The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Holiness in Heaven: The Need for Purgation

Melchizedek and Bob,

I have been a bit busy with other tasks, but I am also researching and meditating on your last posts. So I will soon have a reply to both of you in the next few days.

Dave

Melchizedek and Bob,

This is my combined reply to your last posts.

The Lake of Fire is the presence of Theion, the healing, transforming life of God. It is not a place of separation from God but the actual immersion into the purifying, healing presence of God. Healing is not punitive it is restorative—and even more so it is creative, a new creation. That’s right. It is not at all what has been falsely presented in the translations. The angels (messengers of God) and the Lamb are present on the shore of the lake (limnhn, the root of which is limen, which means “harbor” and it is associated with the nearness of the shore). The Lamb is there with them in the safe harbor of the healing, transforming presence of YHWH. The Lake of Fire is not about torment (basanizo is the testing by the touchstone to determine whether the metal/object is purified), either everlasting or temporary. It is to determine whether that which is immersed into the presence of YHWH and the Lamb has been freed/purified from all that oppressed and corrupted it and is made ready for the new birth of their life that is the new creation in Jesus Christ). All that is not in the book of the life of the Lamb is brought into intimate closeness with the very source of life, YHWH and the Lamb. They are embraced by the Life, freed from all that has tormented them with fear, abandonment, nihilism and hopelessness. Then they become like little children who enter into the new creation of God.

We all live in a state of death. Our daily sustenance depends on the taking of the life of others, whether it be animals or plants. We all partake in the Babylonian systems of exploitation and oppression of the living Earth and of those who are among the least and weakest. If we do not see this then we are in profound denial about the true state of this world. The only alternative to this world of death is a world made new by a Life freely given to all. Not a life forcefully or fraudulently taken from the powerless to stave off our own inevitable deaths, but a Life freely given to all by the sole possessor of Life, YHWH and the Lamb.

Is this “automatic” is this “magic?” No, it is the very essence of agape—the love of God.

The Book of Revelation is both about the Revelation given to Jesus Christ and the revelation of Jesus Christ. The Lamb discloses the true meaning of history and defines and rewrites the history of the world. The Lamb is in complete empathetic solidarity with all those who suffer the horrors and injustices of this reality. He is the Lamb who takes all of the suffering, injustice and death away from the history of the world. He makes way for the unimpeded outpouring of the Life of YHWH into the creation to heal, transform and make new all that has been lost, tormented and killed.

There is no rapture or escape from the suffering of this world, instead there is the Lamb immersing himself into the very depths of the world’s suffering, despair and death. He takes the source of Life into the very abyss of godforsaken nothingness to transform that godforsaken place into the wellspring of God’s living waters, which fills the creation with life all bountiful. It is the faithfulness of the Lamb which goes into those depths where the faithless have fallen into and like the good shepherd will not rest until that most godless are brought into the healing presence of the safe harbor of the living presence of Theion and the Lamb. All things will be made new, all things will be written with a new story and name into the Lamb’s book of Life—the Alpha and Omega of all creation.

Dave,

My views supportive of Beck’s purgation thesis rest very little on having confidence of Revelation’s meaning. I am aware of numerous interpretations of it, but your anti-purgation one is unfamiliar, and to me seems especially contradictory to most students’ impressions of its’ dominant themes. I’m not seeing how your assertions derive from its’ text. Is there a commentary or other scholars who find in it the meaning that you do?

Bob

I think it’s time for you to defend your rejection of God’s unlimited generosity, grace, healing, and kindness.

Dave is writing about the all-sufficiency of the Lamb, the water of life freely given, the total liberation that was at the centre of Jesus’s mission, his faithfulness to his whole creation. He’s talking about the creator, the source of life, giving life in all its fulness to all without restraint. He’s showing how God behaves *exactly *how Jesus behaved – taking the pain on himself, not putting it on others, in order that they would be healed, restored, and would flourish.

Why on earth would you oppose that?

Do you honestly believe that somehow *our pain *can achieve in us something that Jesus’s death and resurrection was unable to do?

Hi Ruth,

It appears frustrating that most universalists won’t just accept your view that we experience grace’s freedom from all suffering and judgment without any conditions! I realize that you and Dave sincerely believe that this is the right view to draw from the Bible’s story. But I have already enumerated numerous passages that specify such conditions, and just now to Dave that interpretations of Revelation almost universally recognize a major theme is warning precisely of painful consequences of not meeting such conditions. I am failing to see see that you defend your view with a serious engagement of any of this substance.

My perception is that you essentially just assert that the meaning of Jesus is to contradict this broad Biblical narrative that I have defended, when as I’ve cited, Jesus himself agreed with this sobering Biblical theme. I don’t think the reason “why” most oppose what you assert is that it’s not desirable to them (I’d be thrilled to find out your view is right). I think the problem is that those who want to be faithful to Jesus perceive that you have been unable to defend your desire in light of the Bible’s narrative.

Grace be with you,
Bob

Bob

Please just answer the questions:

Ruth,

We don’t seem to be understanding each other! I just answered your first two questions as to why I reject your view that there are no conditions for experiencing God’s blessings, by pointing to my numerous citations of a whole pattern of Biblical texts that specify those conditions. I don’t know how to tell you any more clearly than that what is the reason that followers of the Biblical Christ give for reaching the beliefs that they do. ISTM the question is why you offer no answer or response to that Biblical substance (I’ve tried to be responsive to your questions; can you answer this one of mine?) On your third question: Yes, I do honestly believe that God is able to use painful experiences to test, purify, and refine us. I not only believe this is Biblical, but believe that some difficult experiences have nonetheless been growing experiences in my life.

Take a look at the life of the apostle Paul, for instance. Here was a man clearly chosen by and used of God, but his life from a human viewpoint was an absolute wreck. He suffered a LOT, but we see his response was one of joy in spite of (and in fact because of!) the suffering. God always manifests himself in His glorious power in human weakness and suffering, that is his M.O. This is why the cross is such a stumbling block!

Scripture states that Paul was given (By God, is the implication!) a demonic messenger from satan to beat on him, (The english translation is much more tame) so that he wouldn’t be filled with pride. He asked three times for God to remove this affliction from him, and God’s response was; No “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.”
Paul then says, ‘So then, I will boast most gladly about my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may reside in me.’

So, it is precisely through these (2nd Cor. 12:10) “weaknesses, insults, troubles, persecutions and difficulties” that the power of God is manifest in our lives!

Bob, It has been awhile since I’ve read it, but I think J. Preston Eby’s lake of fire series takes a similar tack; and it seems somewhat familiar from other sources as well, although I don’t recall what they are at the moment. I’m not sure that Eby takes so much an anti-purgation stance as an anti torment stance, but it’s probably worth a read.

Hi Ruth; I don’t think that he’s saying that our pain replaces something Jesus was unable to do, but rather that the experience of our process of the realization of the new life includes elements that were modeled in the death and resurrection. We share both in Christ’s death and His life; one does not come without the other. Also, see my other post here on the apostle Paul for additional example.

I’m SO confused!! :exclamation: :confused: :blush: :blush: :blush: :blush: :blush: :blush: :blush: :blush: :blush: :blush:

And NOW, very, very afraid. :frowning: :cry:

Hi Mel,

This is lifted directly from one of Bob’s earlier posts in this thread.

Perhaps one could say that the cross created ‘salvation,’ if this meant something like it ‘offers’ it or establishes it “in principle.” **But my preference would be to say that the cross did not “create salvation” in that no one is automatically saved by the cross apart from the appropriate response to the offer of God’s grace, and that it is Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, exaltation, and his facilitation of the Holy Spirit’s work that makes salvation possible. **If the past event of the cross alone created our salvation, then wouldn’t everyone would already be saved? My sense is that God will secure everyone’s salvation, but that this is securely worked out over time, and the Bible’s assumption is that we play a part in it as we choose to respond to God’s grace. In other words, I think the NT is consistent with the OT in looking for an obedient and righteous response of faith to the always unmerited love and grace of God. Thus I do think saying that Jesus and the cross provide the “path to salvation” is appropriate, since the Bible suggests that experiencing salvation’s wholeness involves following his example and taking up our own cross.

That sounds like salvation (which is a problematic word that now means anything and everything) is something that is completed by the individual’s experience and not what God has accomplished in and through the experience of Jesus for us. The Gospel is about what is done for us not by us. It is not a about good advise, good practice, good laws or anything else other than the good news of what was done independent of who we are and what we do. The Gospel is not a path to God or of salvation, it is the path from God walked by Jesus through Golgotha and into the new creation of all things. That is what makes the Gospel singularly and unequivocally universal good news for all of creation! The world is in desperate need for real, hardcore good news not more religion, ideology or some other human-centered surrogate for what God and only God can do. We can no more be the saviors of the world, or of our selves, than we can be creators of the universe. Salvation is an act of creation, it is that radical and that comprehensive and universal.

How can anybody claim to experience salvation’s wholeness in this broken world where there is so much injustice and suffering going on. Wholeness will only come at the Parousia when all things will be healed and resurrected into the life of the new creation made possible by the singular experience of Jesus at Golgotha.

For those who are still confused carefully read through this thread again and see for yourself what is actually being said. If you are confused by anything that I wrote please let me know I will gladly make my best effort to make it less confusing.

Dave

No - please, no! Bret, if you are confused and afraid, that is NOT the good news you are hearing, so do not listen to it!

Jesus reached out to people who were in pain. He spoke kind words to them, only kind and comforting words, never threatened them, always said, “Don’t be afraid!” He never, never told anyone to be afraid. He is Perfect Love, and Perfect Love casts out fear, because fear brings torment - and to PERFECT LOVE, the torment of the beloved (that’s YOU) is utterly intolerable. He would rather let HIMSELF be tormented to the end of time… and actually, that’s just what he did.

Jesus says, “Don’t be afraid!” “It’s me, don’t be afraid!” because he takes away all reason to fear.

Honestly, now I’m sad, and angry too. Striking terror into people like this is not a game: it does real damage. Jesus got angry too about hurting and frightening people.

Hi all!

I’m heading on the road, and distinguishing our semantics here seems to remain confusing. My impression is that Mel totally catches my position and meaning perfectly. I don’t think that affirming that the saving work in us must ultimately be credited to God’s work means that we are not called to any participation in the transformation that God seeks. To me, part of the genius of universalism is that it helps us hold together these two major themes in the Biblical narrative. We are called to respond to conditions such as faith and repentance, while at the same time the assurance of the promise of ultimately completing the work that God has begun in us is totally secure because it lies altogether in God’s loving character. Both sides of this tension seem amplified in Scripture, and the reading of must students of it. So just as the burden of defending universalism falls especially on us who offer this minority interpretation, so I think it falls on those who argue that Scripture does Not point to conditions for enjoying God’s best blessings.

Grace be with you,
Bob

Ok, I guess my current understanding is perhaps slightly different than Bob’s. I see salvation as already a done deal in one sense, but also something that must be ‘worked out’ in order to experience its fullness. I think this was James’ whole point with his works vs. faith thing. It isn’t one or the other, it’s both; In other words, we can’t experience faith without it “working out” in our lives any more than we can experience the salvation that has been provided without its truth permeating our lives, transforming us in the process. I do agree that God does all of it in us somehow; it’s really hard (for me) to quantify how our “response” plays into it.

Perhaps a somewhat crude illustration might be helpful here. Let’s say that I’m a smoker, and salvation from smoking has already been provided for me. I can mentally assent to the idea that salvation has been provided from that and that smoking is bad for me. But until that knowledge actually transforms me, including the damaging habits, I don’t fully experience salvation from smoking until that happens, even if that’s a process outside of my control.

Mel,

You express the issue just as I sometimes put it! It’s hard to spell this issue out with clarity, but when I speak of God “completing” in us our salvation, this corresponds to what you describe as experiencing its’ benefits. I agree that it is already ‘complete’ in the sense that its’ accomplishment lies securely in God’s character, where in reality, it’s a done deal. But the focus here has been on whether there is any place in our coming to experience God’s salvation and wholeness for a process that may involve painful purfication. A great deal of Scripture and experience say to me that the answer is yes. So would we be on the same page if the distinguishing issue is, "There are ‘conditions’ of response on our end which are necessary for enjoying the benefits of our ‘salvation’?

why thank-you , an interesting, intelligent and enjoyable post, I don’t have the time to read all the responces just now but to quote a movie star ‘‘I’ll be back’’ ! :smiley:

The interesting thing is that Christ was perfected through suffering yet Ruth expects to walk the same path as Jesus without being perfected in suffering. If people go to hell either their suffering will bring about perfection or it will not and they will simply suffer for retribution sake.

It’s getting a lttle chilly in here. :cry:

Actually, I don’t expect to walk the same path as Jesus.

  • I am not the Way from God to the creation.

  • I cannot walk around healing others by creating sight where there was never any, by making maimed or withered hands grow again, by creating a healthy working nervous system and/or musculoskeletal structure where someone was paralysed, because I am not the creator.

  • I cannot go to a dead person’s tomb and call them back to life.

  • I cannot take the suffering and pain on myself, so that the creation won’t have it.

  • I cannot go to Golgotha and pour life, healing and forgiveness into the world even as I die.

  • I cannot go into the nothingness, fill it to overflowing with the life of God so even death cannot hold anything any more.

  • I cannot spill so much life that the splashback raises me to a new kind of life that never even existed before.

  • I cannot lead the creation from its death spiral into that new-creation kind of life.

THAT is Jesus’s path.

NONE of us can walk it. Only he ever could walk it.