on the level of an angry volcano god?It could be that the Universalist point is correct, but it seems to me that if most of the argument boils down to a translation issue over "anionios kolasis, then much of this debate is more or less an argument over who has the "best and most professional" translation expert(s). Personally, I think it's more than just this, BUT it seems to be a central issue.
From a UR point of view, the biggest issue is about the character of God. Is he really a cosmic tyrant? Something on the level of an angry volcano god?
It could be that the Universalist point is correct, but it seems to me that if most of the argument boils down to a translation issue over "anionios kolasis, then much of this debate is more or less an argument over who has the "best and most professional" translation expert(s). Personally, I think it's more than just this, BUT it seems to be a central issue.
God is being slandered.Steven, why are you so focused on this issue?
Sad to say, they are winning the debates against the traditional church. Here's an example.It doesn't work that way, but it is what a lot of ex-Christians today have done in order to arrive that their current atheistic mindsets.
I believe you've got this the wrong way round: it's not a central issue to the universalist argument but it is to the infernalist case. The reason this particular translation error is discussed so much is that to infernalists, the facts that the phrase "eternal punishment" appears in most English Bibles is proof of ECT. What other argument can be made other than pointing out that it is a simple translation?
Sad to say, they are winning the debates against the traditional church.
Sure, it is discomfitting to see fellow Christians push for what seem to us to be mistakes in reading, understanding and applying the Bible. Huge mistakes have been made, and ECT may be one of the longer running mistakes, but at the same time, the overall interpretive issue is kind of ambiguous. So, I tend to just accept that God has wrath, and that some of that wrath is expressed here in this life, and some of it will also be expressed to some people on the other side of the grave. And it is what it is, even if none of us has a full claim on understanding exactly what it all entails.God is being slandered.
It is horrifying to examine what the church teaches about God without thinking through the implications.
Yeah, but it also sounds like serial murderers who are unrepetent are going to get off scott free without due penalty and that we're being pressed here to accept the idea that if God somehow isn't going to punish them on the other side of the grave, we shouldn't either man-to-man on this side of the grave.It is claimed that God predestined the vast majority of humankind to burn for all eternity with no hope of escape. And this is used as a fear tactic to control people. Spiritual extortion. Believe, or burn. The church is set about the task of saving people from God. Say what?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?