So many brilliant insights here connecting ethics and eschatology, where compassion and loving our enemies triumphs gloriously over vengeance on one’s enemies and that “sweet sound” of their suffering (sadism at its worst). This was a wonderful presentation of Christian Universalism, incorporating a communal anthropology far superior ethically to the compassionless void of eternal torment. Thank you for this wonderful introduction to Schleiermacher and his views on Christian Universalism! So well done!!
Great stuff. One of my favorite philosophers, Josiah Royce, sounds very much like Schleiermacher, particularly notions of genuine communities, and against heroic individualism - that we are only saved through community. I highly recommend his magnum opus, The Problem of Christianity.
Hi Stephen, Hope this finds you well. Just a few points. 1) I just wanted to say, Christians are not to rejoice over the sufferings of their enemies (Prov. 24:14), and nor does God (Ezek. 18:32). We see Him constantly desiring all to repent instead, whether it's the backsliding Israelites in the Old Testament, the Ninevites in Jonah, or in the New Testament. 2) Yes, Paul talked about Israel's eventual rescue. But he qualifies this by saying thay this is only effectual for a remnant. (This is consistent with the rest of scripture.) He makes it clear that "not all Israel is true Israel" (paraphrasing Romans 9:6). In Romans, Jacob and Esau are presented as equal blank slates, but one is chosen to be set apart for God, whereas the other is given over to his own lusts. This theme is consistent with the Old Testament, too, as I'm sure you're aware. Abel is counted righteous, Cain is not. Isaac is chosen as the heir, Ishmael is not. Jacob receives the birthright, Esau does not. The world bows to primogeniture. God does not. This is a pattern we see. World's way vs. Yahweh's way. This becomes more poignant as we see Jesus as a firstborn who is actually good. We have all these older brothers who failed. But then Christ shows up. 3) aj agree with you that the Church has long indeed failed to love not just Muslims and Jews but many other groups well. But things have changed since then and there are many, thanks to those like Nabeel Qureshi and Ray Comfort, who have pushed many evangelicals out of cultural comfort zones. Theres still so much worship of America, which is why there's so much work to be done still. But I don't think it's fair to say this is the Church's fault. Not all those who fall before the idol of nationalistic zeal are actually true born-again Christians. The Bible makes clear that loving our neighbor means desiring them to be saved and reconciled to God, but we also know from the Bible that not all will be saved. This is a repeated teaching, and I understand that universalism is an attractive temptation, but it's still a false doctrine to be rejected. Hope you have a great day. And hope you had a good Memorial weekend.
Regarding your point #2 Paul does say in Rom. 11:26-27 that all Israel will be saved. In fact Romans has some of the strongest verses in support of universalism/ultimate reconciliation. The Augustinian/Calvinist reading of Romans just cannot be supported.
Great video, your points are really well artciulated. I've often wondered that myself, how can Jesus' call to love our enemies, be compatible with a God who punishes his enemies for eternity? If God desires all to be saved, yet most people are lost forever, then how can we call that a victory for God's love? Universal salvation defenitely resolves these tensions, and presents a more hopeful vision for the afterlife, and for building Heaven on Earth here and now 😊
@@StephenDMorrison On the other hand, there is the passage in Revelation, about those whose names are not written in the Book of Life, being condemned to the Lake of Fire. That seems to suggest some sort of final judgement. I'm still making up my mind on this, but defo lean more towards Universalism. Blessings! 😊
I think it would be rejected by this argument because it still does not solve the issue of the blessed being conscious of those who are annihilated. Moreover, the communal nature of what it is to be human would contradict losing a large part of the human race. But I could also see an argument for it within this framework.
@@scubasquad2995 I could see Schleiermacher's argument being pushed in that direction if someone argues that a few of the damned would choose to remain damned eternally, and the merciful thing in that regard would be annihilation. I think it would be going against Schleiermacher, and it is not something I would argue for, but I just meant that it is possible someone could use this argument for that purpose. But I don't think it would be right.
If God is to be understood as ethical, then God is just, and this justice is that which saves the weak, which is as we are, having been made in the image of God, free with the gifts of love and faith and a hope, yet, these being affected by that which also works in us who trespass upon one another, destruction perpetuating though unable to sustain, as the grace that made the world also continues making all things to work toward that very good, the greatest being love, for, God works so that we believe that God is love, a good that as hot coals and the news of tongues of fire brings the enemy to repentence, drawing all to Jesus who says to the opposing spirit that it shall serve God only, much the same as we shall love God and neighbor in spirit and truth, a truth that frees, that forgives, that delivers, that is the light in man, that is the love from before the foundation of this which God loves, whom he himself also foreknowing subjected to the futility which cannot of itself be restored, and so, their faith our hope, reconciliation coming from God through the Christ, as one, we shall be like him when we see him as he is, as he sees our Father, perfect in love, just in saving, as we shall also judge be done for each another, in eternal love, the unchanging willful plan of God for us, not against us, all sharing of free-will in God's love, such that, even in time and chance as we perceive, gifts coming down on the the just and unjust, the first being last and the weak being made strong, all shall have received what is due after all debts are paid in forgiveness, and all justified, all hearts renewed, all of one mine, one as Jesus prayed, salvation being for all. As I understand, this seems ethical enough. Thank you for the objective and fair share. 🕊️🤍🕊️
So many brilliant insights here connecting ethics and eschatology, where compassion and loving our enemies triumphs gloriously over vengeance on one’s enemies and that “sweet sound” of their suffering (sadism at its worst).
This was a wonderful presentation of Christian Universalism, incorporating a communal anthropology far superior ethically to the compassionless void of eternal torment.
Thank you for this wonderful introduction to Schleiermacher and his views on Christian Universalism! So well done!!
Thank you for watching and for the kind words about the video! I am glad you enjoyed it. Blessings!
Great stuff. One of my favorite philosophers, Josiah Royce, sounds very much like Schleiermacher, particularly notions of genuine communities, and against heroic individualism - that we are only saved through community. I highly recommend his magnum opus, The Problem of Christianity.
Thanks for watching! And thanks for the recommendation. I've not heard of Royce, but I'll check him out.
Thanks for sharing Stephen 👍
This is fantastic, Stephen. I would actually love to have you back on to chat about this and universalism more broadly.
It's just such a great argument against ECT as well as annihilationism.
Absolutely! And yes, would love to chat again sometime. Just let me know when!
Why not consider Patristic universalism?
Hi Stephen,
Hope this finds you well.
Just a few points.
1) I just wanted to say, Christians are not to rejoice over the sufferings of their enemies (Prov. 24:14), and nor does God (Ezek. 18:32). We see Him constantly desiring all to repent instead, whether it's the backsliding Israelites in the Old Testament, the Ninevites in Jonah, or in the New Testament.
2) Yes, Paul talked about Israel's eventual rescue. But he qualifies this by saying thay this is only effectual for a remnant. (This is consistent with the rest of scripture.)
He makes it clear that "not all Israel is true Israel" (paraphrasing Romans 9:6). In Romans, Jacob and Esau are presented as equal blank slates, but one is chosen to be set apart for God, whereas the other is given over to his own lusts. This theme is consistent with the Old Testament, too, as I'm sure you're aware. Abel is counted righteous, Cain is not. Isaac is chosen as the heir, Ishmael is not. Jacob receives the birthright, Esau does not. The world bows to primogeniture. God does not. This is a pattern we see. World's way vs. Yahweh's way.
This becomes more poignant as we see Jesus as a firstborn who is actually good. We have all these older brothers who failed. But then Christ shows up.
3) aj agree with you that the Church has long indeed failed to love not just Muslims and Jews but many other groups well. But things have changed since then and there are many, thanks to those like Nabeel Qureshi and Ray Comfort, who have pushed many evangelicals out of cultural comfort zones. Theres still so much worship of America, which is why there's so much work to be done still. But I don't think it's fair to say this is the Church's fault. Not all those who fall before the idol of nationalistic zeal are actually true born-again Christians.
The Bible makes clear that loving our neighbor means desiring them to be saved and reconciled to God, but we also know from the Bible that not all will be saved. This is a repeated teaching, and I understand that universalism is an attractive temptation, but it's still a false doctrine to be rejected.
Hope you have a great day. And hope you had a good Memorial weekend.
Hi, thanks for the thoughtful reply! I appreciate you taking the time to watch and respond to the video. Have a nice day!
Regarding your point #2 Paul does say in Rom. 11:26-27 that all Israel will be saved. In fact Romans has some of the strongest verses in support of universalism/ultimate reconciliation. The Augustinian/Calvinist reading of Romans just cannot be supported.
Great video, your points are really well artciulated. I've often wondered that myself, how can Jesus' call to love our enemies, be compatible with a God who punishes his enemies for eternity? If God desires all to be saved, yet most people are lost forever, then how can we call that a victory for God's love?
Universal salvation defenitely resolves these tensions, and presents a more hopeful vision for the afterlife, and for building Heaven on Earth here and now 😊
Hi Daniel, thanks for watching and for your comment. I definitely agree that this view solves a number of critical tensions. Blessings!
@@StephenDMorrison On the other hand, there is the passage in Revelation, about those whose names are not written in the Book of Life, being condemned to the Lake of Fire. That seems to suggest some sort of final judgement. I'm still making up my mind on this, but defo lean more towards Universalism. Blessings! 😊
How does fit with Annihilationism? Would it still be ethically wrong?
I think it would be rejected by this argument because it still does not solve the issue of the blessed being conscious of those who are annihilated. Moreover, the communal nature of what it is to be human would contradict losing a large part of the human race. But I could also see an argument for it within this framework.
@@StephenDMorrison in what way could you see an argument for it?
@@scubasquad2995 I could see Schleiermacher's argument being pushed in that direction if someone argues that a few of the damned would choose to remain damned eternally, and the merciful thing in that regard would be annihilation. I think it would be going against Schleiermacher, and it is not something I would argue for, but I just meant that it is possible someone could use this argument for that purpose. But I don't think it would be right.
If God is to be understood as ethical, then God is just, and this justice is that which saves the weak, which is as we are, having been made in the image of God, free with the gifts of love and faith and a hope, yet, these being affected by that which also works in us who trespass upon one another, destruction perpetuating though unable to sustain, as the grace that made the world also continues making all things to work toward that very good, the greatest being love, for, God works so that we believe that God is love, a good that as hot coals and the news of tongues of fire brings the enemy to repentence, drawing all to Jesus who says to the opposing spirit that it shall serve God only, much the same as we shall love God and neighbor in spirit and truth, a truth that frees, that forgives, that delivers, that is the light in man, that is the love from before the foundation of this which God loves, whom he himself also foreknowing subjected to the futility which cannot of itself be restored, and so, their faith our hope, reconciliation coming from God through the Christ, as one, we shall be like him when we see him as he is, as he sees our Father, perfect in love, just in saving, as we shall also judge be done for each another, in eternal love, the unchanging willful plan of God for us, not against us, all sharing of free-will in God's love, such that, even in time and chance as we perceive, gifts coming down on the the just and unjust, the first being last and the weak being made strong, all shall have received what is due after all debts are paid in forgiveness, and all justified, all hearts renewed, all of one mine, one as Jesus prayed, salvation being for all.
As I understand, this seems ethical enough.
Thank you for the objective and fair share.
🕊️🤍🕊️