...in Light and Love

Having spent a great deal of time over the last few years in sincere prayer and objective study surrounding the Hebrew and Greek languages of particular controversial words and phrases, and many varying theological positions (within Christianity) on the afterlife and the fate of human souls, I've realized in the process that there is not one branch of Christian theology (and every other religion for that matter) that comes without the ‘dogma’ of its own as each claim inerrancy within their own and “false doctrine” on most of the rest. The big question at the end of all the ‘theological squabble’ is: ‘who really has full authority, save God and His Son Himself, to decide?’ And yet we have been arguing over these translations and interpretations for centuries.

I reason; we all agree that “Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love. 1 John 4:8 and so; if the definition of Love is as scripture tells us (Corinthians 13:4-7): “⁴patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. ⁵ It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. ⁶ Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. ⁷ It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres” and if we go on to understand in 1 John 4:18 “such love has no fear, because perfect love expels all fear. If we are afraid, it is for fear of punishment, and this shows that we have not fully experienced his perfect love” then a fair question to every sincere Christian ought to be, why not leave it to ‘The Big Guy Upstairs’ to decide. Is it really necessary to make the afterlife for unbelievers such a focal point of our ministry? As the popular phrase goes: “What Would Jesus Do?”  

But we don’t really have to ask ourselves this question if we are remotely familiar with the teachings of Christ and the essence of His ministry. Did He walk around telling everyone to repent and accept Him as their Lord and Savior or else face His wrath in eternal torment of hell? No. We know that He “did not come to condemn the world but to save it”.  This is not to say that we ought not share our theologies, but when they reach a point where we are ultimately condemning ourselves by giving God no room inside His ‘tiny little box’ we've created for Him; when our own theologies become cause for division within the Body of Christ and the turning away and/or stumbling of unbelievers and believers alike—we must, must take a step back and reevaluate whom it is we are serving. Is it Christ or our own self-inflated, prideful egos? It's a battle for many of us if we are being honest with ourselves, myself included. Pride is the deadliest of all sins and for good reason. It pulls us further and further away from our desire and willingness to act in the charitable Love and hopefulness for others that we are called to as Christians. 

So given what the Bible tells me of His Love, then in the Spirit of the Love of Christ, I am led to be nothing but a ‘hopeful’ Universalist in my Christian faith as I strive to live-out and minister with a confident hope for all things and all souls past, present, and future to be restored unto Him, our Creator in the perfection of His Agape Love one day.

This Agape Love by nature and definition is a feeling only secondary to an action and therefore cannot come to an end without having fulfilled its purpose. In other words, God’s Love is ‘first’ and foremost by Biblical definition, ‘patient’ and purposefully so as the essence of patience is ongoing and sees no end until its purpose has been fulfilled which is why we say that God's Love is infinite and lasts forever; if it were not so then none of us would be guaranteed 'saved' from total destruction. We should be confidently hopeful that we are all like the prodigal son, at one point in Heaven with Him and therefore on a journey back to Him being drawn by His Love; unless of course we do not hold to the view of the preexistence of the soul and our eternal nature only starts once we are born a physical birth.

Nonetheless, we would still need to revise God's Biblical definition of Agape Love--unless we intend to suggest that His patience can and will in fact run out (for eternity) and that the ultimate ‘purpose’ of His Agape Love is in fact meant to be fulfilled through the eternal torment of those who did not choose His Son and eternal bliss for those who did.

We argue that His Love is not imposed or forced on us. It cannot be or it is not True Love. His gift of Agape Love and great sacrifice on the cross also came with the gift of free will to make a ‘choice’. And it is here, where we may say, ‘lies the conundrum’. It is here where the two, that is: God’s Highest Agape Love for His own creation and His gift of ‘free’-will to the human soul must meet and harmonize. If He is omnipresent, all knowing, all-foreseeing, a fair argument might be, ‘why’ create beings for the very purpose of tormenting them in the end, knowing that’s where they’d end up forever?

And furthermore we can argue, what is ‘choice’ made ‘freely’? What guidelines have we set forth and established for the rational ‘free’ agent? Do infants constitute as ‘rational’ beings?  Unless in our own theological view, we understand that we are not actually saved by 'Grace' but rather 'predetermined destination' (e.g.‘favoritism’)  on God's behalf, presuming, as many Calvinists do, that God sent His Son to die only for the ‘elect’ knowing full well whom they’d be and that He had no intention of saving the rest (a theology that poses a number of problems and the need for many revisions of Scripture); with such theology set aside, what do we make of this free ‘choice’ He has given the rest of us as it pertains to the final dwelling place of our souls? Does that ‘choice’ truly come with a time-frame?

“If I am ignorant of, or deceived about, the true consequences of my choices, then I am in no position to embrace those consequences freely; and similarly, if I suffer from an illusion that conceals from me the true nature of God, or the true import of union with God, then I am again in no position to reject God freely” Thomas Talbott (The Inescapable Love of God, p. 187). ).  Talbott also argues that for a free rational agent to decisively and definitively reject his supreme good is seemingly incoherent. “For no one rational enough to qualify as a free moral agent could possibly prefer an objective horror—the outer darkness, for example—to eternal bliss, nor could any such person both experience the horror of separation from God and continue to regard it as a desirable state” ("Towards a Better Understanding of Universalism,” in Universal Salvation?, p. 5).

For me to go deeper into understanding His Love as it was intended for me to know and ultimately to experience’; to be able to ‘defend’ my faith and answer the many questions thrown at me from my closest friends and acquaintances over the years, it became vital that I thrust myself into this ‘theological’ and doctrinal study as it stood historically and evolved in due time. In all the years of growing up in the church, this was something I had never done for myself. 

Having done this, I realized that I am not a fundamentalist Christian at all. The deeper I've sensed His inescapable and inevitable Love, the more eclectic I've become in my faith. By every sense of the word, I am a ‘mystified-by-God-in-all-His-mysterious-and-Loving ways’ Christian, who couldn't stand firm on anything more than His Agape Love that casts out all binding fear. Instead I am unbound in Spirit in the healthy, reverent Fear of a Supreme and Loving, Sovereign Creator who is capable of anything and everything that serves His greater Glory and Highest purpose for His Creation. Far be it from me to place limitations on His capabilities and will for humanity.

I believe in the consequences of sin and rebellion; the consequences (good or bad) of the choices we make while here on earth. And as strongly as I believe in heaven, I believe in the reality of hell as the Bible makes no confusion to its existence, but I continuously fall back on the question:

“To what purpose might the promise or threat of eternal torment (of any created-Being) serve the Supreme Creator—Thee Ultimate Loving Father?”  This question may be posed in earthly terms. What purpose would it serve us as mothers and fathers to punish our children without end for mistakes made in ignorance or flat out disobedience? Do we say: 'Sorry kid, I know you're hungry and thirsty but remember you sent yourself to time-out for eternity by your own choices and now I have to allow you to stay there; it breaks my heart to see you rot away, but its only because I love you that I must leave you there'. Could this be true Love; the Love God has called us to? Again, what purpose would it serve? 

But the fundamental orthodox Christian might sincerely argue: "although we may not understand it and ultimately God only knows who is really saved, we have to believe in the eternal status of it because the Bible clearly states that the "goats and sheep" will be separated in the end for all of eternity". Matt.25:46. True. The most popular Bibles today do indeed read it this way, but there are those less popular, still highly regarded (difficult to read at times), literal translation such as Rotherham's Emphasized Bible or 'Robert Young's Literal Translation' in addition to 'Young's Analytical Concordance'that never suggest the original Greek word 'aion' to be anything more than an 'age', 'age-abiding', or (the literal English translation) 'eon' as today we might attribute a 1,000 years to (nonetheless an indefinite period of time); knowing that "a day is like a thousand years to the Lord and a thousand years is like a day" 
 2 Peter 3:8. 

It's also necessary to put the doctrine into perspective regarding its history and when it first surfaced in theological 'orthodox' writings hundreds of years after Christ's death and resurrection.

"One of the essential tenants of Universalism is that all punishment in Hell is remedial, curative, and purifying. As long as Western Christianity was mainly Greek — the language of the New Testament — it was Universalist.

Interestingly, NONE of the Greek-speaking Universalists ever felt the need to explain Greek words such as “aion” and “aionion.” In Greek, an aion (in English, usually spelled “eon”) is an indefinite period of time, usually of long duration. When it was translated into Latin Vulgate, “aion” became “aeternam” which means “eternal.” These translation errors were the basis for much of what was written about Eternal Hell.

The first person to write about Eternal Hell was the Latin North African Tertullian who is considered the Father of the Latin Church. As most people reason, Hell is a place for people you don’t like to go! Tertullian fantasized that not only the wicked would be in Hell but also every philosopher and theologian who ever argued with him! He envisioned a time when he would look down from Heaven at those people in Hell and laugh with glee!" "The Salvation Conspiracy: How Hell Became Eternal" by Ken R. Vincent 

With a study done on the history of the King James Version of the Bible (the first English translation by which almost all others followed), we would find that the New Testament translation was taken from the Latin Catholic Vulgate (e.g. 'aeternam'/ 'eternal') to definitively imply such a status to the word. 

So then the argument to this, one might say, is that it would have to work both ways; that is, if hell is not eternal then neither is heaven. As Christians can we honestly believe this to be true? How might that also come with the need for revision or removal of many scriptures in the Bible? A fair argument. 

Perhaps the answer to this question also lies in the gift of 'Free-Will' that comes with His Agape Love; a gift He gave that He will never take back because His Love is not forced. Perhaps there will always, for the rest of time, exist a place in which a soul may depart to, should he choose separation from God and therefore the 'eternal' status as we know it to be would more appropriately fall in line with 'age-abiding' status. That 'age' may be infinite and 'eternal' but just as much as God would not force a 'truly-repented' soul to remain in hell for ever, He would not force a free-rational soul to remain in heaven either. 'Free-will' being the component that is always at the foundation of His Love.  

Those of us living in anticipation of the second coming of our Lord Jesus;or all of us for that matter (in our respective beliefs and religions) who have experienced the Life-giving Love of God would find this concept preposterous and naturally so. The 'likeliness' that anyone would 'choose' separation from Him after experiencing the splendor and depth of Joy in being with Him, seems hardly comprehensible. 

All this should go without saying that these are only my theological reflections on the 'could-be' explanation.  

Nonetheless, and regardless of any of our individual theologies on what could be, we all agree that Jesus Himself said “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life; no one comes to the Father except through Me".
John 14:6. 

In this regard we must take Him at His word quite literally, but how can we claim to ever understand His ways in those lives around us, be it in this life or the afterlife. How can we claim to know who is really "saved" now or who might be later on?

Why might I not believe in His capabilities and willingness to rescue whomever He sees fit out of the gates of hell, which He himself has said “will not prevail”? Those stories of the many near-death experiences confirming such instances only reassure me of this hope I have for all. They further convey that 'hell' like heaven may have an inconceivable number of realms of existence and not all "fire and brimstone" as we are led to believe. 

And how can I claim that all those people who have died without ‘professing’ His name are ‘without a doubt’ immediately suffering the consequences of that choice in hell. And if I jump on the theological band wagon that begins to make exceptions for this group (e.g. babies that die) or that group (e.g. drug attics, the mentally disabled, those ‘who have never heard the message’ etc.) but not 'everyone' alike, everything starts to become vaguely ambiguous.

And if I take the opposite approach on the other end of eternal torment doctrine to say that ‘without a doubt’ even Satan and his demons will be reconciled to Christ as some of the earliest renowned Christian fathers (e.g. Gregory of Nyssa and Origen) held to; can I say it with 100% certainty based on the biblical support of those same scriptures by which every other dogma has taken measure to interpret, having come to extremely different conclusions? Although I may argue the case that the majority of Scripture (when read quite 'literally') stands more in favor with Universalism than opposing theologies, I still must admit that only God really knows.

Many have argued (in so many words); “Right we’re all just going to be hanging out with Hitler and the Devil in heaven, having a grand old time rehashing about earlier days on earth…and our ministry on earth was all in vain since we all end up together in the end?”

I suppose that’s one way of looking at it. But I also know that as certain as I am of His promise that I, Naomi will be made a ‘New’ being having done away with the 'old' me, I can hardly jump on that wagon that would say ‘It’s not possible that God is able to do that for Hitler and Satan himself’. After all, what does ‘reconcile’ mean? To ‘make’ or ‘restore’ ‘friendly' relations. Before we knew him as Satan, as the destroyer of all that is good and innocent; before we knew him to be synonymous with evil, was he not Lucifer the “Light Bearer”; the “Morning Star”; God’s ‘head honcho’ and highest ranking angel of them all? 

As for our ministry being in 'vain' on earth if we all end up together anyway, I would have to argue the question: 'What is our motive for serving Christ'? If we are most concerned with 'hell fire' and separation from God for the unbeliever and therefore strictly concerned with the 'number' who accept Jesus into their heart, then should it really make a difference to us whether that suffering will last eternally or 'just' perhaps (say) a thousand to two thousand years? 

Now I don't believe this is the case as God is a Just God and our punishments fit our crimes (be it in this life or the afterlife), but let's say hypothetically that we could guarantee that every soul (upon leaving their earthly body) would end up in a blissful heaven, but the suffering and quality of life was no different (than it is now) before that point. Drug addictions, sex addictions, murder, war, perverse evil etc.still exists. Would it be enough motive for us as Christians to continue serving Christ and spreading the Gospel for the sake of transforming lives in the 'here and now' regardless of the afterlife? As Christ followers, I believe our collective answer to that question should be a resounding 'yes!'.  It ought to be an honor and privilege to serve our Lord and to be that vessel in which He operates and transforms a broken heart and a broken life. Regardless of His plan for the fate of our souls in the afterlife, we are living  in the 'here and now' today where people are desperate for Love...they are desperate for Him and they don't even know it. 

Sadly, this is not the case for a large chunk of Christianity. Our response to the question is not a resounding 'Yes'. We have been limiting ourselves with our own theologies for hundreds of years. But if we stripped away all the different theologies about the afterlife, what are we left with? 

Simply Jesus. 

Many have a hard time even imagining that we ought to ‘Love’such an enemy as Satan, but do we assume just because we can’t fathom it, that God doesn't think fondly of Him on those earlier ‘days’ in heaven when He was one in Spirit and Love with God; when he was God’s right-hand-man? Has God so much ‘hatred’ for Lucifer that He cannot Love him while hating what he has done and continues to do? If we are being honest and sincere in our Christianity, we must be able (in some degree) to wrestle with these tough questions. Wasn't it the very message of Christ to ‘hate’ the sin and evil of the man, but ‘Love’ the man himself as one created by God to be Loved in the same way as ourselves? But how are we to Love as God loves when we don't like someone, and for 'good reason'? How can I 'Love' the man who has robbed the innocence of a child when that is the worst of evils in my book? As C.S. Lewis would respond: 

“Some Christian writers use the word charity to describe not only Christian love between human beings, but also God’s love for man and man’s love for God. About the second of these two, people are often worried. They are told they ought to love God. They cannot find any such feeling in themselves. The answer is the same as before. Act as if you did. Do not sit trying to manufacture feelings. Ask yourself, ‘If I were sure that I loved God, what would I do? When you have found the answer go and do it.” 'Mere Christianity' pg.132

So truly ‘loving’ someone we may not 'feel' love for (e.g. God Himself) and the pesky, rude, demeaning neighbor we find extremely unlovable; thank the Lord-- is not based on our own self-attempted manufactured feelings-- as much as those feelings of 'disliking'someone are natural and not a sin in and of themselves. It is what we do with those feelings that determine the effectiveness of our ability to Love as His Highest Love demands; that is to ‘act’ as He would act (in charity) to each and every individual alike regardless.   

Acting in True Love is the charitable ‘action at work’ and perhaps the greatest surprises happen when we choose to abide in this Love and that person we liked the very least becomes someone we inevitably come to 'like' and even better; to 'feel' Love for; as we begin to see them as God’s children, created by Him and made to be loved we begin to break away from the Pride in our hearts that hinders our Spiritual growth and understanding. The action of Love changes us from the inside out and it can break even the coldest heart of evil. This is why Christ taught us to demonstrate love ‘through action’ for those who persecute us and to forgive our enemies. We are to be His Peacemakers of the Earth and so this call to ‘Love’ must be decided in our own hearts. Most likely our response to it will reflect the level of Pride we maintain in ourselves and our own fixed-views. But from a Divine Cosmic perspective the question of ultimate reconciliation may be posed. 

To reiterate; wasn't it Christ's message to ‘forgive’ our enemies? Should Satan, Lucifer, ever have a ‘break through’ moment and fall flat on His face in sincere anguish and sorrow over all he’s done; should he plead for forgiveness while remaining willing to suffer the wrath of God as he is due, would not the Mercy of God be that much more demonstrated in its Victory over sin and evil and death (e.g. “separation” from God) with such a reconciliation? Would not the angels and all of Heaven rejoice with God for such a change in the most evil one of all?

The truth is, I do not have the ‘absolute’ answers to the ultimate fate of every soul, including the Devil, because I am but only a created-being; a vessel to be used by my Lord Jesus; for His own glory. To veer away from the essence of His heart and teachings and take on any ‘absolute’ approach in theology is self-righteously (as I strongly feel) claiming to know God’s Mind and Ways which no one can ever fully do. The Pharisees in the Bible did so and as a result, their hearts were hardened and blinded to the Truth of Christ and the true Love demanded by God. By all means I must never compromise what I know to be the Truth of His atoning sacrifice on the cross; I can never and will never deny the Truth of my Savior, but having studied to the length that I have, I cannot claim any one branch of Christian theology (with total confidence) on the afterlife and that’s perfectly ok with me.

But I can and will, to no fault, remain hopeful for all of His Creation…the Devil included.

I'm hopeful that in the very moment in which Christ fulfilled the work of the cross, Salvation (e.g. ‘to be rescued from destruction’) was given to every past, present, and future soul that ever walked the earth and ever will. Like the parable of the lost sheep who were saved but didn't seem to know it, so is every soul having been atoned through Jesus, the only One who paid our debt. While the ‘reconciliation’ component (e.g. ‘repentance’) is based on our own free will and would therefore likely happen at very different times and/or within different realms of life, it has not negated the ‘gift’ of Salvation itself, freely given when His blood was shed. 

I can think of it in this hypothetical scenario to elaborate; I get a call from the post office and they tell me that I have a package with my “name on it” but there is no return address so they cannot tell me who it is from. The package regardless belongs to me. It was sent to me irrespective of my choice to pick it up or not. The gift-giver did not send a ‘stipulation’ with the package stating that it was only mine if I opened it and called to say “thanks”. In this regard, the package itself (e.g. Christ) is my ‘salvation’ but I am currently ignorant of this and certainly cannot reap the benefits of the package until I open it and receive the gift inside. As of now, I am living in total turmoil--until circumstances may lead me to take the time to drive to the post office and pick up/open my package. 

You should also know here, that I am someone who is struggling to get through life and keep my head above the water. I find myself in such an extreme amount of debt that I see no way out of. I stress every day. I worry constantly that debt collections will be showing up sooner or later to evict me from my home. I am hopeless and begin to see ‘suicide’ as the only way out of this desperation and miserable anxiety surrounding my finances.

So one day, weeks later (weeks longer) of continued consequential suffering in my circumstances of life, I happen to be driving by the post office sobbing my eyes out, seriously contemplating running the red light in hopes of being hit and dying on impact (with the obvious emotional instability to even think rationally on the fact that I may kill another in the process). But as if out of the thin air, something speaks to me and tells me to look to my left wherein the Post Office lies and I suddenly remember the call I received. I turn into the parking lot to pick up the package.

I get back into my car and open the package. In it is a letter stating my debts have been paid in full which include my car loan, credit card bills, and the mortgage on my home, all by an anonymous donor. The letter also told me to live as though every moment of my life (rain or shine) were a gift not to be taken for granted; to count all things (even those difficult and overwhelming tragedies) as a gift and to know that life doesn't ever end because ‘Life’ itself is an eternal gift; to live selflessly; to love and be generous to that person whom I have counted as my greatest of all enemies.

Holding this package in my hand in this very moment, I am in full, unfathomable gratitude that this gift was sent to me. I do not feel worthy to receive it, but I am assured that I am indeed worthy of it. I am aware that Love for me is at the foundation of this gift I hold in my hands.  I feel as light as a feather as the burden of debt, fear, and worry I was made captive to is released and beyond that, I am given ‘new’ sight, ‘new’ vision to see things as I never saw them before. In this moment, I know without a doubt that God is real and that He is holding me in the palm of His hand calling me to live a ‘New’ life.

As I stiffed through the many varying theologies; as I studied the history of eternal torment doctrine and the history of the first English translation (KJV) all that kept coming to mind was the game ‘telephone’. We've all played it. Sitting in a circle, one starts the ‘message’ and whispers into the ear of the next as the ‘message’ makes its way through the group. Now the one who first spoke the message, by all accounts is the authentic bearer, original author of that message but even the slightest change in tone, verbiage, and ‘interpretation’ of that message is likely to produce an increasingly skewed ‘received’ message as it makes its way to the very end of the ‘line’ or the last ‘receiver’ of the message. Now at any point in time, the originator of the message can certainly yell out the message loud enough for all to hear (to clear up any possible confusion) but then what ‘game’ is left to play?

And so it goes (as far as I can tell) with religion and theology. It’s like the ‘game’ of telephone—fun to play and entertain ourselves with, if only out of our own human attempt to make sense of God and the world around us, but we cannot seize to remember that the True Author of the authentic message is present within this entire conversation searching for the purest of hearts and those acting within the 'goodness' and love of the Spirit of that message (not the 'theology' of the message), even though the message may have been completely altered at the end of the line. Does he hold that end-of-the-line message-receiver to the same standard as the first to receive the message? Only He has full authority to decide that. 

It is not a matter of “right” and/or “wrong". If we are all being perfectly honest with ourselves, we know that we are all going to stand before our Creator one day. Do we have so much pride in ourselves to believe that any of us are going to be found flawless in our understanding of God and His Divine Doctrine? As many things as we are bound to get ‘right’ we are equally bound to get ‘wrong’ so that ‘message’ in the game of ‘telephone’ must become relative to what we have received and chosen to believe in the sincerity of faith. How can the ‘right’ choice as He sees fit be made without taking into account those aspects that make us truly ‘free’ rational agents? 

And so the ‘good, better, best’ may look something like this in the game:

The ‘good’ is at the very end of the ‘line’ (the farthest away from the original message and potentially the most ‘skewed’ received message); the ‘better’ is somewhere in the middle and the Best starts with the Author of that message in the beginning of the game. That Author is God the Father, the Son and The Holy Spirit Himself through Christ (e.g. The 'Word'/ the 'Logos' of God made manifest in the flesh). He is the ‘Best’ because He IS the Way, the Truth, and the Life who freely paid for the sins of the world. While at the very end of the line, the message may or may not have been totally butchered, He is still present in the conversation nonetheless as He is present in all His Creation and searching for those who are serving Him (even if they don’t realize it) in the Spirit of ‘goodness, love, and mercy’ for God and others, especially their' enemies.

My father once said to me, and I have to say that coming from him this was very profound; he said “Naomi, in my life I have met atheists who are more ‘Christian’ than myself”. Now he is not a Universalist in the sense of the word so much as a humble, created-being who places God at the forefront of ‘Salvation Authority’ who can and will save anyone He chooses to, and there’s no real way for any of us to know ‘exactly’ whom those people are. It is only our job to share the love, and the Gospel/‘Good News’ of Christ.

If we all had this outlook as Christians (regardless of our theologies) how might our message, in conveying the heart and ministry of Christ be transformed in our own lives and in turn--in the lives of others. How might the message (collectively) shift in the direction more spiritually in tune with Christ?

Plagued with a conscience and curiosity that often leaves me wrestling with some of these deeper mysteries and challenges, I am learning how to ‘let go’ and ‘let God’ freely work in me and transform me daily with the ‘renewing’ of my mind by His Holy Spirit. My prayer for myself and the destiny of all humanity alike is for a continuous ever-maturing and spiritually evolving Agape Love that does not seize to rest. The Love that goes deeper and deeper by the day, the hour, the second. As the Body of Christ in this world, my prayer is that we would experience a revival in our own hearts and a hope that is unbound by any limitation or restriction theology may attempt to place on it as we continue to be God’s ‘salt’ of the earth.

I pray that our Spirits would be awakened and united; may the eyes of our souls be opened---seeing more clearly with every passing day.

For further reading, visit the previous post history in the doctrine... for a paper written by Ken R. Vincent titled: "The Salvation Conspiracy: How Hell Became Eternal". 

And May You Be Blessed in His Light and Love today and always!