** you do not have permission to see this link **
**Origen of Alexandria (c. 185–254 AD)** is the most famous early Christian proponent of **universalism**, specifically the doctrine of **apokatastasis** (ἀποκατάστασις πάντων — “the restoration of all things”).
### Core Idea
Origen taught that God’s ultimate purpose is the complete restoration of all rational creatures (humans, angels, and even demons/Satan) to unity with Himself, so that God becomes “all in all” (1 Corinthians 15:28).
This is not a sudden event but a long process of purification, education, and free conversion spanning ages (aeons).
Key scriptural foundations he used:
– 1 Corinthians 15:25–28 (“that God may be all in all”)
– Acts 3:21 (“the times of restoration of all things”)
– Colossians 1:20 (reconciliation of all things)
### Main Features of Origen’s Teaching
– **Beginning and end correspond**: Rational beings (logika) were originally created equal and pure, united to God. Through the free misuse of will they fell into varying degrees of embodiment and alienation. The end will restore them to (or beyond) that original unity.
– **Punishment is remedial, not purely retributive**: Hell/fire is purifying and corrective. It lasts as long as needed for each soul but is not endless in the absolute sense. God uses it therapeutically so that free will eventually turns back to the Good.
– **Free will remains central**: Restoration is not coerced. Souls retain freedom; over “countless and unmeasured ages” God’s goodness and pedagogy will eventually win every will without violating it.
– **Scope is universal**: Origen explicitly includes the possibility of the salvation of the devil (the most fallen rational being). In *On First Principles* (*De Principiis* / *Peri Archōn*) he writes that the goodness of God through Christ “may recall all His creatures to one end, even His enemies being conquered and subdued.”
– **Process across ages**: Purification and ascent can continue after death and across successive worlds or ages. Some souls progress faster; others lag far behind. The final state involves spiritualized bodies and the complete disappearance of evil (which has no independent ontological reality).
### Important Nuances and Controversies
Origen was cautious in public teaching. He often presented stronger universalist statements as speculative or reserved for the spiritually mature, while emphasizing the reality of judgment and hell for ordinary believers (a form of pastoral pedagogy). Some modern scholars argue his universalism is more implied or tentative than dogmatic, but the majority scholarly consensus (especially Ilaria Ramelli and others) holds that apokatastasis was central to his entire theological system.
His views on pre-existence of souls, multiple ages, and the possible salvation of the devil later contributed to the condemnation of “Origenism” (notably the 15 anathemas associated with the Second Council of Constantinople in 553, though the exact relation of those anathemas to the official acts of the council is historically disputed).
Gregory of Nyssa later developed a related (but not identical) form of universal restoration that remained more accepted in the East.
In short, Origen’s universalism is a coherent, philosophically informed Christian vision of the eventual healing and return of *all* rational creation to God through the pedagogical work of Christ, grounded in the conviction that divine goodness and freedom will ultimately prevail over every form of evil and alienation.
** you do not have permission to see this link **
**Gregory of Nyssa (c. 335–395 AD)**, one of the three Cappadocian Fathers and a saint in both Eastern and Western traditions, taught a form of **universal restoration (apokatastasis)** more explicitly and confidently than almost any other major Church Father.
Unlike Origen, whose views were later controversial and associated with condemnations of “Origenism,” Gregory was never condemned for this teaching.
He remains a recognized Doctor of the Church, and the Seventh Ecumenical Council (787) referred to him among the “holy Fathers.”
### Core Teaching
Gregory held that evil has no independent ontological existence— it is a privation or parasite on the good.
Therefore, it cannot endure forever.
In the end, after a process of purification lasting “long periods of time” or “ages,” evil will be completely annihilated, and God will be “all in all” (1 Corinthians 15:28).
All rational creatures—human beings and even the demonic powers (including the devil)— will ultimately be restored to communion with God and join in a harmonious hymn of thanksgiving.
Key texts include:
– *On the Soul and the Resurrection*
– *Catechetical Oration* (Great Catechism), especially chapters 26 and 35
– *On the Making of Man*
– *Life of Moses*
– Homilies on the Song of Songs
### Representative Passages
In *On the Soul and the Resurrection*, Gregory (speaking through his sister Macrina) argues that when God becomes “all in all,” evil cannot remain:
> “But He that becomes ‘all’ things will be ‘in all’ things too; and herein it appears to me that Scripture teaches the complete annihilation of evil. If… God will be ‘in all’ existing things, evil, plainly, will not then be amongst them.”
In the *Catechetical Oration* 26 he writes of the eventual purification of even the originator of evil:
> “…when the long periods of time shall have led the originator of evil and his ministers to the participation in good, then the whole creation will sing together a hymn of thanksgiving… and even he who hatched evil among us himself acknowledges Him as Lord.”
And more generally:
> “When, after long periods of time, the evil of our nature… has been expelled, and when there has been a restoration of those who are now lying in Sin to their primal state, a harmony of thanksgiving will arise from all creation…”
### Key Features of Gregory’s View
– **Punishment is medicinal and purifying**, not purely retributive or eternal. The “fire” of judgment is a surgeon’s fire that burns away evil until only the good remains.
– **Human freedom is preserved**. Restoration is not forced; every rational being will eventually see the truth and freely submit. Subjection to Christ (1 Cor 15) is understood as voluntary and salvific.
– **Unity of humanity**. Because Christ assumed the whole of human nature, the salvation of the entire human race is implied in the Incarnation and Resurrection.
– **No pre-existence of souls** (in the problematic Origenist sense) and no dissolution of the body.
Gregory affirms the resurrection of the body and the permanence of created nature, now fully healed and transformed.
– **Christological foundation**. The restoration is the fruit of the Incarnation, death, and resurrection of Christ, who “recapitulates” and heals all of human nature.
Gregory’s universalism is thus more thoroughly integrated with orthodox Trinitarian and Christological teaching than Origen’s, and it lacks the more speculative elements (pre-existence of souls, multiple successive worlds, etc.) that later drew criticism.
For this reason, many scholars regard him as the most important and least controversial patristic witness to the hope of the final restoration of all things.
A note from Bart’s rules:
Please realize that if your post is LONG, far fewer people will actually read it. If a post is ridiculously long (say, 1000 words), I won’t approve it. I’d suggest posts from 100-500 words, on average. The fewer words the better. Succinct is good.
Also realize that if you make tons of posts, people will be less likely to read any one of them, thinking to themselves, here s/he goes again! So choose your spots.
Bart D. Ehrman, James A. Gray Professor, Department of Religious Studies, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
*Posts no longer need to be individually approved before they appear. That slowed down discussions.
BJH1960 said
Helen, David is, for whatever reason, unconcerned with the rules.
He’s made it clear he’s used to being ignored or doesn’t mind being ignored or something like that.
Yeah, but:
“The ultimate goal of the forum is to increase the blog’s growing community so that we can raise more funds for charity.”
^ also from Bart’s rules ^
The way things go down and happen on the Forum can affect people’s lives in real ways, and in really important ways.
It’s important that we make the Forum a positive and healthy place to communicate.
** you do not have permission to see this link **
**In Christian eschatology, universalism** (also called **universal reconciliation** or **apokatastasis**) is the view that **all human beings will ultimately be saved** and restored to a right relationship with God.
### Core claim
Every person—regardless of faith, deeds, or rejection of God in this life—will eventually come to salvation. God’s love, will, and power ensure that no one remains permanently separated from Him. The final state is one in which God is “all in all” (drawing on 1 Corinthians 15:28) and all things are reconciled (cf. Colossians 1:20).
Most forms of Christian universalism still affirm:
– The reality of sin and its serious consequences.
– Some form of postmortem judgment or purification (often understood as temporary and remedial rather than everlasting retributive punishment).
– Salvation exclusively through Christ.
They reject the traditional idea of **eternal conscious torment** for the unrepentant (and usually also reject annihilationism, the view that the unsaved cease to exist).
### Historical background
– Early expressions appear in some Greek-speaking Church Fathers, most famously **Origen** (c. 185–254), who taught a restoration (*apokatastasis*) of all rational creatures, and **Gregory of Nyssa**.
– Certain versions of Origen’s teaching were later condemned (associated with the controversies around the Second Council of Constantinople in 553).
– The view remained a minority position for most of Christian history.
– It has reappeared in various forms in modern theology (e.g., some 19th-century Protestant universalists, certain readings of Karl Barth, and contemporary writers such as David Bentley Hart).
### Varieties
– **Dogmatic / strong universalism**: All *will* inevitably be saved.
– **Hopeful universalism**: Scripture and tradition leave open the possibility (or even the duty) of hoping that all will be saved, without claiming certainty (associated with figures such as Hans Urs von Balthasar).
– Some versions extend salvation to fallen angels; others limit it to human beings.
– Some include a temporary purgatorial process; others envision immediate or eventual reconciliation without prolonged suffering.
### Contrast with mainstream views
The historic majority positions in Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, and most Protestant traditions hold that some (or many) will finally be lost—either in eternal punishment or through annihilation. Universalism is generally regarded as outside the bounds of orthodoxy by these traditions, though “hopeful” versions have received more sympathetic discussion in some modern Catholic and Protestant circles.
In short, Christian universalism is the eschatological conviction that God’s redemptive purpose in Christ will succeed for every human being, so that hell (if it exists) does not have the last word.
DavidFord said
** you do not have permission to see this link **
**In Christian eschatology, universalism** (also called **universal reconciliation** or **apokatastasis**) is the view that **all human beings will ultimately be saved** and restored to a right relationship with God.
### Core claim
Every person—regardless of faith, deeds, or rejection of God in this life—will eventually come to salvation. God’s love, will, and power ensure that no one remains permanently separated from Him. The final state is one in which God is “all in all” (drawing on 1 Corinthians 15:28) and all things are reconciled (cf. Colossians 1:20).
Most forms of Christian universalism still affirm:
– The reality of sin and its serious consequences.
– Some form of postmortem judgment or purification (often understood as temporary and remedial rather than everlasting retributive punishment).
– Salvation exclusively through Christ.
They reject the traditional idea of **eternal conscious torment** for the unrepentant (and usually also reject annihilationism, the view that the unsaved cease to exist).
### Historical background
– Early expressions appear in some Greek-speaking Church Fathers, most famously **Origen** (c. 185–254), who taught a restoration (*apokatastasis*) of all rational creatures, and **Gregory of Nyssa**.
– Certain versions of Origen’s teaching were later condemned (associated with the controversies around the Second Council of Constantinople in 553).
– The view remained a minority position for most of Christian history.
– It has reappeared in various forms in modern theology (e.g., some 19th-century Protestant universalists, certain readings of Karl Barth, and contemporary writers such as David Bentley Hart).
### Varieties
– **Dogmatic / strong universalism**: All *will* inevitably be saved.
– **Hopeful universalism**: Scripture and tradition leave open the possibility (or even the duty) of hoping that all will be saved, without claiming certainty (associated with figures such as Hans Urs von Balthasar).
– Some versions extend salvation to fallen angels; others limit it to human beings.
– Some include a temporary purgatorial process; others envision immediate or eventual reconciliation without prolonged suffering.
### Contrast with mainstream views
The historic majority positions in Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, and most Protestant traditions hold that some (or many) will finally be lost—either in eternal punishment or through annihilation. Universalism is generally regarded as outside the bounds of orthodoxy by these traditions, though “hopeful” versions have received more sympathetic discussion in some modern Catholic and Protestant circles.
In short, Christian universalism is the eschatological conviction that God’s redemptive purpose in Christ will succeed for every human being, so that hell (if it exists) does not have the last word.
I like it.
What’s your opinion of Universalism?
*Posts no longer need to be individually approved before they appear. That slowed down discussions.
Not to mention requiring Robert to read every post and individually approve them would be an act of utter cruelty.
What’s universalism?
That’s the belief that no one will be saved. Everyone goes to Hell. Folks that makes as much sense as saying everyone is destined to be saved. In each circumstance, what’s the point? These views serve to flatten out all meaning and make every choice inconsequential.
** you do not have permission to see this link **
“more about why specifically condemned as a heretic”
** you do not have permission to see this link **
**Here is the standard English text of the fifteen anathemas associated with Origenism**, traditionally linked to the Second Council of Constantinople (553).
These are the ones commonly referred to as “the 15 anathemas against Origen.”
(Note: Their exact status as official acts of the ecumenical council itself is historically disputed.
Many scholars regard them as originating from a local synod or imperial initiative around the same time, or as reflecting sixth-century “Evagrian Origenism” more than Origen’s own third-century writings.
They are nevertheless the classic list cited in discussions of the condemnation of Origenism.)
### The Fifteen Anathemas
**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 of all reasonable things includes only intelligences 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 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 condition, but that there is only one soul of the universe, which has been divided into many parts, and that some of these have been called principalities, and others powers, and others virtues, and others dominions, and others thrones, and others angels, and others archangels, and others of other ranks, and that these have all fallen and taken bodies, some more subtle, others more gross: let him be anathema.
*(Slight variations exist in some editions for VI–IX; the core concerns Christological errors about the “Nous”/intelligence identified with Christ.)*
**VII–IX.** (Christological anathemas concerning the idea that Christ is a single unfallen intelligence united to the Word rather than the Word Himself incarnate, that He passed through various ranks of beings, etc.)
**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…: let him be anathema.
**XI.**
If anyone shall say that the judgment to come is the destruction of the body, and that at the end of the story there shall be nothing left but the spirit, and that the body shall be annihilated: 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 Nous which is by them called Christ…: let him be anathema.
**XIII.**
If anyone shall say that Christ (i.e., the Nous) is in no wise different from other reasonable beings…: 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… moreover, that in this pretended apocatastasis, spirits only will continue to exist…: let him be anathema.
**XV.**
If anyone shall say that the life of the spirits 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.
These anathemas primarily target a system involving the pre-existence of souls/intellects (*nous*), their fall into bodies of varying density, a hierarchical ladder of beings, a spherical/ethereal resurrected body, and a final restoration (*apokatastasis*) in which all distinctions (including bodies and individual hypostases) disappear and everything returns to an original undifferentiated state.
Robert said
Stephen said
What’s universalism?
That’s the belief that no one will be saved. Everyone goes to Hell. Folks that makes as much sense as saying everyone is destined to be saved. In each circumstance, what’s the point? These views serve to flatten out all meaning and make every choice inconsequential.Stephen, as a determinist, perhaps you can see some irony in your last sentence. But, on the other hand, consequential acts for which no one is actually responsible does not break the logic barrier, and I am, of course, aware of your perceptive critique of universalism. And yet, for those of us who are tempted to believe in a less than omnipotent god, universalism might still make sense. “Don’t shoot me, I’m only the piano player.”
Yes, but the irony belongs to those who have the universalist tendency but also want to claim that our ethical decisions have some ultimate significance. I was highlighting the inner contradictions of their point of view. As a determinist I am happy to delineate the positive consequences of a lack of personal responsibility. But of course determinism doesn’t free us (sorry) from the very real consequences of our actions.
As I have said I am fascinated by the concept of the god who appears not at the beginning of history but at its culmination. One of my favorite, perhaps most favorite, literary depictions of this concept is the British writer/philosopher Olaf Stapledon’s ** you do not have permission to see this link **. Alas, as far as I can tell this concept of god exists only within fiction.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)