Universalism

by choosing life 24 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  tetrapod.sapien

  hi Cog! long time no talk! wow, good to see you around. :)

  about a singularity. i think it will return to a singularity because it came from one. if that means that we came from another universe that compressed to a singularity, and blew into ours, i obviously can't say. and i can't say that it will re-big bang into another new universe or not either, or if that will be the end. but i do think that the universe will ultimately implode to a singularity. but the line of sight, scientifically speaking, is cut at each singularity. we can never really know what is on the other side of the singularity.

  in my day dreams i like to imagine a human spawned singularity, where all our culture, technology, metaphysical depth exponetially climax in a singularity where all information and dimension is known (accessible) to all entities (perhaps not even humans by then). or that humans invent a time machine, and at the instant of the invention of the first time "machine" (time transcendence?), all the other time transcenders (machines? lol!) come from the future to that point to witness the first time machine "take off" (lol). but in doing so, they also bring all of their technology and information and knowledge and depth from the future back to this one point. entities from the future who had a vested interest in that moment would be there. which is to say, they would all be there. which is to say that based on our current pathological obsession with dominating nature, there might be war right at that moment too. basically, a point in time where it is impossible to say what the universe will be like the "following moment"... heh heh.

  but those are just day dreams. ;) i think humans will be long long gone from the scene when the curtains close. nature will close them the way she opened them. humans (SELF CONSCIOUS SIMIANS) are a blip. a phenomenal blip, but a blip.

  and if the universe is always here, then so will i be, and so will all of us (in terms of every atom that makes us, us). either way, we've always all been here together, and will be in the end still together, singularity or not.

  i also believe in psychological singularities. but that's another windy one.

  tetra
• 

  snowbird

  I don't believe in universal salvation, but I do believe in the redemption of Adam and Eve. The Society makes the assumption that they were willful sinners and therefore undeserving of salvation.

  I contend the blood of Jesus covers them also. If not, Satan would have won. Never may that happen!

  Snowbird
• 

  jwfacts

  I was talking to a friend who believes that everyone will acieve eternal life eventually. She used some scriptures that make sense to me.

  1 Cor. 15:22 -For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ, all will be made alive.

  Similiar to this, Russell and the WTS used to say that everyone, Adam included would get a resurrection and second chance. It was only Rutherford who brought in the narrow salvation concept and the no resurrection for judgement periods.
• 

  stev

  Russell was not quite a universalist. His views are best expressed in the chapter on Ransom and Restitution in his book the Divine Plan of the Ages. He believed in a future probation for the world in the next age, but did not call this a second chance, because he thought that the world did not have a full opportunity to be saved in this life, especially those who never heard the gospel. He believed that the faith in the gospel was necessary for salvation, and that the ransom covered the whole human race, based on Rom. 5:12-20. He believed in universal salvation from death, and an opportunity to hear the gospel and to choose the right, but not universal salvation to eternal life. After being put on trial for eternal life, some using their freedom of will would choose to not be in harmony with God. Russell believed in annihilationism, and taught that these would not suffer eternal torment, but be destroyed forever.

  One of the early divisions of the WatchTower has to do with question of universalism. J.H. Paton was an early associate of Russell, he wrote the book Day Dawn, which was distributed to the early Watchtower readers before the Millenial Dawn. Around 1881, Paton changed his views, and denied the substitionary atonement. Since Russell based restitution on the ransom, this was a crucial doctrine to Russell. Also, Paton adopted universalism, that all mankind would be saved, and also all mankind would eventually become spirit beings, and as I remember correctly, the divine nature. Russell did not believe this, but held that most of mankind would be on the earth as human beings. Russell and Paton parted company, Paton wrote his own books, and published the magazine 'The World's Hope". Paton's following eventually merged the Concordant Versionists, and they can be found on the internet. I have read several of Paton's books. He continued to hold much of the chronology from Barbour, and was interested in types and antitypes. He was more tolerant and liberal than Russell. For much of the 1880s, there was a paper war in the WatchTower, where Russell wrote against Paton's views without mentioning him directly.

  The early works of Barbour, Russell, and Paton all are somewhat eccentric, filled with chronology, symbolism, types, idiosyncratic notions. IMO, they are best when they share larger concerns rather narrow individualistic views. Since Russell was able to gain the largest following, he got to address the public, and by necessity dealt with broader more general subjects.
• 

  Narkissos

  Interesting stuff as ever on the early WT stev.

  Seems like universalism is a minoritary but rather constant development of salvation doctrines (cf. Romans 11:32, Ephesians 1, John 17, and Origen) -- they logically tend to it, asymptotically maybe, as to their "end". In both senses of the term "end" inasmuch as the difference (between "saved" and "unsaved") which was initially constitutive of "salvation" eventually vanishes in universalism.

  Waves of metaphysics.