Universal Reconciliation
I'm an atheist but I find universal reconciliation to be interesting. It means that all people will eventually go to heaven regardless of whether or not they believed in Jesus Christ. Sinners will go to hell but not for eternity.
Universal reconciliation was believed in by the majority of Christians during the period of early Christianity.
Doesn't this sound more plausible than an eternal hell?
Universal reconciliation was believed in by the majority of Christians during the period of early Christianity.
Doesn't this sound more plausible than an eternal hell?
Yes, but I prefer what many near-death-experiencers (NDEs) have reported, that the only judgment that takes place is that of the deceased judging themselves after a life review.
Universal reconciliation was believed in by the majority of Christians during the period of early Christianity.
Doesn't this sound more plausible than an eternal hell?
It sounds like nonsense to me.
ruveyn
thomas81
Veteran
Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland
Universal reconciliation was believed in by the majority of Christians during the period of early Christianity.
Doesn't this sound more plausible than an eternal hell?
It sounds like nonsense to me.
ruveyn
It sounds a lot more desirable than me, and plausible from a philosophical stance.
Eternal torture without hope of end or respite sounds like the will of a masochist, rather than a benevolent god worthy of worship much less one I would want to spend eternity with.
thomas81
Veteran
Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland
Universal reconciliation was believed in by the majority of Christians during the period of early Christianity.
Doesn't this sound more plausible than an eternal hell?
Yes, but I prefer what many near-death-experiencers (NDEs) have reported, that the only judgment that takes place is that of the deceased judging themselves after a life review.
have you ever noticed that people who have NDE's never seem to bring back accounts of 'hell'?
Universal reconciliation was believed in by the majority of Christians during the period of early Christianity.
Doesn't this sound more plausible than an eternal hell?
It sounds like nonsense to me.
ruveyn
It sounds a lot more desirable than me, and plausible from a philosophical stance.
Eternal torture without hope of end or respite sounds like the will of a masochist, rather than a benevolent god worthy of worship much less one I would want to spend eternity with.
There is not an iota of empirical evidence indicating humans have a life after their physical death.
Such is wishful thinking.
ruveyn
Universal reconciliation was believed in by the majority of Christians during the period of early Christianity.
Doesn't this sound more plausible than an eternal hell?
Yes, but I prefer what many near-death-experiencers (NDEs) have reported, that the only judgment that takes place is that of the deceased judging themselves after a life review.
have you ever noticed that people who have NDE's never seem to bring back accounts of 'hell'?
Yessir..as my old TV Pal Brother EV Hill say one time. "You cant check into Hell for the weekend just to see if you like it." The Good Book says the fire is not quenched and the worm never dieth..paraphrasing of course. Choose wisely. Weigh the possible consequences of your decisions. Thanks.
Universal reconciliation was believed in by the majority of Christians during the period of early Christianity.
Doesn't this sound more plausible than an eternal hell?
Yes, but I prefer what many near-death-experiencers (NDEs) have reported, that the only judgment that takes place is that of the deceased judging themselves after a life review.
have you ever noticed that people who have NDE's never seem to bring back accounts of 'hell'?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRSjzY0s0SM
Also, the theology generally isn't that God is damning people, but that God has to actively save people, and he can't do that if they have not asked to be saved. Everyone needs to be saved because some people who never existed ate a fruit that they weren't allowed to eat. Of course, that also makes very little sense.
How can it be Heaven when most of the people are not like the rest?
Uniformity! Conformity! Cookie-cutter souls playing and singing the same songs over and over forever and ever, Hallelujah!! ! THAT is Heaven!
![]()
_________________
The mere fact that science may not yet adequately explain an object, event, or experience does not mean the immediate explanation should automatically default to a conspiratorial, extraterrestrial, paranormal, or supernatural cause.
nominalist
Supporting Member
Joined: 28 Jun 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,740
Location: Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas (born in NYC)
There was an entire American denomination based upon the theology of universal reconciliation (the Universalist Church). It later joined with the Unitarian Church to form the Unitarian Universalist Association.
_________________
Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. (retired tenured sociology professor)
36 domains/24 books: http://www.markfoster.net
Emancipated Autism: http://www.neurelitism.com
Institute for Dialectical metaRealism: http://dmr.institute
Also, the theology generally isn't that God is damning people, but that God has to actively save people, and he can't do that if they have not asked to be saved. Everyone needs to be saved because some people who never existed ate a fruit that they weren't allowed to eat. Of course, that also makes very little sense.
The theology of Bible Believing Christians runs something like this. We are all damned extending back to the failure in Eden and to our own propensity to fail to properly observe God's Written Ordinances. So he sends us a Life Preserver in the form of Jesus Christ. For them who are smart enough to grab hold of Jesus they will be moved from enemies of God to being Beloved Children and younger siblings of Christ. It's indescribably delicious..to coin a phrase..lol.
Also, the theology generally isn't that God is damning people, but that God has to actively save people, and he can't do that if they have not asked to be saved. Everyone needs to be saved because some people who never existed ate a fruit that they weren't allowed to eat. Of course, that also makes very little sense.
The theology of Bible Believing Christians runs something like this. We are all damned extending back to the failure in Eden and to our own propensity to fail to properly observe God's Written Ordinances. So he sends us a Life Preserver in the form of Jesus Christ. For them who are smart enough to grab hold of Jesus they will be moved from enemies of God to being Beloved Children and younger siblings of Christ. It's indescribably delicious..to coin a phrase..lol.
Smart enough? Are you condescending enough?
Well, the general Orthodox viewpoint is we should hope and pray for Universal Reconciliation. However, it's not guaranteed. We simply do not know how God will judge everyone. God is within his power and rights to send everyone to hell if he wants to, that's a given. But, since we do believe God is a merciful God, it's likely he'll have some amount of mercy on nonbelievers. People who willfully don't believe will probably be treated differently than people with no opportunity to know (ie, people in a remote jungle type thing.) In Orthodox Christianity, we pray for the souls of the departed, that God will have mercy on them. What God decides, we don't know.
This is an interesting argument about who is "saved" though.
The Jesuits' pragmatic accommodation with Confucianism was later to lead to conflict with the Dominican friars, who came to Beijing from the Philippines in the middle of the century. Dominican leader Domingo Fernández Navarrete in responding to the question, 'Was Confucious saved?' said that since Greek philosophers such as Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Seneca and others were all damned "how much the more Confucius, who was not worthy to kiss their feet"? In responding, António de Gouveia, a Portuguese Jesuit, said that Confucius was certainly saved, "which is more than can be said for King Philip IV of Spain."[3]
Even in the Bible Jesus says this:
47 “The servant who knows the master’s will and does not get ready or does not do what the master wants will be beaten with many blows. 48 But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows. From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked.
I interpret that as meaning that people who do not know will not be judged as severely as people who do know and reject Jesus's teachings.
So I'd like to lean toward Universal Reconciliation, but I can't speak on behalf of God on what exactly he's going to do one way or the other. One thing interesting, Origen's theory of UR only got rejected by the Church after he said the demons and possibly Satan himself would be reconciled again, but there wasn't really controversy over it applying to humans.
