Author Topic: Universalists on Wiki--articles being modified to deny UR  (Read 1242 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

HTaft

  • Guest
Universalists on Wiki--articles being modified to deny UR
« on: December 31, 2010, 04:48:46 PM »
All of the wikipedia articles with connections to UR have been modified in the last two weeks to throw doubt on Origen, Clement of Alexandria and more ever being universalist and generally making it seem that these early influential church fathers were not universalists. I became suspicious after noting all of these articles had all been modified since the middle of December (tis month). Are these modification genuine or is this someone tampering do you think? I have read the articles on these early universalists many times and couldn't believe what I was reading!

Can anyone offer some explanations or opinions. I am very confused now!

Paul Hazelwood

  • Guest
Re: Universalists on Wiki--articles being modified to deny UR
« Reply #1 on: December 31, 2010, 05:35:07 PM »
All of the wikipedia articles with connections to UR have been modified in the last two weeks to throw doubt on Origen, Clement of Alexandria and more ever being universalist and generally making it seem that these early influential church fathers were not universalists. I became suspicious after noting all of these articles had all been modified since the middle of December (tis month). Are these modification genuine or is this someone tampering do you think? I have read the articles on these early universalists many times and couldn't believe what I was reading!

Can anyone offer some explanations or opinions. I am very confused now!

It is because wiki pedia is a poor reference for accuracy in general too many people can modify a wiki article.

HTaft

  • Guest
Re: Universalists on Wiki--articles being modified to deny UR
« Reply #2 on: December 31, 2010, 05:45:59 PM »
These modification all refer to an article by Frederick W Norris on Origen and stating that

Quote
It is now known that Origen did not believe in the fullest form of Universalism or Universal reconciliation that the devil himself would be reconciled. Origen explicitly denied this. Origen may not have strongly believed in Universal reconciliation at all. Frederick W. Norris in the article on Apocatastasis in The Westminster handbook to Origen (2004) writes that "As far as we can tell, therefore, Origen never decided to stress exclusive salvation or universal salvation, to the strict exclusion of either case."

I don;t know who this Norris is but it goes further to say that the UR of Gregory of Nyssa and His sister is disputed! I don;t get it. I've read some quotes of Gregory of Nyssa on here that seem pretty universalist.

I am very confused. Who is this Norris? :sigh:

Paul Hazelwood

  • Guest
Re: Universalists on Wiki--articles being modified to deny UR
« Reply #3 on: December 31, 2010, 05:54:17 PM »
These modification all refer to an article by Frederick W Norris on Origen and stating that

Quote
It is now known that Origen did not believe in the fullest form of Universalism or Universal reconciliation that the devil himself would be reconciled. Origen explicitly denied this. Origen may not have strongly believed in Universal reconciliation at all. Frederick W. Norris in the article on Apocatastasis in The Westminster handbook to Origen (2004) writes that "As far as we can tell, therefore, Origen never decided to stress exclusive salvation or universal salvation, to the strict exclusion of either case."

I don;t know who this Norris is but it goes further to say that the UR of Gregory of Nyssa and His sister is disputed! I don;t get it. I've read some quotes of Gregory of Nyssa on here that seem pretty universalist.

I am very confused. Who is this Norris? :sigh:


Have no idea who Norris is, but your confusion is caused by the fact that a wikipedia site can be modified by just about anyone and if the information is bogus it may not get changed back for a long time, perhaps never.


Here is an excerpt from the "About" section of wikipedia.

Quote
Wikipedia is written collaboratively by largely anonymous Internet volunteers who write without pay. Anyone with Internet access can write and make changes to Wikipedia articles (except in certain cases where editing is restricted to prevent disruption or vandalism). Users can contribute anonymously, under a pseudonym, or with their real identity,


Wikipedia cannot be readily trusted as an authoritative source of information on anything, that is why for the most part wikipedia is stupid if someone is linking to it to try to prove something. 


Online jabcat

  • Admin
  • *
  • Posts: 9087
  • SINNER SAVED BY GRACE
Re: Universalists on Wiki--articles being modified to deny UR
« Reply #4 on: December 31, 2010, 05:59:43 PM »
These modification all refer to an article by Frederick W Norris on Origen and stating that

Quote
It is now known that Origen did not believe in the fullest form of Universalism or Universal reconciliation that the devil himself would be reconciled. Origen explicitly denied this. Origen may not have strongly believed in Universal reconciliation at all. Frederick W. Norris in the article on Apocatastasis in The Westminster handbook to Origen (2004) writes that "As far as we can tell, therefore, Origen never decided to stress exclusive salvation or universal salvation, to the strict exclusion of either case."

I don;t know who this Norris is but it goes further to say that the UR of Gregory of Nyssa and His sister is disputed! I don;t get it. I've read some quotes of Gregory of Nyssa on here that seem pretty universalist.

I am very confused. Who is this Norris? :sigh:

H, if you have accurate knowledge and information, I'd suggest you go into Wiki and correct the errors.  I've done it once before, and it's very easy.  An ET'er can go in and put anything they want in there, spouting their doctrine.  If you've got the goods, share them!   :2c:

HTaft

  • Guest
Re: Universalists on Wiki--articles being modified to deny UR
« Reply #5 on: December 31, 2010, 06:04:08 PM »
Thank you for answering again. Has anyone here read this article--included in a book called the Westminster Handbook on Origen? I'm searchign the web for reputable sources on Origen's works so I can safely ignore these changes on Wiki. Still, it is a deep shame because others reading it will now dismiss UR altogether. The tempering/modifications are very cleverly done!

ETA: Unfortunaly I don't have that knowledge and have no idea who this Noris is or what he has said that would allow someone to make these changes etc. Seriously, have a look at the articles on Universal Reconciliation, Origen, Clement and even the list of early universalists! Someone has been VERY busy this December!

Online jabcat

  • Admin
  • *
  • Posts: 9087
  • SINNER SAVED BY GRACE
Re: Universalists on Wiki--articles being modified to deny UR
« Reply #6 on: December 31, 2010, 06:47:56 PM »
Thank you for answering again. Has anyone here read this article--included in a book called the Westminster Handbook on Origen? I'm searchign the web for reputable sources on Origen's works so I can safely ignore these changes on Wiki. Still, it is a deep shame because others reading it will now dismiss UR altogether. The tempering/modifications are very cleverly done!

ETA: Unfortunaly I don't have that knowledge and have no idea who this Noris is or what he has said that would allow someone to make these changes etc. Seriously, have a look at the articles on Universal Reconciliation, Origen, Clement and even the list of early universalists! Someone has been VERY busy this December!

I will look.  Again, though, ANYONE can go into Wiki and make changes.  I could go on there today and say Origin was communist dictator of an island country in the 1960's (oh wait, that would be Castro  :laughing7:) - anyway, you get my point.  Or you can sign in there today and make some changes that say something more accurate about Origin.  Or whatever Noris said, if you or I have evidence that his statements are inaccurate, we can just go in and delete it.  Anyway,  :2c: and I'll look in a bit.

Quaesitor

  • Guest
Re: Universalists on Wiki--articles being modified to deny UR
« Reply #7 on: December 31, 2010, 07:09:53 PM »
Thank you for answering again. Has anyone here read this article--included in a book called the Westminster Handbook on Origen? I'm searchign the web for reputable sources on Origen's works so I can safely ignore these changes on Wiki. Still, it is a deep shame because others reading it will now dismiss UR altogether. The tempering/modifications are very cleverly done!

ETA: Unfortunaly I don't have that knowledge and have no idea who this Noris is or what he has said that would allow someone to make these changes etc. Seriously, have a look at the articles on Universal Reconciliation, Origen, Clement and even the list of early universalists! Someone has been VERY busy this December!

I will look.  Again, though, ANYONE can go into Wiki and make changes.  I could go on there today and say Origin was communist dictator of an island country in the 1960's (oh wait, that would be Castro  :laughing7:) - anyway, you get my point.  Or you can sign in there today and make some changes that say something more accurate about Origin.  Or whatever Noris said, if you or I have evidence that his statements are inaccurate, we can just go in and delete it.  Anyway,  :2c: and I'll look in a bit.

Then Wikipedia is an useless source in all disputed matters?

Online jabcat

  • Admin
  • *
  • Posts: 9087
  • SINNER SAVED BY GRACE
Re: Universalists on Wiki--articles being modified to deny UR
« Reply #8 on: December 31, 2010, 07:57:11 PM »
I actually use Wiki a lot, but really, you can not always be sure if the information is correct.  For general-type info I think it can be useful, i.e., how many widgets were made last year at X factory, etc.;  but anything you want to "bet your life on", I'd check other sources.

Little example, the only thing I've changed on there (although from today's posts here, I make some others soon  :laughing7:).  Anyway, I was reading about the Christian girl band Zoe Girl on Wiki, and it said "Zoe is greek for eternal life and that's what the group sings about".  I changed it to "Zoe is greek for life, and they sing about that life in Christ" ( or something to that effect).

Either a whole lot of trust, or a whole lot of discernment/skepticism is involved IMO. 

Offline micah7:9

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 5963
  • Gender: Male
  • Mic 7:8 Thou dost not rejoice over me, O mine ene
Re: Universalists on Wiki--articles being modified to deny UR
« Reply #9 on: December 31, 2010, 08:21:32 PM »
I only use Wiki if Im curious about actors, singers, etc. just about anything Im curious about other than something serious, like THE WORD OF GOD!  :happy3:
Mic 7:8  Thou dost not rejoice over me, O mine enemy, When I have fallen, I have risen, When I sit in darkness Jehovah is a light to me.

Paul Hazelwood

  • Guest
Re: Universalists on Wiki--articles being modified to deny UR
« Reply #10 on: December 31, 2010, 08:34:01 PM »
Thank you for answering again. Has anyone here read this article--included in a book called the Westminster Handbook on Origen? I'm searchign the web for reputable sources on Origen's works so I can safely ignore these changes on Wiki. Still, it is a deep shame because others reading it will now dismiss UR altogether. The tempering/modifications are very cleverly done!

ETA: Unfortunaly I don't have that knowledge and have no idea who this Noris is or what he has said that would allow someone to make these changes etc. Seriously, have a look at the articles on Universal Reconciliation, Origen, Clement and even the list of early universalists! Someone has been VERY busy this December!

I will look.  Again, though, ANYONE can go into Wiki and make changes.  I could go on there today and say Origin was communist dictator of an island country in the 1960's (oh wait, that would be Castro  :laughing7:) - anyway, you get my point.  Or you can sign in there today and make some changes that say something more accurate about Origin.  Or whatever Noris said, if you or I have evidence that his statements are inaccurate, we can just go in and delete it.  Anyway,  :2c: and I'll look in a bit.

Then Wikipedia is an useless source in all disputed matters?


Yes, My wife could not use wikipedia as a reference for any of her college papers for that reason.

  Although as jabcat said, for general information is has its uses, for instance I came across several Christian heavy metal bands I  had never heard of by using it.


Edit:  I guess a good example with this would be that if I needed to try to prove that X band was a Christ centered band, I could not rely on the bands name being in a Christian band list on wikipedia as proper evidence for that.


« Last Edit: December 31, 2010, 08:44:10 PM by Paul Hazelwood »

Online jabcat

  • Admin
  • *
  • Posts: 9087
  • SINNER SAVED BY GRACE
Re: Universalists on Wiki--articles being modified to deny UR
« Reply #11 on: January 01, 2011, 12:23:42 AM »
Someone(s) will likely go in later and make [ET] changes;

Anyone please feel free to keep a watch and make sure information presented is not unduly/inaccurately biased against the Victorious Gospel of Jesus Christ.   This link  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universalism#Christianity   as of 12/31/2010, appears as;

"In Christianity, Universalism refers to the belief that all humans may be saved through Jesus Christ and eventually come to harmony in God's kingdom if they choose to repent.[citation needed] This salvation is expressed as being offered not only to the Jew, but also to the Gentile (Romans 1:16,Romans 9:24-25,Revelation 7:9).

The Greek term apokatastasis has been related to Christian Universalism. Additionally the term Catholic is derived from the Greek word katholikos, which means universal. The Catholic Church is universal in the sense that it embraces individuals "from every race, nation, language, and people", but does not Christian Universalism as a sanctioned doctrine.

The Universalist historian George T. Knight (and others) contend that Universalism was a widely held view among theologians in Early Christianity and that in the first five or six centuries of Christianity, there were six known theological schools, of which four (Alexandria, Antioch, Caesarea, and Edessa) were universalist, one (Ephesus) accepted conditional immortality, and one (Carthage or Rome) taught the endless punishment of the lost.[1] The two major theologians opposing it were Tertullian and Augustine. A case can be made that Gregory of Nyssa was a Christian Universalist in the 18th Century sense.[2]

Christian Universalist ideas are also documented in 17th-century England and 18th-century Europe and America. Gerrard Winstanley (1648), Richard Coppin (1652), Jane Leade (1697), and then George de Benneville in America, taught that God would grant all human beings salvation. Those in America teaching this became known as the Universalists.[3] Today the Unitarian Universalist Association is a liberal denomination, with doctrinal teaching that all are already saved, including those of other faiths. However, there are many who are not affiliated with the UUA who hold to the belief of Ultimate Reconciliation/The Victorious Gospel of Jesus Christ (Biblical Universalism) who believe all will be saved through the redeeming blood of Jesus Christ, but that not all are saved in this age; rather, each in his own order. (I Cor. 15:23)" - credit, wikipedia 12/31/2010

------------------------------------

and in this link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_reconciliation#21st_Century , as of 12/31/2010; 

"In theology, universal salvation , also called universal reconciliation (in context, simply universalism) is the doctrine that all immortal souls — because of the love and mercy of God — will ultimately be 'reconciled' with God.[1]

Universal salvation may be related to the perception of a problem of Hell, standing opposed to ideas such as everlasting torment in Hell, but may also include a period of finite punishment similar to a state of purgatory.[2] Believers in universal reconciliation may support the view that while there may be a real "Hell" of some kind, it is neither a place of endless suffering nor a place where the spirits of human beings are ultimately 'annihilated' after enduring the just amount of divine retribution.[2] The concept of "reconciliation" is related to the concept of Christian salvation — i.e., salvation from spiritual and eventually physical death — such that the more term, "universal salvation," is functionally equivalent. Univeralists espouse various theological beliefs concerning the process or state of salvation, but all adhere to the view that salvation history concludes with the reconciliation of the entire human race to God. Many adherents[who?] assert that the suffering and crucifixion of Jesus Christ constitute the mechanism that provides redemption for all humanity and atonement for all sins.

Universalism is distinct from modern Unitarian Universalism, which is a syncretic religion that does not recognize Jesus of Nazareth as the unique savior of humankind, although the latter is historically derived from a now-defunct Christian denomination which did affirm that all people would eventually come to salvation through Christ.

A nontraditional alternative to universal reconciliation is the doctrine of annihilationism, often in combination with Christian conditionalism.

[edit] History
The most recent academic survey of the history of Universal Salvation is by Richard Bauckham. He outlines the history thus:

"The history of the doctrine of universal salvation (or apokatastasis) is a remarkable one. Until the nineteenth century almost all Christian theologians taught the reality of eternal torment in hell. Here and there, outside the theological mainstream, were some who believed that the wicked would be finally annihilated (in its commonest form. this is the doctrine of 'conditional immortality').[3] Even fewer were the advocates of universal salvation, though these few included same major theologians of the early church. Eternal punishment was firmly asserted in official creeds and confessions of the churches.[2] It must have seemed as indispensable a part of universal Christian belief as the doctrines of the Trinity and the incarnation. Since 1800 this situation has entirely changed, and no traditional Christian doctrine has been so widely abandoned as that of eternal punishment.[2] Its advocates among theologians today must be fewer than ever before. The alternative interpretation of hell as annihilation seems to have prevailed even among many of the more conservative theologians.4 Among the less conservative, universal salvation, either as hope or as dogma, is now so widely accepted that many theologians assume it virtually without argument."[2]
[edit] Inaccurate sources
Some of the sources concerning Universalism, Universal reconciliation and apokatastasis contain erroneous historical information. For example:

Pierre Batiffol in a article translated in the Catholic Encyclopedia of 1914, cites Grétillut (sic), "Exposé de théologie systématique" Paris, "1890" (sic, 1892) and claims incorrectly that universal reconciliation "reappears at the Reformation in the writings of Hans Denk" and "is found among the Anabaptists, the Moravian Brethren, the Christadelphians, among rationalistic Protestants". These statements are in each case incorrect.
Heinrich Adolf Köstlin, in the "Realencyklopädie für protestantische Theologie" (Leipzig, 1896), I, 617, article "Apokatastasis", names Diodorus of Tarsus and Theodore of Mopsuestia as having also held the doctrine of apokatastasis, but cites no passage in support of his statement.
The Universalist historian John Wesley Hanson (1899) considered that the conversion of the Roman Emperor Constantine to Christianity and the legalization of the religion in 313 gave increasing influence to the Roman theological school, which taught eternal torment of the wicked. According to Universalist historian John Wesley Hanson (1899)[4] the centralization of the Christian Church under Roman imperial authority and the rise of Latin translations of the Bible instead of the Greek original of the New Testament were major factors in the decline of Alexandrian Christian Universalism.[5] Hanson also claimed that Saint Augustine's rise to prominence as a theologian in the 5th century was a further blow to Christian Universalism. Augustine created a systematic theology emphasizing original sin, the ontological separation of man and God, predestination, and the damnation of sinners and non-Christians to eternal punishment. Augustine's ideas became a major part of the theological foundation of Western Christianity. Despite his promotion of the idea of eternal hell, Augustine did however admit that many Christians believed in universal reconciliation and he included them among the orthodox.[6]
The Universalist historian George T. Knight's article in the Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge (1911) includes, per Bauckham's studies, figures who may have simply believed in apokatastasis in the Jewish sense used by the apostle Peter. Knight claimed a List of early Christian universalists during the first five or six centuries of Christian history, four of theological schools in the East taught Universalism in combination with the belief in the immortal soul and purification of soul through a form of purgatory.[7]



[edit] Early Christianity
 
Origen, traditionally considered a 3rd century proponent of Universal Reconciliation[edit] Origen (c.185 – 254)
Origen believed in ultimate reconciliation, and for the first several hundred years of the church, although he was censured for some of his beliefs, universalism was not one of them.

As Christianity became an institutionalized religious system increasingly controlled by sanctioned officials, Origen and a form of apocatastasis were condemned in 544 Patriarch Mennas of Constantinople and the condemnation was ratified in 553 by the Fifth Ecumenical Council. Apocatastasis was considered, in the 19th Century[who?], to refer to Origen's doctrine of Universal Reconciliation. While it applied to a number of doctrines regarding universal salvation, it referred to a return, both to a location and to an original condition. Many heteroclite views became associated with Origen, and the 15 anathemas against him attributed to the council condemn a form of apocatastasis along with the pre-existence of the soul, animism, a heterodox Christology, and a denial of real and lasting resurrection of the body. Some authorities believe these anathemas belong to an earlier local synod.[8][9][10] The Fifth Ecumenical Council has been contested as being an official and authorized Ecumenical Council, since it was established not by the Pope, but rather by the Emperor, because of the Pope's resistance to it. The Fifth Ecumenical Council addressed what was called "The Three Chapters"[11] and was against a form of Origenism which had nothing to do with Origen and Origenist views. Popes Vigilius, Pelagius I (556-61), Pelagius II (579-90), and Gregory the Great (590-604) were only aware that the Fifth Council specifically dealt with the Three Chapters and they made no mention of Origenism or Universalism, nor spoke as if they knew of its condemnation, even though Gregory the Great was opposed to the belief of universalism.[12]

The Fifth Ecumenical Council has been contested as being an official and authorized Ecumenical Council because it was established not by the Pope, but the Emperor Justinian due to the Pope's resistance to it. It should also be noted that the Fifth Ecumenical Council addressed what was called "The Three Chapters" [13] and was against a form of Origenism which truly had nothing to do with Origen and Origenist views. In fact, Popes Vigilius, Pelagius I (556–61), Pelagius II (579–90), and Gregory the Great(590–604) were only aware the Fifth Council specifically dealt with the Three Chapters and make no mention of Origenism or Universalism, nor spoke as if they knew of its condemnation even though Gregory the Great was opposed to the belief of universalism. 1914 [http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11306b.htm CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Origen and Origenism --->

[edit] Alexandria
The most important such school was the Didascalium in Alexandria, Egypt, which was founded by Saint Pantaenus ca. 190 C.E.[14] Alexandria was the center of learning and intellectual discourse in the ancient Mediterranean world, and was the theological center of gravity of Christianity prior to the rise of the imperial Roman Church.[15][16]

[edit] Clement of Alexandria (c.150 - c.215)
George T. Knight (1911) claimed that various theologians, including Clement of Alexandria and Origen in the 3rd century, St. Gregory of Nyssa in the 4th century expressed universalist positions in early Christianity.[citation needed]

[edit] Gregory of Nyssa (c.335 – 390s)
Traditional and modern Greek orthodox scholars dispute Pierre Batiffol and George T. Knight's claim that Saint Gregory of Nyssa and Saint Macrina the Younger, who were brother and sister, believed or taught universal salvation. Gregory of Nyssa was declared "the father of fathers" by the seventh ecumenical council.[17][18][19][20][21]

[edit] 7th Century - Isaac of Nineveh
One of the documented teachers of universal salvation is St. Isaac the Syrian in the 7th century,[22]

[edit] Middle Ages
The Universalist John Wesley Hanson claimed that even after eternal hell became the normative position of the Church, there were still some Christian thinkers during the Middle Ages who embraced Universalist ideas. In his Schaff article George T. Knight stated that "maybe" Johannes Scotus Eriugena, Johannes Tauler, Blessed John of Ruysbroeck and Blessed Julian of Norwich had Universalist leanings. No source or evidence is given for these claims. (source?)

[edit] 16th Century - Reformation era
If ideas about the salvation of all souls after purgatory existed in early Christianity they did not resurface in the Reformation, where the main controversy was between the majority who believed in the immortal soul and eternal punishment in hell such as Calvin and a minority, including Luther, who believed in soul sleep. Joachim Vadian and Johann Kessler accused the German Anabaptist Hans Denck of universal salvation, but he denied it, and recent research suggests that this is not so.[23] [24]

The Reformation shows no direct trace of renewed interest in the theological doctrine of the Universal Salvation of all souls. In Universalist literature a German Anabaptist Hans Denck has been commonly cited as a universalist, but recent research suggests that "probably he was not".[25] Hans Hut was deeply influenced by Denck but there is no evidence that he either spread the doctrine of universalism.

[edit] 17th Century
The 17th Century saw the first verifiable believers in universal salvation since Origen, if Origen did in fact believe in universal reconciliation:

Gerrard Winstanley, The Mysterie of God Concerning the Whole Creation, Mankinde (London, 1648);
Richard Coppin A hint of the glorious mysterie of the divine teachings (1649) defended at Worcester Assizes, 1652.
Jane Leade A Revelation of the Everlasting Gospel Message (1697)
Jeremy White (chaplain) chaplain to Cromwell, wrote a book, entitled, The Restoration of all things, which was published after his death (1707) published posthumously, 1712.
[edit] 18th Century (Britain)
George Whitfield in a letter to John Wesley says that Peter Boehler, a bishop in the Moravian Church, had privately confessed in a letter that "all the damned souls would hereafter be brought out of hell"[26] William Law in An Humble, Earnest, and Affectionate Address to the Clergy (1761).[27] an Anglican, and James Relly, a Welsh Methodist, were other significant 18th century Protestant leaders who believed in Universalism.

In 1843 the Universalist Rev J. M. Day published an article "Was John Wesley a Restorationist?" in the Universalist Union magazine suggesting that John Wesley (d.1791) had made a private conversion to Universalism in his last years but kept it secret. Biographers of Wesley reject this claim.

[edit] 18th Century (America)
Universalism was brought to the American colonies in the early eighteenth century by the English-born physician George de Benneville, attracted by Pennsylvania's Quaker tolerance. North American universalism was active and organized. This was seen as a threat by the orthodox, Calvinist Congregationalists of New England such as Jonathan Edwards, who wrote prolifically against universalist teachings and preachers.[28] John Murray (1741–1815)[29] and Elhanan Winchester (1751–1797) are usually credited as founders of the modern Universalist movement and founding teachers of universal salvation.[30] Early American Universalists such as Elhanan Winchester continued to preach the punishment of souls prior to eventual salvation.

[edit] 19th Century
The 19th Century was the heyday of Christian Universalism and the Universalist Church of America.

[edit] 20th Century
The Universalist Church of America merged with the American Unitarian Association in 1961 to form the Unitarian Universalists.

Adolph E. Knoch and William Barclay were universalists. In 1919 the Swiss F. L. Alexandre Freytag led a breakway group of International Bible Students Association (the forerunner of Jehovah's Witnesses).

[edit] 21st Century
Christian or Biblical Universalism continues apart from Unitarian Universalism.

In 2004 the Protestant bishop Carlton Pearson received notoriety when he was officially declared a heretic by the Joint College of African-American Pentecostal Bishops. Bishop Pearson, who had attended Oral Roberts University, a conservative Protestant college, formally declared his belief in the doctrine of universal salvation. His church, called the New Dimensions Church, adopted this doctrine,[31] and in 2008, the congregation was merged into All Souls Unitarian Church in Tulsa, Oklahoma, one of the largest Unitarian Universalist congregations in the world.[32] His version of universalism differs from Ultimate Reconciliation (Victorious Gospel of Jesus Christ) believers, who stress salvation through the cross of Christ - only some in this age, the rest later - each in his own order. I Cor. 15:23

In 2005, Cardinal Murphy O'Connor, the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Westminster, expressed his hope that Protestants and non-believers are destined for heaven.[33] and expressed his personal hope that he would be surprised in heaven.[34]

On May 17, 2007, the Christian Universalist Association was founded at the historic Universalist National Memorial Church in Washington, D.C.[35] This was a move to distinguish the modern Christian Universalist movement from Unitarian Universalism, and to promote ecumenical unity among Christian believers in universal reconciliation.

In 2008 the Russian Orthodox bishop Hilarion Alfeyev of Vienna, in his presentation at the First World Apostolic Congress of Divine Mercy (held in Rome in 2008), argued that God's mercy is so great that He does not condemn sinners to everlasting punishment. The Orthodox understanding of hell, said Bishop Hilarion, corresponds roughly to the Roman Catholic notion of purgatory.[36]

Modern Bible-believing teachers of ultimate reconciliation include Thomas Talbott, Stephen E. Jones[citation needed], J. Preston Eby[citation needed], Bill and Elaine Cook[citation needed] and Gary Amirault (tentmaker.org)."  credit wikipedia 12/31/2010

« Last Edit: January 01, 2011, 12:37:54 AM by jabcat »

Offline WhiteWings

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 13057
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahshua heals
    • My sites
Re: Universalists on Wiki--articles being modified to deny UR
« Reply #12 on: January 01, 2011, 11:34:02 AM »
Hi Tenties!
I hope the New Year brought you all dual PC screens. Mine is a bit wobbly :)

I see no problem in the fact that all UR articles got changed in a short time span. It's very likely someone found a quote in a book and decided to paste it in every UR article. Repeating a source a 1000 times is still one source.
The wiki author likely quoted correctly. But does that matter if we can make up our own mind on the quotes of Origen?

Quote
Frederick W. Norris in the article on Apocatastasis in The Westminster handbook to Origen (2004) writes that "As far as we can tell, therefore, Origen never decided to stress exclusive salvation or universal salvation, to the strict exclusion of either case."
Then the claim should be we don't know if Origen believed in UR. The same Wiki also speaks of not the most strict UR form including the devil. If Origen was a present ET he wouldn't have written all but one, but all but 90%.

Note that even Augustine admitted that many at his time believed in UR and he didn't fully reject that view. Neither were his views on the fate of the doomed as what they are today. According to Augustine living in hell is to be preferred above none existence....
Maybe he didn't believed in a pool of liver instead a pool of fire? :)

It's funny how easily ETs fall in their own swords of hatred....

Quote
Many heteroclite views became associated with Origen, and the 15 anathemas against him attributed to the council condemn a form of apocatastasis along with the pre-existence of the soul, animism, a heterodox Christology, and a denial of real and lasting resurrection of the body. Some authorities believe these anathemas belong to an earlier local synod.[10][11][12] The Fifth Ecumenical Council has been contested as being an official and authorized Ecumenical Council, since it was established not by the Pope, but rather by the Emperor, because of the Pope's resistance to it. The Fifth Ecumenical Council addressed what was called "The Three Chapters"[13] and was against a form of Origenism which had nothing to do with Origen and Origenist views. Popes Vigilius, Pelagius I (556-61), Pelagius II (579-90), and Gregory the Great (590-604) were only aware that the Fifth Council specifically dealt with the Three Chapters and they made no mention of Origenism or Universalism, nor spoke as if they knew of its condemnation, even though Gregory the Great was opposed to the belief of universalism.
Why did the council not mention the UR believes of Origen? Even the pope was against UR. So an easy way to add a 16th anathema. Rebeling priests?
Or was Origen really not believing in UR?
Quote
HT,
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11306b.htm
"We think that the goodness of God, through the mediation of Christ, will bring all creatures to one and the same end" (De Principiis I.6.1-3)"
The above is a strong UR quote unless it means all end in hell. Can I conclude the whole council was pro UR? How many of the pope's buddies were in that counsel? If many I would say the counsel had the same view as the pope (pro UR)
I wouldn't be suprised if the early RCC was more UR that that of the dark ages. RCC seems to become more pro UR again.

http://home.online.nl/spamfree/index.html?page=The_prevailing_doctrine.htm
Then download the whole book by clicking the top left link.
Also read: http://home.online.nl/spamfree/index.html?page=The_Origin_and_History_of_the_Doctrine_of_Endless_Punishment_.htm
1 Timothy 2:3-4  ...God our Savior;  Who will have all men to be saved...
John 12:47  And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
Romans 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous ...

Offline WhiteWings

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 13057
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahshua heals
    • My sites
Re: Universalists on Wiki--articles being modified to deny UR
« Reply #13 on: January 01, 2011, 11:50:58 AM »
The Universalist historian George T. Knight (and others) contend that Universalism was a widely held view among theologians in Early Christianity and that in the first five or six centuries of Christianity, there were six known theological schools, of which four (Alexandria, Antioch, Caesarea, and Edessa) were universalist, one (Ephesus) accepted conditional immortality, and one (Carthage or Rome) taught the endless punishment of the lost.[1] The two major theologians opposing it were Tertullian and Augustine. A case can be made that Gregory of Nyssa was a Christian Universalist in the 18th Century sense.[2]
"Gregory adopts the doctrine of the final restoration of all things. The plan of redemption is in his
view absolutely universal, and embraces all spiritual beings. Good is the only positive reality; evil is
the negative, the non-existent, and must finally abolish itself, because it is not of God. Unbelievers
must indeed pass through a second death, in order to be purged from the filthiness of the flesh. But
God does not give them up, for they are his property, spiritual natures allied to him. His love, which
draws pure souls easily and without pain to itself, becomes a purifying fire to all who cleave to the
earthly, till the impure element is driven off. As all comes forth from God, so must all return into him
at last." "Universal salvation (including Satan) was clearly taught by Gregory of Nyssa, a profound
thinker of the school of Origen."
In his comments on the Psalms, Gregory says: "By which God shows that neither is sin from
eternity nor will it last to eternity. Wickedness being thus destroyed, and its imprint being left in none,
all shall be fashioned after Christ, and in all that one character shall shine, which originally was
imprinted on our nature." "Sin, whose end is extinction, and a change to nothingness from evil to a
state of blessedness." On Ps. lvii: I: "Sin is like a plant on a house top, not rooted, not sown, not
ploughed in in the restoration to goodness of all things, it passes away and vanishes. So not even a
trace of the evil which now abounds in us, shall remain, etc." If sin be not cured here its cure will be
effected hereafter.
And God's threats are that "through fear we may be trained to avoid evil; but by
those who are more intelligent it (the judgment) is believed to be a medicine," etc. "God himself is not
really seen in wrath." "The soul which is united to sin must be set in the fire, so that that which is
unnatural and vile may be removed, consumed by the aionion fire."17 Thus the (aionion) fire was
regarded by Gregory as purifying. "If it (sin in the soul) remains (in the present life) the healing is
accomplished in the life beyond." (Orat. Catech.)
1 Timothy 2:3-4  ...God our Savior;  Who will have all men to be saved...
John 12:47  And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
Romans 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous ...

Offline WhiteWings

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 13057
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahshua heals
    • My sites
Re: Universalists on Wiki--articles being modified to deny UR
« Reply #14 on: January 01, 2011, 12:24:15 PM »
[edit] Middle Ages
The Universalist John Wesley Hanson claimed that even after eternal hell became the normative position of the Church, there were still some Christian thinkers during the Middle Ages who embraced Universalist ideas. In his Schaff article George T. Knight stated that "maybe" Johannes Scotus Eriugena, Johannes Tauler, Blessed John of Ruysbroeck and Blessed Julian of Norwich had Universalist leanings. No source or evidence is given for these claims. (source?)
The source of Knight's claim is Schaff. "....whom theologians regarded as one of the greatest teachers on Church History"



Hey all,
I am once again involved in debate on another forum (the same one as before) and I posted about the 6 known early theological schools. I cited Wikipedia and another Universalist site as my source but for some reason, even though this seems to be historically sound and accurate, those reading will not accept that these schools even existed. They say I need to post at least 3 non-biased (aka non-Universalist) sources that say these schools existed. The Herzog Encyclopedia Of Religious Knowledge apparently ins't enough for them. Anyone have any ideas on where I can find some non-Universalist links that would show some historical facts about these schools as evidence? It is much appreciated.




My friend: if Schaff-Hertzog is not accepted, two or three other sources will not be either. Further:  there is zero information that would indicate either Philip Schaff or Johann Herzog believed in, or leaned to, the restitution of all things. If so, I would most certainly appreciate the information (not that it would change the scholarship).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schaff-Herzog_Encyclopedia_of_Religious_Knowledge

Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia Of Religious Knowledge

http://www.ccel.org/s/schaff/encyc/encyc13/htm/TOC.htm

Universalism: The Majority Belief Of The Early Church

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/encyc12/Page_96.html

"Under the instruction of these great teachers many other theologians believed in universal salvation; and indeed the whole Eastern Church until after 500 A.D. were inclined to it."

"In the West this doctrine had fewer adherents and was never accepted by the Church at large. In the first five or six centuries of Christianity there were six known theological schools, of which four (Alexandria , Antioch, Cæsarea, and Edessa or Nisibis) were Universalist, one (Ephesus) accepted conditional immortality; one (Carthage or Rome) taught endless punishment of the wicked. Other theological schools are mentioned as founded by Universalists, but their actual doctrine on this subject is unknown. Doederlein says that "In proportion as any man was eminent in learning in Christian antiquity, the more did he cherish and defend the hope of the termination of future torments." In the dark ages Universalism almost disappeared, but in the ninth century it had one great representative, John Scotus Erigena (see Scotus Erigena, Johannes), who was the chief Christian luminary of his time. In the Middle Ages, some of the lesser mystics and probably Johann Tauler and Jan van Ruysbroeck (qq.v.), and one leading scholastic, Albertus Magnus (q.v.), were Universalists. In the times of the Reformation Universalists were found among Anabaptists, Lollards, and Protestant mystics; and later there were increasing numbers of individual believers in this doctrine in all northern European countries, including such men as Kant, Schleiermacher, Ritschl and many of his followers, Archbishop Tillotson, Tennyson, the Brownings, Wordsworth, and Coleridge.


Who Was Rev. Philip Schaff D.D.?

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2065/is_n1_v47/ai_16420083/pg_1

Career of the man whom theologians regarded as one of the greatest teachers on Church History

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9F03E5DC173EEF33A25752C2A9669D94629ED7CF

Who Was Johann J. Hertzog

http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9040271/Johann-Jakob-Herzog

Universalism: The Prevailing Doctrine

HERE

Quote
Not only are copious citations given from the ancient Universalists themselves, but abstracts and compendiums of their opinions, and testimonials as to their scholarship and saintliness, are presented from the most eminent authors who have written of them. No equal number of the church's early saints has ever received such glowing eulogies from so many scholars and critics as the ancient Universalists have extorted from such authors as Socrates, Neander, Mosheim, Huet, Dorner, Dietelmaier, Beecher, Schaff, Plumptre, Bigg, Farrar, Bunsen, Cave, Westcott, Robertson, Butler, Allen, De Pressense, Gieseler, Lardner, Hagenbach, Blunt, and others, not professed Universalists.
1 Timothy 2:3-4  ...God our Savior;  Who will have all men to be saved...
John 12:47  And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
Romans 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous ...

Offline Isaac

  • Reg
  • *
  • Posts: 11
Re: Universalists on Wiki--articles being modified to deny UR
« Reply #15 on: January 01, 2011, 03:12:17 PM »
There edit attempts are pretty desperate. Questioning, say, Gregory Nazianzen as a definite Universalist is fair enough, but Gregory of Nyssa? Clement? Origen? Come on... are they serious?

This all gets me wondering why people want to deny UR. I guess maybe it's fear and wanting to cover their bases (i.e. if ET is wrong, then we all win anyway).

HTaft

  • Guest
Re: Universalists on Wiki--articles being modified to deny UR
« Reply #16 on: January 01, 2011, 04:17:37 PM »
Thank you so much for all of the replies. I'll Look forward to looking at them in detail later. Happy New Year everyone. God keep us and bless us all and all whom we love this new year and always! :bigGrin:

Offline thinktank

  • Silver
  • *
  • Posts: 2672
Re: Universalists on Wiki--articles being modified to deny UR
« Reply #17 on: January 01, 2011, 05:08:17 PM »
It' talking about Origens beliefs and not UR. I read on another site that Origens UR beliefs were questionnable.

Offline reFORMer

  • < Moderator >
  • *
  • Posts: 1943
  • Gender: Male
  • Psalm 133
Re: Universalists on Wiki--articles being modified to deny UR
« Reply #18 on: January 02, 2011, 08:38:36 AM »
Origen castrated himself.  I don't follow him, though perhaps it would have been better if I had.  For a while I agreed with his idea that many other espouse, that the Doctrine of Universal Salvation should not be shared with pagan unbelievers or new converts.  I felt that the unity of the body and acceptance to minister among those holding other ideas was more important.  Not only did I have very little access to these other believers, I no longer am of that opinion.  I'm rather sorry I spent at least maybe 8 years keeping UR and several other areas of even basic knowledge to myself.  Seeing how short life is I  now want to rock the boat.  I hope to make a difference for having been here.  I used to share these things with only a few I felt might know me enough to give me a hearing and have some openess in themselves.  With those who have deeper commitments to other authorities than God or the Bible, like religious bureachracy, a so-called apostle, or the burnings of their own deception I discovered miracles and prophecies aren't enough to persuade them to continue studying the topic.

What I mean to say here is that these various prominent "Christians" across a couple thousand years are held as a much lesser light than Scripture by many who really want the Truth, including myself.  In studying history I was pleased to discover I'm in good company and a lot of it, but these witnesses don't determine accurate adjustment to revealed Truth for me.

Who was it on here that a while back said that for a long time he went to wiki everyday and straightened out the info concerning UR?
I went to church; but, the Church wasn't on the program!  JESUS WANTS HIS BODY BACK!!  MEET WITHOUT HUMAN HEADSHIP!!!

Online jabcat

  • Admin
  • *
  • Posts: 9087
  • SINNER SAVED BY GRACE
Re: Universalists on Wiki--articles being modified to deny UR
« Reply #19 on: January 02, 2011, 08:53:37 AM »
I'm not sure who made regular UR changes/corrections in the past.  The posts I made above were after I had gone in and made several changes.  I'm sure there's more that needed to be done, but maybe some others can look at it further.  Also, I doubt ET'ers will leave the changes made 2 days ago alone.  That's why I suggested folks may want to keep a check on it.