Open Blogging

You may also like...

38 Responses

  1. Babylon's Dread says:

    Years ago I had a friend online — strangely enough he and I had the same name — He was an atheist and I think he was a pastor’s son. He died tragically and due to his inability to manage the dark shadows … he was swallowed by his pain, you understand my meaning. He would argue with me about death and dying. Mostly he could not find any meaning in our view of a life without pain, sorrow or suffering. The absence of struggle made life seem meaningless.

    Our vision of heaven (not disembodied spirits) as new heaven and earth made no sense to him. He considered it the height of folly. “Who would want such an existence.”

    Indeed, we have so little content to our view of resurrected life. Mostly, we are left with our folk religion based on sentimentality — our reunion with loved ones. In fact we are often more dogmatic about pets in the afterlife than we are about marriage and familial relations. I don’t write it as a taunt but an inquiry … what visions of life after death carry you?

  2. Duane Arnold says:

    Coming on Monday… (God willing…)

  3. Michael says:


    Some of us have been closer to our pets than our families…the love given has sustained us and any life without them is a diminished life.

    Still…it’s a great question.

    My vision of the new heavens and the new earth is life as it was intended and the created world as it was intended.

    All that is broken will be fixed…without the threat of it breaking at some future date.

    The creation will be a place to be enjoyed to the fullest…and me and my cats will do just that. 🙂

  4. Michael says:

    If we use Eden as a template…there will be food, family, productive work, and intimate fellowship with God.

    I’m ready…

  5. pstrmike says:

    “what visions of life after death carry you?”

    They don’t carry me, they torment me………….

    All I know is that if those whom I love are suffering in hell, heaven will not be heaven for me.


  6. Dread says:


    Well, that means you are fixed on a doctrine of eternal conscious torment .That is perhaps the least well attested claim that has been foisted upon us by historic christianity. And that is one that evangelicals cannot be blamed … they may have carried the water uncritically but they did not John Wayne that one on Jesus.

    Heaven has over 700 mentions in scripture and over 250 in the NT. Hades (the place of the dead) has 9 and gehenna, translated hell (the garbage dump of Jerusalem) has what 13? Thirteen mentions and refers to destruction or perishing by fire and worms. The word tartarus (usually also hell) is more obscure to us.

    Most of the other mentions of judgment seem pretty temporal, if horrifying.

    Anyway … I was trying to imagine life beyond death with the LORD.

    I guess it is inevitable to go that way too.

  7. pstrmike says:

    I was responding to life beyond death with the LORD. It makes heaven just another place of my discontent and inability to feel at home.

    I’m a hopeful universalist, yet it is a doctrine that I am still working through.

    Annihilationism is of no comfort to me either.

    I think the worse thing is the concept of there being no memory of people. It essentially says, your life did not count. It’s incredibly hopeless to me.

  8. Michael says:


    What is your vision of the afterlife?

  9. Michael says:

    I’ve moved from “hopeful” universalism to “pretty well persuaded” universalist…all things will be reconciled in Him…

  10. Em says:

    I look forward to my King – Jesus – telling me just what I’m good for…. 😇

  11. Officerhoppy says:

    Julie Roys has responded to the allegations made toward her and the Roy’s report. You’ll have to decide who is telling the truth.

  12. Officerhoppy says:

    I don’t know much about heaven. Don’t spend much time thinking about it. But but I would probably become an atheist if universalism is true. Being a follower of Christ is hard enough as is this life. If all will be saved future, I’ll soften the torment of this life by being a hedonist.

  13. Michael says:

    Universalism doesn’t deny the reality of hell or the justice of God.

    If the eventual reconciliation of all people would offend you, the problem is not with the doctrine…

  14. Michael says:

    Judgment in the NT is always of works…

  15. Officerhoppy says:

    Many things about God offend me. But I think, as you suggest, it’s that I don’t understand certain aspects about hm and His ways

  16. BrianD says:

    1) I am a hopeful universalist as well. I have not done much reading on the subject and it’s something I need to rectify. There’s like 1,000 books on my Kindle app alone and a couple of hundred more on my bookshelves…a podcast or YouTube video may be more helpful to me…

    2) What Hoppy said regarding Roys.

    There is more I wanted to say about these sites versus PP but I will keep it all to myself for now.

  17. Officrhoppy says:

    With deconstruction of my theology, I am always fearful of importing my own bias, or ignorance to the biblical text thus making god after my own image. I tend to hold onto the historically held beliefs. In Revelation there is silence in heaven for 1/2 an hour. I wonder if god isn’t giving us all time to readjust our theologies!

  18. pstrmike says:

    Don’t fear your own bias. I cannot name one person who doesn’t have a bias on their POVs. It’s good to recognize it, attempt to reconcile it, and receive what it is God has in this new season that some have identified as deconstruction…….. which I personally don’t feel is a helpful term…….

  19. Dread says:

    I’m so glad I don’t have to care about the Julie Roys drama … I got weary real fast with both that video and her response. If that proves to be a false accusation it would help deflect her problems or so it seems.

    Anyway, back to universalism

    My reason for posting was to talk about visions of new heaven and earth and resurrection.

    Now I’ll have to reckon with my aversion to universalism.

    I’ll address it when later is earlier in a day.

    Short answer I think it possible to die in you sin and remain there without redemption.

    I think there is also the problem of the powers and principalities and their ultimate state.

    When I began in theology I was pretty sure animals were temporal amusements and/or problems. New creation theology does reshape things.

    More anon

  20. Michael says:

    I understand Julie is fighting for her reputation and her site.
    I posted the video and made my comment on the 11th.
    Julie was online and defending herself when the video came out…I assumed she would answer it then as she was engaging other matters.

    This the 14th…and now she responds.

    She’s angry that I didn’t ask her first…and she’s justified in that…I shouldn’t have assumed that she would address these crucial questions at the time.

  21. Nathan Priddis says:

    Michael. It appears she answered it as a journalist, not a commenter.

    When I saw the video I thought..
    ..”..He that is first in his own cause seemeth just; but his neighbour cometh and searcheth him..”..
    The testimony came from a witness who should be first considered carefully.

    Is she toast? She will be attacked. That may or may not be synonymous. What we can say is the Church has rampant corruption, and this corruption dictates that said attacks are a matter of life and death to her opponents.

  22. Dread says:

    Per your universalism … it was a short step in some ways from Calvinist determinism to universalist determinism. Aren’t both basically monergistic?

    Nothing is more risky than freedom. By risk I don’t mean that God can fail. His love does not fail. But to generate offspring is to abandon omnipotent control. It is to allow your love to be refused.

    Eternal conscious torment has a long history but it does not seem to stand up under careful exegesis or consistent theology proper. It is inconsistent with ‘God is love.’ There is no hallowing of his name in it.

    Now I want to press the matter further because there can be no universalism without some version of purgatorial afterlife. The fires must cleanse or purge the sinner and there must be postmortem embrace by the rebel.

    In my understanding the postmortem fires consume. Thus immortality is conditional. The threat of death is unending but merciful being void of ongoing torture — temporal torment gives way to nonexistence.

    This I believes honors God and respects freedom as authentic

    The problem of the uninformed remains a stressful mandate upon the church and a question as per God’s resolution.

    Anyway more thoughts to share as we go.

  23. Officerhoppy says:

    Still want to know if the Nathan Priddis who posts here is the same guy who teaches at BYU. Just be honest. Don’t need to be snarky.

  24. Michael says:


    Yes, universal reconciliation is monotheistic in that Jesus doesn’t give up until His love conquers all.
    Yes, the “fire” does cleanse…as promised.
    Yes, it does imply post mortem conversion.

    I don’t think libertarian freedom is nearly the issue in heaven that it is in America…

    There are two tracks here that move me…one is the love of God that sent His own Son to provide a universal atonement.

    The second is a simple understanding of the brokenness of man who is expected to believe despite his own limitations and grief and the failures of God’s messengers.

    He desires all men to be saved, but all men have not been given the tools or mental and emotional acuity to be saved.

    Every knee shall bow…in praise, not in defeat…

    I could be wrong, but this will get me home…

  25. Nathan Priddis says:

    I wasn’t being snarky at all.
    Nor was I offended in any way.
    And I’ve never claimed to teach anything.
    The courts of heaven association was just an off comment by BD, not me.
    Never identified as Mormon. That’s totally from someone else.
    Never identified with Gnosticism.
    Never claimed to reject historical tenants of the Faith.
    Never identified with Charismatics claiming journeys to Heaven or simular apparitions, visitations.ect.

    If it would make you more comfortable regarding orthodoxy, I was reading Augustine this AM.

  26. Officerhoppy says:

    Doesn’t make me feel better at all. Just trying to understand your comments

    Than you

  27. Em says:

    Post mortem conversion?

  28. Michael says:

    After death.
    Maybe in hell.

  29. Em says:

    Interesting take…
    I have wondered about all those folk who’ve never heard the good news

  30. Ruth says:

    How should bloggers manage accountability: a proposal

    Suppose that a person believed a blogger had done them dirty. They have a grievance. To whom can they take it? Who watches the watchers?

    Proposal: each blogger (“Blogger”) shall designate no fewer than one (1) and no more than three (3) peer bloggers whose fair judgement they respect and with whom they share a topical space but are at idealogical odds, henceforth called Frienemies.

    Then, any person who has a grievance is welcome to take it to one or more Frienemies for inspection. Blogger commits to handling any grievances determined by a Frienemy to be valid via whatever method is agreed upon by Frienemies, including public acknowledgement as needed.

  31. Michael says:


    I wouldn’t have a problem with that…if there were a big enough group that knew each other to make it work.

    I really only communicate with one other blogger…and she and I are both semi retired from our sites.

  32. Nathan Priddis says:

    My slant on Julie Roys…

    Its human nature among average humans to love a good David and Goliath story. We want to root for an underdog.

    I’m not objective, I’m emotionally biased whether it be Putin or the Evangelical Industrial Complex.

    I’m not going to root for Big Eva. It’s Roys vs. rot. She can Lance as many absesses as she can. No hair off my back.

  33. Em says:

    Isn’t there a directive in Scripture to the affect if a brother sins, don’t make it public fodder? ? ?

  34. Nathan Priddis says:

    If Matthew 18 is bantered about, I automatically assume (without knowing any facts of any kind) that an individual in leadership, or friend / associate of leadership did something wrong. If it’s leadership, then a high probability of sexual impropriety exist.

    If I was accused of wrongful conduct ( have been) I would never want to appeal to Matthew 18. I just associate any such appeal to be of I’ll repute. Better to accept a public accusation.

  35. Steve says:

    I’m not a hopeful universalism or a persuaded one, I’m a convinced not everyone will be in heaven one. With that said, I believe God desires all to be saved and therefore He wants all to be saved and therefore I should also want all to be saved as well.

    With that said, the reformed understanding of many that somehow God hates us is ultimately pathetic and dangerous but I see this doctrine taught more and more by well respected theologians. To me it’s a mis characterization of God which is deeply sinful in my opinion. However I am also convinced Jesus was not a universalist by any stretch and therefore neither am I. Finally the gospel is sufficient in power and truth and grace. For those that never hear the good news, I trust in the goodness of God and his wisdom and general revelation He gives to all.

  36. Em says:

    Amen, Steve, amen
    God so LOVED the world that He gave His only Son……..

  37. Ruth says:

    It wouldn’t work, for that reason among others, but still.

  38. Em says:

    What people refuse to consider is evil – the source of evil? Satan
    God instructed us to pray DELIVER us from evil as we’re no match for God’s adversary

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.