"Separation from God" after judgement

[~Anastasia~]

Just a heads-up for visitors, this is going in The Ancient Way (TAW) because I specifically am interested in Orthodox nuances on the question. Not really looking to debate what happens after the judgement. But we always welcome everyone in fellowship.

I was listening to Fr. Evan Armitas and Fr. Lou Christpoulos in a recent Orthodoxy Live podcast, and something struck me.

One of them commented on "separation from God" in the afterlife, but it was juxtaposed with the alternative of "union with God" and it got me to thinking.

As a Protestant, I was nearly always told that the unsaved would be "separated from God" as in a location sort of thing - deprived of God's Presence - as "punishment" in the afterlife. But I used to try to reconcile that with God being supposedly omnipresent.

Fast forward to more recently, and I understand much better our ultimate purpose of being united with God, not so much a matter of proximity, but rather as we being partakers of the divine nature, enjoying a union with God that wasn't something I could fathom before.

In fact, we don't teach proximal separation from God as part of the afterlife for the condemned, as far as I can discover? So I was surprised (a bit) to hear two priests discussing it.

My question is this - do I understand it then, that "separation from God" in an Orthodox sense, for those who are "unsaved", to be not that they occupy a place somewhere that God isn't, but that they are in the Presence of God (being that He is everywhere present and filling all things) ... yet in spite of that necessary proximal closeness, they share nothing of His nature, so they are separated - ontologically? - from Him? That would actually make everything (from a language perspective) make sense. Not to mention making better sense of the suffering of the unsaved after judgement.

If that is true, I wonder if the Protestant understanding somehow derived from language as the Orthodox Church uses it (perhaps filtered through degrees of separation) and I wonder if that is even where they get the idea of proximal separation from God? That is only a bit of curiosity to me, but I do like to understand how theologies develop. Not sure if anyone can answer that part.

But I am mostly interested if the part above about what Orthodoxy teaches makes sense.

Thanks!

 

[ArmyMatt]

yes, when we speak of separation from God, we do not mean a spatial separation, but a relational one. God is a communion of Three Persons, so if you don't want that, you choose eternal isolation.

as far as Protestants go, I think that depends on the Protestant. although I think it's rooted in God not standing the sight of sin.

 

[~Anastasia~]

yes, when we speak of separation from God, we do not mean a spatial separation, but a relational one. God is a communion of Three Persons, so if you don't want that, you choose eternal isolation.

as far as Protestants go, I think that depends on the Protestant. although I think it's rooted in God not standing the sight of sin.

Thank you so much. That might be a simple thing, but I never quite considered separation vs union - rather my thinking was still in separation vs nearness.

That's another thing - definitely tied into the Protestant theology, that God can't be where sin is. I had to abandon that one long ago as we can cite too many exceptions, from Satan speaking to God in Job to Christ-God eating with sinners, not to mention God is everywhere, so ...

I had come to think it's not that God shrinks away and is somehow repelled by sin, like Superman with Kryptonite. Rather I started thinking the truth is that sin can't be (comfortably) where God is, which again, makes sense in terms of eternal torment according to Orthodox teaching.

Thanks very much!

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

We spend our whole life fostering either love or enmity with God. We either seek Him or we seek the humanism and secular pride of the age. Those who spend a life repelled by the Triune God, His morality, His love, imagine what it must be like for them in His divine presence!? It must feel like having to spend an eternity next to the person you hate most!

 

[Spikey]

We spend our whole life fostering either love or enmity with God. We either seek Him or we seek the humanism and secular pride of the age. Those who spend a life repelled by the Triune God, His morality, His love, imagine what it must be like for them in His divine presence!? It must feel like having to spend an eternity next to the person you hate most!

I personally couldn't imagine spending an eternity anywhere, whether it be in Gods presence or not. The idea of it to me would be torture either way, I mean, the first couple of hundred years may be bearable, but after tens of thousands then hundreds of thousands, I'm sure there would be little or no difference between the two options.

 

[~Anastasia~]

We spend our whole life fostering either love or enmity with God. We either seek Him or we seek the humanism and secular pride of the age. Those who spend a life repelled by the Triune God, His morality, His love, imagine what it must be like for them in His divine presence!? It must feel like having to spend an eternity next to the person you hate most!

Thanks, Gurney.

I understood the basic theology of it ... it's just the word "separation" having a distinct meaning in Orthodoxy was something of an eye-opener.

But additional explanations are always good.

 

[~Anastasia~]

I personally couldn't imagine spending an eternity anywhere, whether it be in Gods presence or not. The idea of it to me would be torture either way, I mean, the first couple of hundred years may be bearable, but after tens of thousands then hundreds of thousands, I'm sure there would be little or no difference between the two options.

"Time" likely will have a whole different experience than we have in this life. At least, when it's spoken of, there are already two different kinds of "time" in Christian thought.

I understand how "eternity" measured in the years we live seems simply interminable. But I suspect we won't have that same perspective when the chronos time has ended.

 

[Dewi Sant]

Protestant theology (it's always dangerous to generalise), has its foundations in a more legalistic framework of justice. There are scriptural references of dividing the wheat from the chaff; the sheep from the goats.

Orthodoxy is radical in that it considers the texts not at their face value, but in the spirit in which they were written.

God does not desire the death of any, or the annihilation of a single soul; not even the devil's.

Heaven is not a 'place', likewise nor is hell (correct me with patristic texts if I am incorrect?).
It is not merely a 'state of mind', as described in the Satanic Monologue of Paradise Lost:
"The mind is its own place, and in it self Can make a Heav'n of Hell, a Hell of Heav'n."

Relationship is much deeper, so much more a part of us than simply rational thought allows.
The grief we feel at the death of a loved one comes not from a rational centre, but one founded in the close relationship with the object of that love.
There is a 'substance' that binds two together, between the Creator and the Creature; between you and I, and God.


Seperation from God is a great deceit. God is everywhere present, filling all things.
However,
As a musician must tune his instrument to play harmonious with the ensemble; so too must we tune our hearts to resonate with the communion of God and his saints.

To find oneself dissonant, out of concord with the choir, feelings of resentment, hatred, and pain.

I could go on but I won't bore you further.



Just a theory; perhaps the idea of Heaven/Hell as places of communion and damnation, are products of the black death and the practice of the sale of indulgences in medieval Catholic Europe?
By describing the afterlife as a series of places, it all makes a great deal more sense to the average person.
To simplify language, one simplifies [perceived] theology.
When a group schismates, it is this simplified theology they inherit and develop.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Protestant theology (it's always dangerous to generalise), has its foundations in a more legalistic framework of justice. There are scriptural references of dividing the wheat from the chaff; the sheep from the goats.

Orthodoxy is radical in that it considers the texts not at their face value, but in the spirit in which they were written.

God does not desire the death of any, or the annihilation of a single soul; not even the devil's.

Heaven is not a 'place', likewise nor is hell (correct me with patristic texts if I am incorrect?).
It is not merely a 'state of mind', as described in the Satanic Monologue of Paradise Lost:
"The mind is its own place, and in it self Can make a Heav'n of Hell, a Hell of Heav'n."

Relationship is much deeper, so much more a part of us than simply rational thought allows.
The grief we feel at the death of a loved one comes not from a rational centre, but one founded in the close relationship with the object of that love.
There is a 'substance' that binds two together, between the Creator and the Creature; between you and I, and God.


Seperation from God is a great deceit. God is everywhere present, filling all things.
However,
As a musician must tune his instrument to play harmonious with the ensemble; so too must we tune our hearts to resonate with the communion of God and his saints.

To find oneself dissonant, out of concord with the choir, feelings of resentment, hatred, and pain.

I could go on but I won't bore you further.



Just a theory; perhaps the idea of Heaven/Hell as places of communion and damnation, are products of the black death and the practice of the sale of indulgences in medieval Catholic Europe?
By describing the afterlife as a series of places, it all makes a great deal more sense to the average person.
To simplify language, one simplifies [perceived] theology.
When a group schismates, it is this simplified theology they inherit and develop.

Thank you.

I have not much to add to this, only to thank you for it and to say - you weren't boring me at all. As to the idea of theology development, it makes sense.




This is one of those lovely instances in faith where I find you can "know" a thing to be true, but yet God brings you round to it again, and you know it even more clearly and more deeply, and yet again later, He brings you back to revisit it again later and ... as far as I know, these particular subjects just continue to go deeper. I can't say as there is or might be an end to going into them.

God be with you all.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Thank you so much. That might be a simple thing, but I never quite considered separation vs union - rather my thinking was still in separation vs nearness.

That's another thing - definitely tied into the Protestant theology, that God can't be where sin is. I had to abandon that one long ago as we can cite too many exceptions, from Satan speaking to God in Job to Christ-God eating with sinners, not to mention God is everywhere, so ...

I had come to think it's not that God shrinks away and is somehow repelled by sin, like Superman with Kryptonite. Rather I started thinking the truth is that sin can't be (comfortably) where God is, which again, makes sense in terms of eternal torment according to Orthodox teaching.

Thanks very much!

and sin is not a thing. evil has no positive existence of its own, but is a distortion of what God creates which is always good. God cannot shrink away or avoid something that doesn't actually exist.

 

[~Anastasia~]

and sin is not a thing. evil has no positive existence of its own, but is a distortion of what God creates which is always good. God cannot shrink away or avoid something that doesn't actually exist.

That's a good point, and thank you.

And in my case, very astute. When I consider the idea "God can't be in the presence of sin" I am in fact imagining a tangible thing "sin" that somehow "repels" God. I'm not sure if other Protestants saw it that way, but that sure seems to be how it is talked about.

When I think of the reverse, that sin can't exist comfortably in the Presence of God ... I imagine sin as being simply a description of a condition within us, making us unable to abide the pure holiness of God.

At least that's how my thinking goes.

 

[Spikey]

"Time" likely will have a whole different experience than we have in this life. At least, when it's spoken of, there are already two different kinds of "time" in Christian thought.

I understand how "eternity" measured in the years we live seems simply interminable. But I suspect we won't have that same perspective when the chronos time has ended.

Eternity is eternity, whatever spin you try to put on it. It's a very very long 'time'

Stop and think for two minutes (however long two minutes is)

 

[ArmyMatt]

Eternity is eternity, whatever spin you try to put on it. It's a very very long 'time'

Stop and think for two minutes (however long two minutes is)

not for us, eternity is not a long time, it's the experience of time outside of time. it's timelessness.

 

[Spikey]

not for us, eternity is not a long time, it's the experience of time outside of time. it's timelessness.

That makes no sense to me. Eternity is eternity whether you call it timelessness or whatever, you can't dress it up to suit your own agenda.

 

[ArmyMatt]

That makes no sense to me. Eternity is eternity whether you call it timelessness or whatever, you can't dress it up to suit your own agenda.

I'm not. eternity is God's experience of time. since He created time and is not bound by it, He is outside of it. God experiences all time as the eternal present or now. He sees all time as a single moment.

 

[Spikey]

I'm not. eternity is God's experience of time. since He created time and is not bound by it, He is outside of it. God experiences all time as the eternal present or now. He sees all time as a single moment.

Yeah, the reward for following your particular religion is eternal life? I'm just pointing out that eternity is a very very long and a very very tedious amount of time. If eternity is not an unimaginable amount of time, then what is it?

 

[ArmyMatt]

Yeah, the reward for following your particular religion is eternal life? I'm just pointing out that eternity is a very very long and a very very tedious amount of time. If eternity is not an unimaginable amount of time, then what is it?

it is the experience of being outside of time. it is not a really long time. it is everything being experienced as "now."

 

[Spikey]

it is the experience of being outside of time. it is not a really long time. it is everything being experienced as "now."

So eternal life is not on offer then? I will correct everyone who offers me the free gift of eternal life then. I'm already experiencing everything as now so the free gift doesn't appeal to me.

 

[~Anastasia~]

So eternal life is not on offer then? I will correct everyone who offers me the free gift of eternal life then. I'm already experiencing everything as now so the free gift doesn't appeal to me.

There will always be a "now". And everyone will have it. The only question is how it will seem.

 

[ArmyMatt]

So eternal life is not on offer then? I will correct everyone who offers me the free gift of eternal life then. I'm already experiencing everything as now so the free gift doesn't appeal to me.

um, no, it's an offer. eternal life can only happen in the eternal now, since it's eternal. I don't get your point here.