what do you think about universalism?

[tweety234]

what exactly is this thing?

I am totally ignorant about that.

Do you believe this theory.?

[Melodist]

what exactly is this thing?

All religions are basically the same.

Do you believe this theory.?

No.

[Asteriktos]

what exactly is this thing?

All religions are basically the same.

Wut?

[Jetavan]

what exactly is this thing?

I am totally ignorant about that.

Do you believe this theory.?

There are different types of universalism.

One universalism theory states that it is possible that all may be saved. This universalism is perfectly acceptable in Orthodoxy (and Catholicism).

Another universalism theory states that it is a definite reality that all will be saved. This universalism is rejected by Orthodoxy (and Catholicism).

[Melodist]

Wut?

Unless I misunderstood the question, which is possible.

[domNoah]

what exactly is this thing?

I am totally ignorant about that.

Do you believe this theory.?

There are different types of universalism.

One universalism theory states that it is possible that all may be saved. This universalism is perfectly acceptable in Orthodoxy (and Catholicism).

Another universalism theory states that it is a definite reality that all will be saved. This universalism is rejected by Orthodoxy (and Catholicism).

Not all may be saved, it is part of Divine Revelation that people such as Core and his followers were swallowed up into hell.

That is unless you mean that God provides sufficient grace to all to be saved?

[Asteriktos]

Wut?

Unless I misunderstood the question, which is possible.

Sorry, I was just confused, I should have said more than that!   I thought the universalism was the salvation kind of thing he was asking about, not the universalism as in uber-ecumenical, let's-all-get-along stuff.

As for myself, I lose hope daily that all (or even many) can be saved...

[Sleeper]

Holding out the possibility that all may be saved was one of the things that helped me convert to Orthodoxy. I remember flipping to the chapter on Hell and Judgement immediately after I was given my catechism book, to see what the Church's views were. I was greatly comforted that so many Fathers hoped for this as well. It was refreshing, coming from an evangelical background where everyone was basically already saved or damned.

[tweety234]

Wut?

Unless I misunderstood the question, which is possible.

Sorry, I was just confused, I should have said more than that!   I thought the universalism was the salvation kind of thing he was asking about, not the universalism as in uber-ecumenical, let's-all-get-along stuff.

As for myself, I lose hope daily that all (or even many) can be saved...

Why are you losing hope about that? All can be saved. But it doesn't mean that they will, or that we will for that matter.

[tweety234]

Holding out the possibility that all may be saved was one of the things that helped me convert to Orthodoxy. I remember flipping to the chapter on Hell and Judgement immediately after I was given my catechism book, to see what the Church's views were. I was greatly comforted that so many Fathers hoped for this as well. It was refreshing, coming from an evangelical background where everyone was basically already saved or damned.

saved or damned, before they even finish their lives? interesting.

[Sleeper]

Holding out the possibility that all may be saved was one of the things that helped me convert to Orthodoxy. I remember flipping to the chapter on Hell and Judgement immediately after I was given my catechism book, to see what the Church's views were. I was greatly comforted that so many Fathers hoped for this as well. It was refreshing, coming from an evangelical background where everyone was basically already saved or damned.

saved or damned, before they even finish their lives? interesting.

Calvinists 

[Kerdy]

Universalism = hogwash/humbug/phooey

The modern application of universalism has turned into a touchy feel-good, everything is ok, idea of what religion should be and it doesn’t work.

Ever seen these bumper stickers?  

 

 

[Kerdy]

Having said that, true Universalism is the idea that everyone is a child of God and everyone is going to heaven, which is also hogwash as it denies the need for atonement and stating there is no need of salvation.  Basically, it says Jesus wasted his time and died for nothing.

[tweety234]

Universalism = hogwash/humbug/phooey

The modern application of universalism has turned into a touchy feel-good, everything is ok, idea of what religion should be and it doesn’t work.

Ever seen these bumper stickers?  

 

 

I love this banner.

[tweety234]

Having said that, true Universalism is the idea that everyone is a child of God and everyone is going to heaven, which is also hogwash as it denies the need for atonement and stating there is no need of salvation.  Basically, it says Jesus wasted his time and died for nothing.

there is another theory, that jesus never existed. I don't  believe this theory to be honest. But then again, do we have any evidence of his existence, from anyone other than religious people?

[Kerdy]

Having said that, true Universalism is the idea that everyone is a child of God and everyone is going to heaven, which is also hogwash as it denies the need for atonement and stating there is no need of salvation.  Basically, it says Jesus wasted his time and died for nothing.

there is another theory, that jesus never existed. I don't  believe this theory to be honest. But then again, do we have any evidence of his existence, from anyone other than religious people?

Someone who makes this claim is either willfully ignorant or, well; I try to be a nice so I can’t say much else about this type of person.  I will say to make this claim a person ignores A LOT!  Sort of like ignoring George Washington existed, Julius Caesar existed, that sort of thing.  But since when has this kept people from being ignorant about God?  I suppose if you ignore everything you would come to that conclusion.

[JamesRottnek]

Having said that, true Universalism is the idea that everyone is a child of God and everyone is going to heaven, which is also hogwash as it denies the need for atonement and stating there is no need of salvation.  Basically, it says Jesus wasted his time and died for nothing.

You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about...why am I not surprised?

[Kerdy]

Having said that, true Universalism is the idea that everyone is a child of God and everyone is going to heaven, which is also hogwash as it denies the need for atonement and stating there is no need of salvation.  Basically, it says Jesus wasted his time and died for nothing.

You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about...why am I not surprised?

Interesting you say this since I pulled it directly from one of my college course books.  I'll inform the academic world they are wrong and you are correct.  I can quote it word for word if you like.

I’m not sure what your beef is or why you have the uncontrollable desire to argue with my posts with your “I know you are, but what am I” mentality, but it’s sort of tiresome and juvenile.  Just thought you should know.  Sort of boring too.

[JamesRottnek]

Having said that, true Universalism is the idea that everyone is a child of God and everyone is going to heaven, which is also hogwash as it denies the need for atonement and stating there is no need of salvation.  Basically, it says Jesus wasted his time and died for nothing.

You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about...why am I not surprised?

Interesting you say this since I pulled it directly from one of my college course books.  I'll inform the academic world they are wrong and you are correct.  I can quote it word for word if you like.

I’m not sure what your beef is or why you have the uncontrollable desire to argue with my posts with your “I know you are, but what am I” mentality, but it’s sort of tiresome and juvenile.  Just thought you should know.  Sort of boring too.

What college did you go to that had the audacity to utilize a text book saying that universalism denies a need for atonement, salvation, or Jesus?

[Kerdy]

Having said that, true Universalism is the idea that everyone is a child of God and everyone is going to heaven, which is also hogwash as it denies the need for atonement and stating there is no need of salvation.  Basically, it says Jesus wasted his time and died for nothing.

You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about...why am I not surprised?

Interesting you say this since I pulled it directly from one of my college course books.  I'll inform the academic world they are wrong and you are correct.  I can quote it word for word if you like.

I’m not sure what your beef is or why you have the uncontrollable desire to argue with my posts with your “I know you are, but what am I” mentality, but it’s sort of tiresome and juvenile.  Just thought you should know.  Sort of boring too.

What college did you go to that had the audacity to utilize a text book saying that universalism denies a need for atonement, salvation, or Jesus?

What difference does it make?  You obviously are smarter than the entire collective of the religion department of that university.  Your definition is all that matters.

[JamesRottnek]

Having said that, true Universalism is the idea that everyone is a child of God and everyone is going to heaven, which is also hogwash as it denies the need for atonement and stating there is no need of salvation.  Basically, it says Jesus wasted his time and died for nothing.

You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about...why am I not surprised?

Interesting you say this since I pulled it directly from one of my college course books.  I'll inform the academic world they are wrong and you are correct.  I can quote it word for word if you like.

I’m not sure what your beef is or why you have the uncontrollable desire to argue with my posts with your “I know you are, but what am I” mentality, but it’s sort of tiresome and juvenile.  Just thought you should know.  Sort of boring too.

What college did you go to that had the audacity to utilize a text book saying that universalism denies a need for atonement, salvation, or Jesus?

What difference does it make?  You obviously are smarter than the entire collective of the religion department of that university.  Your definition is all that matters.

If that was what your college's religion department taught, then yes, I am smarter than "the entire collective" of them.

[Asteriktos]

Why are you losing hope about that? All can be saved. But it doesn't mean that they will, or that we will for that matter.

Gates and narrow ways and all that stuff. Also, I will hear about a quote in a saint that seems to indicate that they hope for all to be saved, but then when I actually go and read that saint's writings/sayings (not just the isolated quote) I get a very different picture about what mindset they indicate we should have, or what will actually happen. There's always hope though I suppose...

[Kerdy]

Having said that, true Universalism is the idea that everyone is a child of God and everyone is going to heaven, which is also hogwash as it denies the need for atonement and stating there is no need of salvation.  Basically, it says Jesus wasted his time and died for nothing.

You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about...why am I not surprised?

Interesting you say this since I pulled it directly from one of my college course books.  I'll inform the academic world they are wrong and you are correct.  I can quote it word for word if you like.

I’m not sure what your beef is or why you have the uncontrollable desire to argue with my posts with your “I know you are, but what am I” mentality, but it’s sort of tiresome and juvenile.  Just thought you should know.  Sort of boring too.

What college did you go to that had the audacity to utilize a text book saying that universalism denies a need for atonement, salvation, or Jesus?

What difference does it make?  You obviously are smarter than the entire collective of the religion department of that university.  Your definition is all that matters.

If that was what your college's religion department taught, then yes, I am smarter than "the entire collective" of them.

It must be nice. 

Now back to our regularly scheduled, "What Do You Think" thread.

For that, I turn it over to our onsite correspondent.  Bob, are you there? 

[tweety234]

Having said that, true Universalism is the idea that everyone is a child of God and everyone is going to heaven, which is also hogwash as it denies the need for atonement and stating there is no need of salvation.  Basically, it says Jesus wasted his time and died for nothing.

You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about...why am I not surprised?

would you like to share your theory rather than arguing with the other person? Thanks. Because I am interested.

[JamesRottnek]

Having said that, true Universalism is the idea that everyone is a child of God and everyone is going to heaven, which is also hogwash as it denies the need for atonement and stating there is no need of salvation.  Basically, it says Jesus wasted his time and died for nothing.

You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about...why am I not surprised?

would you like to share your theory rather than arguing with the other person? Thanks. Because I am interested.

Well for starters, there's absolutely no reason to think that someone who believes all will be saved dismisses the saving work of Christ.

[tweety234]

Having said that, true Universalism is the idea that everyone is a child of God and everyone is going to heaven, which is also hogwash as it denies the need for atonement and stating there is no need of salvation.  Basically, it says Jesus wasted his time and died for nothing.

You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about...why am I not surprised?

would you like to share your theory rather than arguing with the other person? Thanks. Because I am interested.

Well for starters, there's absolutely no reason to think that someone who believes all will be saved dismisses the saving work of Christ.

Sure, since salvation is the work of Christ anyway.

[Kerdy]

Let us examine what the Church had to say about Universalism with Origen.

[Asteriktos]

Let us examine what the Church had to say about Universalism with Origen.

Ok, go ahead

[Aindriú]

Let us examine what the Church had to say about Universalism with Origen.

5th EC

The Anathemas Against Origen.

I.
If anyone asserts the fabulous pre-existence of souls, and shall assert the monstrous restoration which follows from it:  let him be anathema.
II.
If anyone shall say that the creation (τὴυ παραγωγὴν) of all reasonable things includes only intelligences (νόας) without bodies and altogether immaterial, having neither number nor name, so that there is unity between them all by identity of substance, force and energy, and by their union with and knowledge of God the Word; but that no longer desiring the sight of God, they gave themselves over to worse things, each one following his own inclinations, and that they have taken bodies more or less subtile, and have received names, for among the heavenly Powers there is a difference of names as there is also a difference of bodies; and thence some became and are called Cherubims, others Seraphims, and Principalities, and Powers, and Dominations, and Thrones, and Angels, and as many other heavenly orders as there may be:  let him be anathema.
III.
If anyone shall say that the sun, the moon and the stars are also reasonable beings, and that they have only become what they are because they turned towards evil:  let him be anathema.
IV.
If anyone shall say that the reasonable creatures in whom the divine love had grown cold have been hidden in gross bodies such as ours, and have been called men, while those who have attained the lowest degree of wickedness have shared cold and obscure bodies and are become and called demons and evil spirits:  let him be anathema,.
V.
If anyone shall say that a psychic (ψυχικὴν) condition has come from an angelic or archangelic state, and moreover that a demoniac and a human condition has come from a psychic condition, and that from a human state they may become again angels and demons, and that each order of heavenly virtues is either all from those below or from those above, or from those above and below:  let him be anathema.
VI.
If anyone shall say that there is a twofold race of demons, of which the one includes the souls of men and the other the superior spirits who fell to this, and that of all the number of reasonable beings there is but one which has remained unshaken in the love and contemplation of God, and that that spirit is become Christ and the king of all reasonable beings, and that he has created318 all the bodies which exist in heaven, on earth, and between heaven and earth; and that the world which has in itself elements more ancient than itself, and which exists by themselves, viz.:  dryness, damp, heat and cold, and the image (ιδέαν) to which it was formed, was so formed, and that the most holy and consubstantial Trinity did not create the world, but that it was created by the working intelligence (Νοῦς δημιρυργός) which is more ancient than the world, and which communicates to it its being:  let him be anathema.
VII.
If anyone shall say that Christ, of whom it is said that he appeared in the form of God, and that he was united before all time with God the Word, and humbled himself in these last days even to humanity, had (according to their expression) pity upon the divers falls which had appeared in the spirits united in the same unity (of which he himself is part), and that to
319
restore them he passed through divers classes, had different bodies and different names, became all to all, an Angel among Angels, a Power among Powers, has clothed himself in the different classes of reasonable beings with a form corresponding to that class, and finally has taken flesh and blood like ours and is become man for men; [if anyone says all this] and does not profess that God the Word humbled himself and became man:  let him be anathema.
VIII.
If anyone shall not acknowledge that God the Word, of the same substance with the Father and the Holy Ghost, and who was made flesh and became man, one of the Trinity, is Christ in every sense of the word, but [shall affirm] that he is so only in an inaccurate manner, and because of the abasement (κενώσαντα), as they call it, of the intelligence (νοῦς); if anyone shall affirm that this intelligence united (συνημμένον ) to God the Word, is the Christ in the true sense of the word, while the Logos is only called Christ because of this union with the intelligence, and e converso that the intelligence is only called God because of the Logos:  let him be anathema.
IX.
If anyone shall say that it was not the Divine Logos made man by taking an animated body with a ψυχὴ῾ λογικὴ and νοερὰ, that he descended into hell and ascended into heaven, but shall pretend that it is the Νοῦς which has done this, that Νοῦς of which they say (in an impious fashion) he is Christ properly so called, and that he is become so by the knowledge of the Monad:  let him be anathema.
X.
If anyone shall say that after the resurrection the body of the Lord was ethereal, having the form of a sphere, and that such shall be the bodies of all after the resurrection; and that after the Lord himself shall have rejected his true body and after the others who rise shall have rejected theirs, the nature of their bodies shall be annihilated:  let him be anathema.
XI.
If anyone shall say that the future judgment signifies the destruction of the body and that the end of the story will be an immaterial ψύσις, and that thereafter there will no longer be any matter, but only spirit νοῦς):  let him be anathema.
XII.
If anyone shall say that the heavenly Powers and all men and the Devil and evil spirits are united with the Word of God in all respects, as the Νοῦς which is by them called Christ and which is in the form of God, and which humbled itself as they say; and [if anyone shall say] that the Kingdom of Christ shall have an end:  let him be anathema.
XIII.
If anyone shall say that Christ [i.e., the Νοῦς] is in no wise different from other reasonable beings, neither substantially nor by wisdom nor by his power and might over all things but that all will be placed at the right hand of God, as well as he that is called by them Christ [the Νοῦς], as also they were in the feigned pre-existence of all things:  let him be anathema.
XIV.
If anyone shall say that all reasonable beings will one day be united in one, when the hypostases as well as the numbers and the bodies shall have disappeared, and that the knowledge of the world to come will carry with it the ruin of the worlds, and the rejection of bodies as also the abolition of [all] names, and that there shall be finally an identity of the γνῶσις and of the hypostasis; moreover, that in this pretended apocatastasis, spirits only will continue to exist, as it was in the feigned pre-existence:  let him be anathema.
XV.
If anyone shall say that the life of the spirits (νοῶν) shall be like to the life which was in the beginning while as yet the spirits had not come down or fallen, so that the end and the beginning shall be alike, and that the end shall be the true measure of the beginning:  let him be anathema.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xii.ix.html

[Asteriktos]

So it would seem that what was condemned doesn't really reflect what Orthodox today mean when they speak of universalism

[Aindriú]

So it would seem that what was condemned doesn't really reflect what Orthodox today mean when they speak of universalism

Correct, but the voices of the Church are divided to the validity of an apocatastasis.

[zoarthegleaner]

Read about st. John Coltrane and the dancing Christ, that is Universalism.

[walter1234]

Universalism seems denying the free-will which men can choose not accept God's love an follow Him.

[OrthoNoob]

I am a former Universalist. Universalism, classically speaking, does not deny the necessity of Christ's saving work nor does it assert that all religions are equal. Christian Universalism teaches:

1. Christ's saving work was necessary for the salvation of any man.
2. Christ's saving work effectively procured the salvation of all men.

This does not mean, however, that all religions are true (the Christian Universalist would deny, for instance, that Buddha did anything to effect salvation), or that they are equal in any way. Christian Universalism does not teach that you can be saved by Buddha, but that Buddhists can be saved by Christ.

[Kerdy]

I am a former Universalist. Universalism, classically speaking, does not deny the necessity of Christ's saving work nor does it assert that all religions are equal. Christian Universalism teaches:

1. Christ's saving work was necessary for the salvation of any man.
2. Christ's saving work effectively procured the salvation of all men.

This does not mean, however, that all religions are true (the Christian Universalist would deny, for instance, that Buddha did anything to effect salvation), or that they are equal in any way. Christian Universalism does not teach that you can be saved by Buddha, but that Buddhists can be saved by Christ.

This is one of many problems with modern universalism.  There is no set standard.  It all depends on who you ask. 

[JamesRottnek]

I am a former Universalist. Universalism, classically speaking, does not deny the necessity of Christ's saving work nor does it assert that all religions are equal. Christian Universalism teaches:

1. Christ's saving work was necessary for the salvation of any man.
2. Christ's saving work effectively procured the salvation of all men.

This does not mean, however, that all religions are true (the Christian Universalist would deny, for instance, that Buddha did anything to effect salvation), or that they are equal in any way. Christian Universalism does not teach that you can be saved by Buddha, but that Buddhists can be saved by Christ.

This is one of many problems with modern universalism.  There is no set standard.  It all depends on who you ask. 

And this would also be the answer of every Christian Universalist I know.

[Cyrillic]

what exactly is this thing?

I am totally ignorant about that.

Do you believe this theory.?

There are different types of universalism.

One universalism theory states that it is possible that all may be saved. This universalism is perfectly acceptable in Orthodoxy (and Catholicism).

Another universalism theory states that it is a definite reality that all will be saved. This universalism is rejected by Orthodoxy (and Catholicism).

Not all may be saved, it is part of Divine Revelation that people such as Core and his followers were swallowed up into hell.

That is unless you mean that God provides sufficient grace to all to be saved?

There were Church Fathers who speculated that all may be saved. Origen and St. Gregory of Nyssa come to mind.

Ever seen these bumper stickers? 

Blergh.

[Achronos]

Holding out the possibility that all may be saved was one of the things that helped me convert to Orthodoxy. I remember flipping to the chapter on Hell and Judgement immediately after I was given my catechism book, to see what the Church's views were. I was greatly comforted that so many Fathers hoped for this as well. It was refreshing, coming from an evangelical background where everyone was basically already saved or damned.

That being said, I think nihilism fits quite nicely into this.

[Nicene]

Well what are we talking about?

Universalism as in everything is true and nothing is false.

Abominadble.

UNiversalism that everyone is saved?

Wrong.

[tweety234]

Let us examine what the Church had to say about Universalism with Origen.

5th EC

The Anathemas Against Origen.

I.
If anyone asserts the fabulous pre-existence of souls, and shall assert the monstrous restoration which follows from it:  let him be anathema.
II.
If anyone shall say that the creation (τὴυ παραγωγὴν) of all reasonable things includes only intelligences (νόας) without bodies and altogether immaterial, having neither number nor name, so that there is unity between them all by identity of substance, force and energy, and by their union with and knowledge of God the Word; but that no longer desiring the sight of God, they gave themselves over to worse things, each one following his own inclinations, and that they have taken bodies more or less subtile, and have received names, for among the heavenly Powers there is a difference of names as there is also a difference of bodies; and thence some became and are called Cherubims, others Seraphims, and Principalities, and Powers, and Dominations, and Thrones, and Angels, and as many other heavenly orders as there may be:  let him be anathema.
III.
If anyone shall say that the sun, the moon and the stars are also reasonable beings, and that they have only become what they are because they turned towards evil:  let him be anathema.
IV.
If anyone shall say that the reasonable creatures in whom the divine love had grown cold have been hidden in gross bodies such as ours, and have been called men, while those who have attained the lowest degree of wickedness have shared cold and obscure bodies and are become and called demons and evil spirits:  let him be anathema,.
V.
If anyone shall say that a psychic (ψυχικὴν) condition has come from an angelic or archangelic state, and moreover that a demoniac and a human condition has come from a psychic condition, and that from a human state they may become again angels and demons, and that each order of heavenly virtues is either all from those below or from those above, or from those above and below:  let him be anathema.
VI.
If anyone shall say that there is a twofold race of demons, of which the one includes the souls of men and the other the superior spirits who fell to this, and that of all the number of reasonable beings there is but one which has remained unshaken in the love and contemplation of God, and that that spirit is become Christ and the king of all reasonable beings, and that he has created318 all the bodies which exist in heaven, on earth, and between heaven and earth; and that the world which has in itself elements more ancient than itself, and which exists by themselves, viz.:  dryness, damp, heat and cold, and the image (ιδέαν) to which it was formed, was so formed, and that the most holy and consubstantial Trinity did not create the world, but that it was created by the working intelligence (Νοῦς δημιρυργός) which is more ancient than the world, and which communicates to it its being:  let him be anathema.
VII.
If anyone shall say that Christ, of whom it is said that he appeared in the form of God, and that he was united before all time with God the Word, and humbled himself in these last days even to humanity, had (according to their expression) pity upon the divers falls which had appeared in the spirits united in the same unity (of which he himself is part), and that to
319
restore them he passed through divers classes, had different bodies and different names, became all to all, an Angel among Angels, a Power among Powers, has clothed himself in the different classes of reasonable beings with a form corresponding to that class, and finally has taken flesh and blood like ours and is become man for men; [if anyone says all this] and does not profess that God the Word humbled himself and became man:  let him be anathema.
VIII.
If anyone shall not acknowledge that God the Word, of the same substance with the Father and the Holy Ghost, and who was made flesh and became man, one of the Trinity, is Christ in every sense of the word, but [shall affirm] that he is so only in an inaccurate manner, and because of the abasement (κενώσαντα), as they call it, of the intelligence (νοῦς); if anyone shall affirm that this intelligence united (συνημμένον ) to God the Word, is the Christ in the true sense of the word, while the Logos is only called Christ because of this union with the intelligence, and e converso that the intelligence is only called God because of the Logos:  let him be anathema.
IX.
If anyone shall say that it was not the Divine Logos made man by taking an animated body with a ψυχὴ῾ λογικὴ and νοερὰ, that he descended into hell and ascended into heaven, but shall pretend that it is the Νοῦς which has done this, that Νοῦς of which they say (in an impious fashion) he is Christ properly so called, and that he is become so by the knowledge of the Monad:  let him be anathema.
X.
If anyone shall say that after the resurrection the body of the Lord was ethereal, having the form of a sphere, and that such shall be the bodies of all after the resurrection; and that after the Lord himself shall have rejected his true body and after the others who rise shall have rejected theirs, the nature of their bodies shall be annihilated:  let him be anathema.
XI.
If anyone shall say that the future judgment signifies the destruction of the body and that the end of the story will be an immaterial ψύσις, and that thereafter there will no longer be any matter, but only spirit νοῦς):  let him be anathema.
XII.
If anyone shall say that the heavenly Powers and all men and the Devil and evil spirits are united with the Word of God in all respects, as the Νοῦς which is by them called Christ and which is in the form of God, and which humbled itself as they say; and [if anyone shall say] that the Kingdom of Christ shall have an end:  let him be anathema.
XIII.
If anyone shall say that Christ [i.e., the Νοῦς] is in no wise different from other reasonable beings, neither substantially nor by wisdom nor by his power and might over all things but that all will be placed at the right hand of God, as well as he that is called by them Christ [the Νοῦς], as also they were in the feigned pre-existence of all things:  let him be anathema.
XIV.
If anyone shall say that all reasonable beings will one day be united in one, when the hypostases as well as the numbers and the bodies shall have disappeared, and that the knowledge of the world to come will carry with it the ruin of the worlds, and the rejection of bodies as also the abolition of [all] names, and that there shall be finally an identity of the γνῶσις and of the hypostasis; moreover, that in this pretended apocatastasis, spirits only will continue to exist, as it was in the feigned pre-existence:  let him be anathema.
XV.
If anyone shall say that the life of the spirits (νοῶν) shall be like to the life which was in the beginning while as yet the spirits had not come down or fallen, so that the end and the beginning shall be alike, and that the end shall be the true measure of the beginning:  let him be anathema.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xii.ix.html

How come only the priests anathematize, and we don't get to do that?

[OrthoNoob]

Let us examine what the Church had to say about Universalism with Origen.

5th EC

The Anathemas Against Origen.

I.
If anyone asserts the fabulous pre-existence of souls, and shall assert the monstrous restoration which follows from it:  let him be anathema.
II.
If anyone shall say that the creation (τὴυ παραγωγὴν) of all reasonable things includes only intelligences (νόας) without bodies and altogether immaterial, having neither number nor name, so that there is unity between them all by identity of substance, force and energy, and by their union with and knowledge of God the Word; but that no longer desiring the sight of God, they gave themselves over to worse things, each one following his own inclinations, and that they have taken bodies more or less subtile, and have received names, for among the heavenly Powers there is a difference of names as there is also a difference of bodies; and thence some became and are called Cherubims, others Seraphims, and Principalities, and Powers, and Dominations, and Thrones, and Angels, and as many other heavenly orders as there may be:  let him be anathema.
III.
If anyone shall say that the sun, the moon and the stars are also reasonable beings, and that they have only become what they are because they turned towards evil:  let him be anathema.
IV.
If anyone shall say that the reasonable creatures in whom the divine love had grown cold have been hidden in gross bodies such as ours, and have been called men, while those who have attained the lowest degree of wickedness have shared cold and obscure bodies and are become and called demons and evil spirits:  let him be anathema,.
V.
If anyone shall say that a psychic (ψυχικὴν) condition has come from an angelic or archangelic state, and moreover that a demoniac and a human condition has come from a psychic condition, and that from a human state they may become again angels and demons, and that each order of heavenly virtues is either all from those below or from those above, or from those above and below:  let him be anathema.
VI.
If anyone shall say that there is a twofold race of demons, of which the one includes the souls of men and the other the superior spirits who fell to this, and that of all the number of reasonable beings there is but one which has remained unshaken in the love and contemplation of God, and that that spirit is become Christ and the king of all reasonable beings, and that he has created318 all the bodies which exist in heaven, on earth, and between heaven and earth; and that the world which has in itself elements more ancient than itself, and which exists by themselves, viz.:  dryness, damp, heat and cold, and the image (ιδέαν) to which it was formed, was so formed, and that the most holy and consubstantial Trinity did not create the world, but that it was created by the working intelligence (Νοῦς δημιρυργός) which is more ancient than the world, and which communicates to it its being:  let him be anathema.
VII.
If anyone shall say that Christ, of whom it is said that he appeared in the form of God, and that he was united before all time with God the Word, and humbled himself in these last days even to humanity, had (according to their expression) pity upon the divers falls which had appeared in the spirits united in the same unity (of which he himself is part), and that to
319
restore them he passed through divers classes, had different bodies and different names, became all to all, an Angel among Angels, a Power among Powers, has clothed himself in the different classes of reasonable beings with a form corresponding to that class, and finally has taken flesh and blood like ours and is become man for men; [if anyone says all this] and does not profess that God the Word humbled himself and became man:  let him be anathema.
VIII.
If anyone shall not acknowledge that God the Word, of the same substance with the Father and the Holy Ghost, and who was made flesh and became man, one of the Trinity, is Christ in every sense of the word, but [shall affirm] that he is so only in an inaccurate manner, and because of the abasement (κενώσαντα), as they call it, of the intelligence (νοῦς); if anyone shall affirm that this intelligence united (συνημμένον ) to God the Word, is the Christ in the true sense of the word, while the Logos is only called Christ because of this union with the intelligence, and e converso that the intelligence is only called God because of the Logos:  let him be anathema.
IX.
If anyone shall say that it was not the Divine Logos made man by taking an animated body with a ψυχὴ῾ λογικὴ and νοερὰ, that he descended into hell and ascended into heaven, but shall pretend that it is the Νοῦς which has done this, that Νοῦς of which they say (in an impious fashion) he is Christ properly so called, and that he is become so by the knowledge of the Monad:  let him be anathema.
X.
If anyone shall say that after the resurrection the body of the Lord was ethereal, having the form of a sphere, and that such shall be the bodies of all after the resurrection; and that after the Lord himself shall have rejected his true body and after the others who rise shall have rejected theirs, the nature of their bodies shall be annihilated:  let him be anathema.
XI.
If anyone shall say that the future judgment signifies the destruction of the body and that the end of the story will be an immaterial ψύσις, and that thereafter there will no longer be any matter, but only spirit νοῦς):  let him be anathema.
XII.
If anyone shall say that the heavenly Powers and all men and the Devil and evil spirits are united with the Word of God in all respects, as the Νοῦς which is by them called Christ and which is in the form of God, and which humbled itself as they say; and [if anyone shall say] that the Kingdom of Christ shall have an end:  let him be anathema.
XIII.
If anyone shall say that Christ [i.e., the Νοῦς] is in no wise different from other reasonable beings, neither substantially nor by wisdom nor by his power and might over all things but that all will be placed at the right hand of God, as well as he that is called by them Christ [the Νοῦς], as also they were in the feigned pre-existence of all things:  let him be anathema.
XIV.
If anyone shall say that all reasonable beings will one day be united in one, when the hypostases as well as the numbers and the bodies shall have disappeared, and that the knowledge of the world to come will carry with it the ruin of the worlds, and the rejection of bodies as also the abolition of [all] names, and that there shall be finally an identity of the γνῶσις and of the hypostasis; moreover, that in this pretended apocatastasis, spirits only will continue to exist, as it was in the feigned pre-existence:  let him be anathema.
XV.
If anyone shall say that the life of the spirits (νοῶν) shall be like to the life which was in the beginning while as yet the spirits had not come down or fallen, so that the end and the beginning shall be alike, and that the end shall be the true measure of the beginning:  let him be anathema.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xii.ix.html

How come only the priests anathematize, and we don't get to do that?

I think it's typically bishops who anathematize.

And all I know is I wouldn't want you having the power to do it.

[stavros_388]

Well what are we talking about?

Universalism as in everything is true and nothing is false.

Abominadble.

UNiversalism that everyone is saved?

Wrong.

Since it seems you missed Jetavan's pertinent post, I'll re-post it here:

There are different types of universalism.

One universalism theory states that it is possible that all may be saved. This universalism is perfectly acceptable in Orthodoxy (and Catholicism).

Another universalism theory states that it is a definite reality that all will be saved. This universalism is rejected by Orthodoxy (and Catholicism).

I agree that the first kind of universalism shouldn't pose a problem for us.

[tweety234]

Holding out the possibility that all may be saved was one of the things that helped me convert to Orthodoxy. I remember flipping to the chapter on Hell and Judgement immediately after I was given my catechism book, to see what the Church's views were. I was greatly comforted that so many Fathers hoped for this as well. It was refreshing, coming from an evangelical background where everyone was basically already saved or damned.

That being said, I think nihilism fits quite nicely into this.

what do you mean by nihilism?

[Asteriktos]

One universalism theory states that it is possible that all may be saved. This universalism is perfectly acceptable in Orthodoxy (and Catholicism).

I agree that the first kind of universalism shouldn't pose a problem for us.

Can you (or anyone else) chime in here then?

[tweety234]

Let us examine what the Church had to say about Universalism with Origen.

5th EC

The Anathemas Against Origen.

I.
If anyone asserts the fabulous pre-existence of souls, and shall assert the monstrous restoration which follows from it:  let him be anathema.
II.
If anyone shall say that the creation (τὴυ παραγωγὴν) of all reasonable things includes only intelligences (νόας) without bodies and altogether immaterial, having neither number nor name, so that there is unity between them all by identity of substance, force and energy, and by their union with and knowledge of God the Word; but that no longer desiring the sight of God, they gave themselves over to worse things, each one following his own inclinations, and that they have taken bodies more or less subtile, and have received names, for among the heavenly Powers there is a difference of names as there is also a difference of bodies; and thence some became and are called Cherubims, others Seraphims, and Principalities, and Powers, and Dominations, and Thrones, and Angels, and as many other heavenly orders as there may be:  let him be anathema.
III.
If anyone shall say that the sun, the moon and the stars are also reasonable beings, and that they have only become what they are because they turned towards evil:  let him be anathema.
IV.
If anyone shall say that the reasonable creatures in whom the divine love had grown cold have been hidden in gross bodies such as ours, and have been called men, while those who have attained the lowest degree of wickedness have shared cold and obscure bodies and are become and called demons and evil spirits:  let him be anathema,.
V.
If anyone shall say that a psychic (ψυχικὴν) condition has come from an angelic or archangelic state, and moreover that a demoniac and a human condition has come from a psychic condition, and that from a human state they may become again angels and demons, and that each order of heavenly virtues is either all from those below or from those above, or from those above and below:  let him be anathema.
VI.
If anyone shall say that there is a twofold race of demons, of which the one includes the souls of men and the other the superior spirits who fell to this, and that of all the number of reasonable beings there is but one which has remained unshaken in the love and contemplation of God, and that that spirit is become Christ and the king of all reasonable beings, and that he has created318 all the bodies which exist in heaven, on earth, and between heaven and earth; and that the world which has in itself elements more ancient than itself, and which exists by themselves, viz.:  dryness, damp, heat and cold, and the image (ιδέαν) to which it was formed, was so formed, and that the most holy and consubstantial Trinity did not create the world, but that it was created by the working intelligence (Νοῦς δημιρυργός) which is more ancient than the world, and which communicates to it its being:  let him be anathema.
VII.
If anyone shall say that Christ, of whom it is said that he appeared in the form of God, and that he was united before all time with God the Word, and humbled himself in these last days even to humanity, had (according to their expression) pity upon the divers falls which had appeared in the spirits united in the same unity (of which he himself is part), and that to
319
restore them he passed through divers classes, had different bodies and different names, became all to all, an Angel among Angels, a Power among Powers, has clothed himself in the different classes of reasonable beings with a form corresponding to that class, and finally has taken flesh and blood like ours and is become man for men; [if anyone says all this] and does not profess that God the Word humbled himself and became man:  let him be anathema.
VIII.
If anyone shall not acknowledge that God the Word, of the same substance with the Father and the Holy Ghost, and who was made flesh and became man, one of the Trinity, is Christ in every sense of the word, but [shall affirm] that he is so only in an inaccurate manner, and because of the abasement (κενώσαντα), as they call it, of the intelligence (νοῦς); if anyone shall affirm that this intelligence united (συνημμένον ) to God the Word, is the Christ in the true sense of the word, while the Logos is only called Christ because of this union with the intelligence, and e converso that the intelligence is only called God because of the Logos:  let him be anathema.
IX.
If anyone shall say that it was not the Divine Logos made man by taking an animated body with a ψυχὴ῾ λογικὴ and νοερὰ, that he descended into hell and ascended into heaven, but shall pretend that it is the Νοῦς which has done this, that Νοῦς of which they say (in an impious fashion) he is Christ properly so called, and that he is become so by the knowledge of the Monad:  let him be anathema.
X.
If anyone shall say that after the resurrection the body of the Lord was ethereal, having the form of a sphere, and that such shall be the bodies of all after the resurrection; and that after the Lord himself shall have rejected his true body and after the others who rise shall have rejected theirs, the nature of their bodies shall be annihilated:  let him be anathema.
XI.
If anyone shall say that the future judgment signifies the destruction of the body and that the end of the story will be an immaterial ψύσις, and that thereafter there will no longer be any matter, but only spirit νοῦς):  let him be anathema.
XII.
If anyone shall say that the heavenly Powers and all men and the Devil and evil spirits are united with the Word of God in all respects, as the Νοῦς which is by them called Christ and which is in the form of God, and which humbled itself as they say; and [if anyone shall say] that the Kingdom of Christ shall have an end:  let him be anathema.
XIII.
If anyone shall say that Christ [i.e., the Νοῦς] is in no wise different from other reasonable beings, neither substantially nor by wisdom nor by his power and might over all things but that all will be placed at the right hand of God, as well as he that is called by them Christ [the Νοῦς], as also they were in the feigned pre-existence of all things:  let him be anathema.
XIV.
If anyone shall say that all reasonable beings will one day be united in one, when the hypostases as well as the numbers and the bodies shall have disappeared, and that the knowledge of the world to come will carry with it the ruin of the worlds, and the rejection of bodies as also the abolition of [all] names, and that there shall be finally an identity of the γνῶσις and of the hypostasis; moreover, that in this pretended apocatastasis, spirits only will continue to exist, as it was in the feigned pre-existence:  let him be anathema.
XV.
If anyone shall say that the life of the spirits (νοῶν) shall be like to the life which was in the beginning while as yet the spirits had not come down or fallen, so that the end and the beginning shall be alike, and that the end shall be the true measure of the beginning:  let him be anathema.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xii.ix.html

How come only the priests anathematize, and we don't get to do that?

I think it's typically bishops who anathematize.

And all I know is I wouldn't want you having the power to do it.

May I ask why?

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > Moderated Forums > Free-For-All > Religious Topics (Moderator: Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)) > Topic: what do you think about universalism?