u/lovesaints

Hi. I was Bahai in 2007-2008 and then converted back to Christianity. In the intervening years I have been in just about every denomination from Episcopalian to Orthodoxy.

Recently, I became interested in Christian universalism and began to reflect on the Baha'i view of the afterlife.

Through that I began to realize that I had grown kind of exhausted with all the different denominations and doctrinal positions within Christianity particularly as it relates to the afterlife. I'm also a moderate person in terms of theology and culture and I have begun to feel like Christianity today seems so focused on target demographics, particularly as it relates to partisan politics, that I'm just...tired.

And even if it doesn't overtly target certain political and ideological demographics some of these denominations seem to be a magnet for very specific ones which in my view is just as exhausting.

So here I am, beginning to read the Hidden Words after 20+ years.

Anyone else here been down this road?

Hi friends. I've been attending a small, nominally Lutheran church that trends evangelical.

I hunger for a bit more liturgy, but I'm theologically/socially moderate, and am in a committed, monogamous relationship but will likely never be legally married due to the scars of a deeply failed marriage.

The traditional churches bar me from communion, the liberal ones are SUPER liberal.

I'm feeling a bit restless at my church. I feel like I can't be entirely open about my life, theology etc. They're a kind community, and they have a general idea ofy life so I don't feel judged or anything I just feel...restless.

I feel like a permanent sojourner. I feel like there's nowhere really where I fit.

Anyway, good times.

First things first I absolutely love CS Lewis. I love his fiction and I love his apologetics. In my view, he is just as much of a towering theological mind as any of the ancient fathers. I think he would find that suggestion repellent which only serves to reinforce my case, lol.

I'm reading the Problem of Pain and just finished his chapter on hell.

Now, if I were to accept the infernalist position I think his explanation of what it is is the best. In fact, before my recent transition to patristic universalism his view on hell was basically mine as well.

However, I read that chapter today in a different light and I was trying to figure out where exactly we diverge and I think I have it. He describes hell as a place people will choose. And not because they would choose a torture chamber over bliss, but because they would choose themselves over God, and that will be the end of the story. Now I am grossly oversimplifying things as he goes into more detail, but I think that is the gist.

The first place where I think he and I diverge is on free will. He seems to think free will is absolute and therefore sufficient for eternal torment, whereas I think free will is limited and therefore insufficient for eternal torment.

He also sees hell as a place people will choose, whereas I'm actually a bit more fire and brimstone in that I think hell is a place of punishment, but a punishment that corrects and refines, no matter how long it takes.

For me it starts at a place of justice. Hell has to be a place where we deal with all of our garbage. Where subterfuge, misdirection and manipulation are no longer factors and we just have to deal with all of our sins.

What made me start thinking this way was actually a true crime documentary I watched a while back. This woman had committed a horrific act of killing a pregnant woman and her unborn child. When being interviewed by the police you could see her just trying to manipulate them and avoid accountability. I imagine hell as an experience where that all becomes impossible, and everyone is laid bare and there is no avoiding the reality and specificity of our sins. But I still think free will plays a role in that refinement and we can resist God for a LONG time.

I Invite your thoughts.

Hi. I've been posting here the past few days because as I've mentioned elsewhere I'm somewhat new to all this.

I was wondering how many of you became universalists and left your church or stayed at your church and how you process the theology if it contains Infernalist views.

In my case, I go to a small community church in my neighborhood that is nominally Lutheran, and I would say moderately conservative to conservative in it's theology. It's fairly gospel centered so seriously the majority of the time is spent just praising Jesus. In fact, I'm trying to think of a sermon where one of the pastors has really talked about hell at all.

But some of the old hymns have ECT in the lyrics, and I found myself wincing a couple of times today lol. But I do love this church and I believe it's got a genuine faith and it's got good people so I'm going to keep going there and worshiping the Lord with my fellow believers.

But it got me thinking about other folks in this theological camp and what your experience has been like.

Hi friend. My partner is not a believer and asked me why the Lord healed lepers but wouldn't stop something like what happened in Nepal. She was not being antagonistic.

It's not the first time she's asked this, and I've always tried to formulate some intellectual and theological defense.

Since coming around to patristic universalism I blurted out "I don't know." Not sure if that's a better answer, but it's honest at least.

Your thoughts?

Morning friends. This week has been somewhat of a spiritual awakening for me. I've always been aware of universalism but in particular I discovered Patristic Universalism and it has connected a lot of dots for me.

In particular this week I have felt a significant sense of relief as though a burden has been lifted. That's something that has been unexpected and almost made me feel light-headed and in the best possible way.

I'm almost 49 so I've had lots of moments in my life like this. I know there's always a high with a new spiritual discovery and whatnot. This feels different though.

Like I'm just looking at my friends, family and neighbors in a completely different way now if that makes sense. You could say I feel more love for them not to sound cheesy.

Can anyone relate and articulate this better than me? 🙂😂

Good morning. I have started a deep dive in Patristic Universalism and have been pondering the purification process after death.

I feel like looking at the length of purification might be too linear given that we will be within the presence of God and His eternal Now. That's when I started to ponder whether or not purification would vary by intensity and perhaps FEEL longer to some.

I'm rambling and fairly new to this. What are your thoughts?

Bonus question - Do you think accepting Christ makes purification "easier" for believers? How so?

Thanks friends. God bless. Have a good day. 🙂👍

Morning. I just watched this last night, and you would think reading film fan reviews that this is on par with classics like Heat and The Killer.

​

I'm a big fan myself of Hong Kong Cinema with one of my top favorite filmmakers of all time being John Woo.

​

Now, I know Ringo Lam is a different kind of filmmaker than Woo, then after watching this movie and nodding off in the middle act I have to say I sort of hated it. Chow Yun Fat is of course awesome, and the last 15 minutes I guess is kind of good but otherwise this movie is a mess.

​

It can't decide if it's a whimsical silly comedy, a melodrama, or a serious heist flick about men being men. Even if it's intent is to be all of the above none of it even works.

​

This is just one of those weird movie experiences where my fellow Cinema lovers adore this movie and literally none of it landed for me.

​

Anyway, as you were.

I recently watched Maniac Cop and Vigilante, and I found myself pleasantly surprised, particularly with Maniac Cop, because as a kid I always just thought it was some terrible direct to video horror movie and so never checked it out.

​

But with both films I was surprised at the skill of his filmmaking. In particular, I love the way he frames shots and has such simple confidence behind the camera in his tracking shots.

​

I was actually watching Vigilante last night and I've kind of come to the position that he is sort of a grindhouse Martin Scorsese if I can be allowed to make such a bold statement.

​

Would love to know your thoughts on Lustig too.

I recently watched Maniac Cop and Vigilante, and I found myself pleasantly surprised, particularly with Maniac Cop, because as a kid I always just thought it was some terrible direct to video horror movie and so never checked it out.

​

But with both films I was surprised at the skill of his filmmaking. In particular, I love the way he frames shots and has such simple confidence behind the camera in his tracking shots.

​

I was actually watching Vigilante last night and I've kind of come to the position that he is sort of a grindhouse Martin Scorsese if I can be allowed to make such a bold statement.

​

Would love to know your thoughts on Lustig too.

I recently watched Maniac Cop and Vigilante, and I found myself pleasantly surprised, particularly with Maniac Cop, because as a kid I always just thought it was some terrible direct to video horror movie and so never checked it out.

​

But with both films I was surprised at the skill of his filmmaking. In particular, I love the way he frames shots and has such simple confidence behind the camera in his tracking shots.

​

I was actually watching Vigilante last night and I've kind of come to the position that he is sort of a grindhouse Martin Scorsese if I can be allowed to make such a bold statement.

​

Would love to know your thoughts on Lustig too.