Catholic Scholar Ramelli...on early church universal salvation belief (hell, punishment, doctrine)

[ClementofA]

"Augustine himself, after rejecting apokatastasis, and Basil attest that still late in the fourth and fifth centuries this doctrine was upheld by the vast majority of Christians (immo quam plurimi)."

"Of course there were antiuniversalists also in the ancient church, but scholars must be careful not to list among them — as is the case with the list of “the 68” antiuniversalists repeatedly cited by McC on the basis of Brian Daley’s The Hope of the Early Church — an author just because he uses πῦρ αἰώνιον, κόλασις αἰώνιος, θάνατος αἰώνιος, or the like, since these biblical expressions do not necessarily refer to eternal damnation. Indeed all universalists, from Origen to Gregory Nyssen to Evagrius, used these phrases without problems, for universalists understood these expressions as “otherworldly,” or “long-lasting,” fire, educative punishment, and death. Thus, the mere presence of such phrases is not enough to conclude that a patristic thinker “affirmed the idea of everlasting punishment” (p. 822). Didache mentions the ways of life and death, but not eternal death or torment; Ignatius, as others among “the 68,” never mentions eternal punishment. Ephrem does not speak of eternal damnation, but has many hints of healing and restoration. For Theodore of Mopsuestia, another of “the 68,” if one takes into account also the Syriac and Latin evidence, given that the Greek is mostly lost, it becomes impossible to list him among the antiuniversalists. He explicitly ruled out unending retributive punishment, sine fine et sine correctione.

I have shown, indeed, that a few of “the 68” were not antiuniversalist, and that the uncertain were in fact universalists, for example, Clement of Alexandria, Apocalypse of Peter, Sibylline Oracles (in one passage), Eusebius, Nazianzen, perhaps even Basil and Athanasius, Ambrose, Jerome before his change of mind, and Augustine in his anti-Manichaean years. Maximus too, another of “the 68,” speaks only of punishment aionios, not aidios and talks about restoration with circumspection after Justinian, also using a persona to express it. Torstein Tollefsen, Panayiotis Tzamalikos, and Maria Luisa Gatti, for instance, agree that he affirmed apokatastasis.

It is not the case that “the support for universalism is paltry compared with opposition to it” (p. 823). Not only were “the 68” in fact fewer than 68, and not only did many “uncertain” in fact support apokatastasis, but the theologians who remain in the list of antiuniversalists tend to be much less important. Look at the theological weight of Origen, the Cappadocians, Athanasius, or Maximus, for instance, on all of whom much ofChristian doctrine and dogmas depends. Or think of the cultural significance of Eusebius, the spiritual impact of Evagrius or Isaac of Nineveh, or the philosophico-theological importance of Eriugena, the only author of a comprehensive treatise of systematic theology and theoretical philosophy between Origen’s Peri Archon and Aquinas’sSumma theologiae. Then compare, for instance, Barsanuphius, Victorinus of Pettau, Gaudentius of Brescia, Maximus of Turin, Tyconius, Evodius of Uzala, or Orientius, listed among “the 68” (and mostly ignorant of Greek). McC’s statement, “there are no unambiguous cases of universalist teaching prior to Origen” (p. 823), should also be at least nuanced, in light of Bardaisan, Clement, the Apocalypse of Peter’s Rainer Fragment, parts of the Sibylline Oracles, and arguably of the NT, especially Paul’s letters.

Certainly, “there was a diversity of views in the early church on the scope of final salvation.” Tertullian, for instance, did not embrace apokatastasis. But my monograph is not on patristic eschatology or soteriology in general, but specifically on the doctrine of apokatastasis. Thus, I treated the theologians who supported it, and not others."

https://afkimel.wordpress.com/2016/0...art-coming-in/

[ClementofA]

compare this thread:


//www.city-data.com/forum/chris...t-believe.html

[ClementofA]

For what it's worth (quite a bit IMO) the overwhelming majority of Bible believing Christians also don't see it your way, according to the scriptures.

(A.) That's debatable. For example, both the RC & EO allow one to hope for universalism, though many don't just hope but believe it in spite of their church's position. Moreover many more would accept universalism if they weren't entirely ignorant of its positions, or were fully informed of the view. BTW, many others have rejected endless torments in favor of endless annihilation.

(B.) It may have been true through the dark & middle ages when few people had bibles of their own & wouldn't have been able to read them if they did & to speak otherwise would have meant punishment or death. Not a point that is in favor of anti-universalism.

(C.) In the early church, when they could read the Scriptures in their original languages, rather than English language KJV pro Endless Infernalism club mistranslated clones, there were, at times at least, many (or perhaps a majority) who rejected endless punishment:

(1.) "Even Augustine, the champion of eternal torment said in his day, "There are very many (imo quam plurimi, which can be translated majority) who though not denying the Holy Scriptures,
do not believe in endless torments" (Enchiria, ad Laurent. c. 29). St. Basil the Great (c. 329-379) in his De Asceticis wrote: "The mass of men (Christians) say that there is to be an end
of punishment to those who are punished." " Appendix Five

"It is in vain, then, that some, indeed very many, make moan over the eternal punishment, and perpetual, unintermitted torments of the lost, and say they do not believe it shall be so; not,
indeed, that they directly oppose themselves to Holy Scripture..." Augustine's ENCHIRIDION, Chs. 97-122

The context of the Augustine (c. 354-430 AD) quote in chapters 111 & 112 includes fallen angels & implies their ultimate salvation.

(2.) "St. Basil the Great (c. 329-379) in his De Asceticis wrote: "The mass of men (Christians) say that there is to be an end of punishment to those who are punished." "(The Ascetic Works
of St. Basil, pp.329-30...Conc. 14 De. *** judic)." Universalism and the Salvation of Satan

"...many people...adhere to the conception of the end of punishment..." (Basil)

(Basil’s short Regulae for his monks, 267 (PG 31,1264,30–1265,47) & by Symeon Metaphrastes, Or. 14 De iudicio 3,551–552. As quoted & cited in Ramelli, The Christian Doctrine of Apokatastasis, p.352).

If there is an end of punishment to those punished, then what is left but universal salvation, even of devils?

(3) John Chrysostom (c. 349-407 A.D.) "There are many men...thinking that hell is...temporary, not eternal..." (Homilies on Second Thessalonians 3 (NPNF 1 13:384)).


(4.) "St. Jerome (c. 342-420 A.D.), the author of the Vulgate Latin Bible...writes: "I know that most persons understand by the story of Nineveh and its King, the ultimate forgiveness of the devil
and all rational creatures." The Church Fathers on Universalism

Jerome says:

"I know that many people interpret the king of Nineveh as the devil, saying that he, at the end of the world (on the grounds that no rational creature made by God should perish), descending from his pride, would repent, and be restored to his former place." [Commentary on Jonah 3:6-9] https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bits...pdf?sequence=1

Whether or not the reference to Ninevah is a misrepresentation by Jerome against his opponents, such as Origen, is unknown. What is known is that Origen (c. 184-254 AD) based his doctrine of universalism on the Scriptures, his favorite passage being 1 Cor.15:28:

"This final phrase is a clear reference to 1Cor 15:28, Origen’s and Nyssen’s favourite passage in support of the apokatastasis doctrine.34" (page 15)

"The eventual submission of humanity to God is a reference to Paul’s eschatological revelation in 1Cor 15:24–28, which is also a very universalistic passage, concluding with the presence of God as “all in all.” This will be one of the favourite passages of Origen in support of the doctrine of apokatastasis." (page 94)

"Thus, at the end of all aeons, in the eventual apokatastasis, all will come to be, no longer in any aeon, but in God the Trinity, and in turn God will be “all in all.” The meaning of this Pauline sentence (1Cor 15:28, Origen’s favourite passage in defence of apokatastasis) is explained especially in Princ. 3,6,2–3. Here, Origen first deduces the definitive eviction of evil from the presence of God “all in all,” given that it is impossible to admit that God may be found in evil, as I have already pointed out; then, he examines:

" "What is this “all” that God will be “in all”? […] It means that God will be “all” even in every individual creature. And God will be “all” in these creatures in the sense that whatever the rational intellect, freed from any dirtiness of sin and purified from any taint of evil, will be able to perceive, grasp and think, all this will be God […], and so God will be all for this intellect […], because evil will not exist any more: for such intellect, God, untouched by evil, is all. One who is always in the Good and for whom God is all, will no longer wish to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil […] After removing every sense of evil, only he who is the sole good God will become all for the creature returned to a state of soundness and purity […] and not only in few or in many, but in all God will be all, when at last there will be no more death, nor death’s sting, nor evil, most definitely: then God will truly be “all in all.” " " (page 168)

Ilaria Ramelli, The Christian Doctrine of Apokatastasis: A Critical Assessment from the New Testament to Eriugena (Brill, 2013. 890 pp.)

https://books.google.ca/books?id=YfG...page&q&f=false

Scholars directory, with list of publications:

Ilaria L.E. Ramelli - ISNS Scholars Directory

>Believers and Supporters of Christian Universalism

[Vf6cruiser]

No amount of greek or latin terms can conjure up all being saved. If it were true Jesus would have said so. At the end of the Trib Jesus separates the wheat from the tares........clearly a judgment on the spot. The premise is wishful thinking only.....