I appreciate that you looked at his argument and gave it thoughtful consideration. I'm not surprised that a non-universalist would come to the conclusion that the non-universalist argument is the more convincing one. But I am grateful that you were open minded enough to look into it. Thank you
I think you nailed it, Acolyte. While I don't speak for all Universalists, I would say that the The Great Divorce was a good, though literary illustration of what Christian Universalists believe occurs after a sinner's death.
Any sin that isn't forgiven will receive just punishment and only when the sinner has paid the last farthing will he be restored.
@ @Invictus, I promised you an explanation for my Universalist interpretation on the Athanasian Creed. You are right that the Latin phrase "aeternam peribit" is generally translated as "eternal death" or "perish everlastingly" in English. Also, the Latin phrase "ignem aeternum" translates to "everlasting fire". That is not where the mistranslation lies. The mistranslation was baked into the Creed from its very beginning. The Creed, Quicumque Vult, was a summary of the Trinitarian formula preached by St. Athanasius in opposition to the Arian heresy prevalent in his lifetime. But the Creed was written hundreds of years after St. Athanasius' death in 373 A.D. In fact, the first historical reference to the Creed doesn't appear until 633 A.D. at the Fourth Council of Toledo. And while the original text of the Creed is generally agreed to have been Latin, St. Athanasius spoke, wrote, and thought in Greek. For that reason, when the Creed uses the Latin term aeternum, it is almost certainly attempting to render into Latin what was originally taught by the saint in Greek as aionion, which as I've mentioned before was not given the air eternity until it was translated into Latin for the western church. Now, since I give my first loyalty to the ideas that inspired the Creed rather than its clumsy words, which have been translated and re-translated and, depending on the version of the prayerbook you use, updated to the version of the Creed we use today, I must defer to the original teachings of St. Athanasius, and more importantly, the Apostles on the topic, which convinces me the fires that the Creed warns about are age-enduring rather than everlasting. Thus, they are temporary. I bring up the Apostles here because they mark the true standard by which all creeds, indeed all theologies, must be measured. The trinitarian ideas and other contents encapsulated in the Creed, if they are true, didn't evolve over time. That's not how Christianity works. Nothing new is catholic. The faith was "delivered once to the saints" not grown over the centuries. So if a 7th century Creed is to be considered authentic, it can be so only insofar as it agrees with the 1st century canon, which closed forever with the death of the last Apostle. The Apostles themselves preached, wrote, and thought not in Latin, but in Greek and Hebrew. The words they used and the ideas they conveyed were ones which did not include eternal fire or eternal torment, but rather age-enduring. They had an end. The fact of the matter is, Universalism was the prevailing doctrine of the Church for the first five centuries, which means those Christians closest to the Apostles were overwhelmingly Universalist. It is wise IMHO to heed their counsel on this topic.
the athanasian creed is a required reading within our prayerbooks.. I believe you said you dutifully recite it with the rest of the church at least once a year.... Is that commitment being reversed? hmmm
If this is true, I would like to see some quotes from the early church writings. Since this is a topic of great interest to you, I imagine you have some in mind which lend credence to your position, right? If, as you say, the early church was "overwhelmingly Universalist," then nearly every early father who wrote anything on the subject would have written against eternal punishment. I conceded the possibility that aionion might not always mean 'eternity.' But are you willing to concede that the word can, and often does, mean 'eternity'? In other words, will you admit to the possibility that universalism might not be correct, or are you dogmatic on the position?
I fear you're asking much more than you're conceding. You conceded that ainion doesn't always mean eternity (something every new Testament Greek dictionary and Bible concordance already did for me), and in return you expect me to concede the possibility that my whole belief system is wrong. I'm no horse trader but that doesn't sound like a fair deal. The best I can do is concede that sometimes anion can mean eternity. Here are some quotes, as requested: The mass of men (Christians) say there is to be an end to punishment and to those who are punished.—St. Basil the Great There are very many in our day, who though not denying the Holy Scriptures, do not believe in endless torments. — Augustine (354-430 A.D.) For the wicked there are punishments, not perpetural, however, lest the immortality prepared for them should be a disadvantage, but they are to be purified for a brief period according to the amount of malice in their works. They shall therefore suffer punishment for a short space, but immortal blessedness having no end awaits them…the penalties to be inflicted for their many and grave sins are very far surpassed by the magnitude of the mercy to be showed to them. –Diodore of Tarsus, 320-394 A.D. And God showed great kindness to man, in this, that He did not suffer him to continue being in sin forever; but as it were, by a kind of banishement, cast him out of paradise in order that, having punishment expiated within an appointed time, and having been disciplined, he should afterwards be recalled…just as a vessel, when one being fashioned it has some flaw, is remoulded or remade that it may become new and entire; so also it happens to man by death. For he is broken up by force, that in the resurrection he may be found whole; I mean spotless, righteous and immortal. –Theophilus of Antioch (168 A.D.) Wherefore also he drove him out of paradise and removed him far from the tree of life, not because He envied him the tree of life, as some dare assert, but because He pitied him and desired that he should not be immortal and the evil interminable and irremediable. –Iraneaus of Lyons (182 A.D.) These, if they will, may go Christ’s way, but if not let them go their way. In another place perhaps they shall be baptized with fire, that last baptism, which is not only painful, but enduring also; which eats up, as if it were hay, all defiled matter, and consumes all vanity and vice. –Gregory of Nazianzeu, Bishop of Constantinople. (330 to 390 A.D.) Oracles 39:19 The Word seems to me to lay down the doctrine of the perfect obliteration of wickedness, for if God shall be in all things that are, obviously wickedness shall not be in them. For it is necessary that at some time evil should be removed utterly and entirely from the realm of being.—St. Macrina the Blessed In the end and consummation of the Universe all are to be restored into their original harmonious state, and we all shall be made one body and be united once more into a perfect man and the prayer of our Savior shall be fulfilled that all may be one. –St. Jerome, 331-420 For it is evident that God will in truth be all in all when there shall be no evil in existence, when every created being is at harmony with iteself and every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord; when every creature shall have been made one body. –Gregory of Nyssa, 335-390 The wicked who have committed evil the whole period of their lives shall be punished till they learn that, by continuing in sin, they only continue in misery. And when, by this means, they shall have been brought to fear God, and to regard Him with good will, they shall obtain the enjoyment of His grace. –Theodore of Mopsuestia, 350-428 We can set no limits to the agency of the Redeemer to redeem, to rescue, to discipline in his work, and so will he continue to operate after this life. –Clement of Alexandria Do not suppose that the soul is punished for endless eons (apeirou aionas) in Tartarus. Very properly, the soul is not punished to gratify the revenge of the divinity, but for the sake of healing. But we say that the soul is punished for an aionion period (aionios) calling its life and its allotted period of punishment, its aeon. –Olnmpiodorus (AD 550) Wherefore, that at the same time liberty of free-will should be left to nature and yet the evil be purged away, the wisdom of God discovered this plan; to suffer man to do what he would, that having tasted the evil which he desired, and learning by experience for what wretchedness he had bartered away the blessings he had, he might of his own will hasten back with desire to the first blessedness …either being purged in this life through prayer and discipline, or after his departure hence through the furnace of cleansing fire.–Gregory of Nyssa (332-398 A.D.) That in the world to come, those who have done evil all their life long, will be made worthy of the sweetness of the Divine bounty. For never would Christ have said, “You will never get out until you hqave paid the last penny” unless it were possible for us to get cleansed when we paid the debt. –Peter Chrysologus, 435 I know that most persons understand by the story of Nineveh and its king, the ultimate forgiveness of the devil and all rational creatures. –St. Jerome “In the end or consummation of things, all shall be restored to their original state, and be again united in one body. We cannot be ignorant that Christ’s blood benefited the angels and those who are in hell; though we know not the manner in which it produced such effects. The apostate angels shall become such as they were created; and man, who has been cast out of paradise, shall be restored thither again. And this shall be accomplished in such a way, that all shall be united together by mutual charity, so that the members will delight in each other, and rejoice in each other’s promotion. The apostate angels, and the prince of this world, though now ungovernable, plunging themselves into the depths of sin, shall, in the end, embrace the happy dominion of Christ and His saints.” – COMMENTARY ON THE NEW TESTAMENT – Jerome (347-420 A.D.) Our Lord is the One who delivers man [all men], and who heals the inventor of evil himself. — Gregory of Nyssa (332-398 A.D.), leading theologian of the Eastern Church While the devil thought to kill One [Christ], he is deprived of all those cast out of hades, and he [the devil] sitting by the gates, sees all fettered beings led forth by the courage of the Saviour.–Athanasius, the Great Father of Orthodoxy Our Lord descends, and was shut up in the eternal bars, in order that He might set free all who had been shut up… The Lord descended to the place of punishment and torment, in which was the rich man, in order to liberate the prisoners. –Jerome In the liberation of all no one remains a captive! At the time of the Lord’s passion the devil alone was injured by losing all the of the captives he was keeping. –Didymus, 370 AD While the devil imagined that he got a hold of Christ, he really lost all of those he was keeping. –St. Chrysostom, 398 AD Stronger than all the evils in the soul is the Word, and the healing power that dwells in him, and this healing He applies, according to the will of God, to everyman. The consummation of all things is the destruction of evil…to quote Zephaniah: “My determination to gather the nations, that I am assemble the kings, to pour upon them mine indignation, even say all my fierce anger, for all the earth shall be devoured with the fire of my jealousy. For then will I turn to the people a pure language that they may all call upon the name of the Lord, to serve Him with one consent”…Consider carefully the promise, that all shall call upon the Name of the Lord, and serve him with one consent.—Origen (185 to 254 A.D.) He founded a school at Caesarea, and is considered by historians to be one of the great theologians and exegete of the Eastern Church. The nations are gathered to the Judgment, that on them may be poured out the wrath of the fury of the Lord, and this in pity and with a design to heal. in order that every one may return to the confession of the Lord, that in Jesus’ Name every knee may bow, and every tongue may confess that He is Lord. All God’s enemies shall perish, not that they cease to exist, but cease to be enemies.—Jerome (340 to 420 A.D), commenting on Zephaniah 3:8-10 Mankind, being reclaimed from their sins, are to be subjected to Christ in he fullness of the dispensation instituted for the salvation of all. –Didymus the Blind So then, when the end has been restored to the beginning, and the termination of things compared with their commencement, that condition of things will be re-established in which rational nature was placed, when it had no need to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil; so that when all feeling of wickedness has been removed, and the individual has been purified and cleansed, He who alone is the one good God becomes to him “all,” and that not in the case of a few individuals, or of a considerable number, but He Himself is “all in all.” And when death shall no longer anywhere exist, nor the sting of death, nor any evil at all, then verily God will be “all in all” –Origen, De Prinicipiis, 3.6.3. (Origen founded a school at Caesarea, and is considered by historians to be one of the great theologians and exegete of the Eastern Church.) The Son “breaking in pieces” His enemies is for the sake of remolding them, as a potter his own work; as Jeremiah 18;6 says: i.e., to restore them once again to their former state. –Eusebius of Caesarea (65 to 340 A.D). Bishop of Caesarea Our Savior has appointed two kinds of resurrection in the Apocalypse. ‘Blessed is he that hath part in the first resurrection,’ for such come to grace without the judgment. As for those who do not come to the first, but are reserved unto the second resurrection, these shall be disciplined until their appointed times, between the first and the second resurrection.– Ambrose, Bishop of Milan (340-397 A.D.) We think, indeed, that the goodness of God, through His Christ, may recall all His creatures to one end, even His enemies being conquered and subdued…. for Christ must reign until He has put all enemies under His feet. –Origen (185 to 254 A.D.) He founded a school at Caesarea, and is considered by historians to be one of the great theologians and exegete of the Eastern Church. For it is needful that evil should some day be wholly and absolutely removed out of the circle of being. –Gregory of Nyssa (332-398 A.D.), leading theologian of the Eastern Church In the present life God is in all, for His nature is without limits, but he is not all in all. But in the coming life, when mortality is at an end and immortality granted, and sin has no longer any place, God will be all in all. For the Lord, who loves man, punishes medicinally, that He may check the course of impeity. –Theodoret the Blessed, 387-458 When death shall no longer exist, or the sting of death, nor any evil at all, then truly God will be all in all. –Origen All men are Christ’s, some by knowing Him, the rest not yet. He is the Savior, not of some and the rest not. For how is He Savior and Lord, if not the Savior and Lord of all?—Clement of Alexandria An influential book in Universalist circles is Hanson's Universalism: The Prevailing Doctrine, found here: https://www.tentmaker.org/books/Prevailing.html
I assent to Athanasius' original teaching on the Trinity in every way, I just interpret "everlasting" to mean age-lasting as St. Athanasius would have originally meant.
What i am asking is not whether you assent to Athanasius, but rather, if you assent to the "Athanasian creed"
The way I am reading this is that he does assent to the Athanasian Creed but his interpretation of what that creed means on everlasting is different than the traditional understanding in the Anglican Church. Is that correct @Lowly Layman
I know you adhere to the Trinitarian formulations, but it just doesn't seem like you adhere to everything in the Creed (whatever one may call it, eg "Quicumque Vult") in the plain and natural meaning of its words... Correct me if I'm wrong
Well, the question should not be, "What would Athanasius have meant by the word," but rather, "What did the formulators of the Creed mean by what they wrote?" Because if you don't agree with the latter, you don't agree with the Creed.
For clarity it might be worth being clear about the distincion between Athanasius and the Athanasian Creed. Athanasius: Athanasian Creed: A medieval account credited Athanasius of Alexandria, the famous defender of Nicene theology, as the author of the Creed. According to that account, Athanasius composed it during his exile in Rome and presented it to Pope Julius I as a witness to his orthodoxy. The traditional attribution of the Creed to Athanasius was first called into question in 1642 by the Dutch Protestant theologian Gerhard Johann Vossius. It has since been widely accepted by modern scholars that the creed was not authored by Athanasius,[4] that it was not originally called a creed at all[5] and that Athanasius's name was not originally attached to it. Athanasius's name seems to have become attached to the creed as a sign of its strong declaration of Trinitarian faith. The reasoning for rejecting Athanasius as the author usually relies on a combination of the following: The creed originally was most likely written in Latin, but Athanasius composed in Greek. Neither Athanasius nor his contemporaries ever mention the Creed. It is not mentioned in any records of the ecumenical councils. It appears to address theological concerns that developed after Athanasius died (including the filioque). It was most widely circulated among Western Christians. The use of the creed in a sermon by Caesarius of Arles, as well as a theological resemblance to works by Vincent of Lérins, point to Southern Gaul as its origin. The most likely time frame is in the late fifth or early sixth century AD, at least 100 years after Athanasius lived. The Christian theology of the creed is firmly rooted in the Augustinian tradition and uses the exact terminology of Augustine's On the Trinity (published 415 AD). In the late 19th century, there was a great deal of speculation about who might have authored the creed, with suggestions including Ambrose of Milan, Venantius Fortunatus and Hilary of Poitiers. The 1940 discovery of a lost work by Vincent of Lérins, which bears a striking similarity to much of the language of the Athanasian Creed, have led many to conclude that the creed originated with Vincent or his students. For example, in the authoritative modern monograph about the creed, J. N. D. Kelly asserts that Vincent of Lérins was not its author but that it may have come from the same milieu, the area of Lérins in southern Gaul. The oldest surviving manuscripts of the Athanasian Creed date from the late 8th century. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athanasian_Creed#Origin
I agree with the creed as you all do but I think this is an unfair thing to say. The creed has to be interpreted in light of Biblical truths not in the intention of the founders.
You are wrong. I agree with everything in the Creed when interpreted correctly. However, if you demand a slavish adherence to the words written without any due regard or deference to the context in which they were written; then you must believe that no one in the Old Testament is able to be saved and are in fact at this moment perishing everlastingly, including Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, and on and on. After all, they couldn't possibly keep the Catholic faith (that is, faith in the Holy Trinity as described in the Creed) "whole and undefiled" when they were already dead by the time the second and third persons of the Trinity were revealed. Even John the Baptist, according to your standard of reading the Creed, is right now roasting in eternal flames and will be forever, since he died before the Crucifixion and Resurrection, or the descent of the Holy Ghost, and belief in all three are necessary to "possibly be saved". How cruel fate must be indeed! But we must believe that to be the case because, as you say, the plain and natural meaning of the Creed's words clearly state that such belief "is necessary to eternal salvation." Too bad.