Misconceptions About Universalism Part 2: Absolute Inclusiveness

As I mentioned in the first post of this series a month ago (I apologize for the long delay), the theological concept of universalism has gained considerable attention in the media lately, due to the publication of Rob Bell's book "Love Wins". Unfortunately, universalism is consistently misunderstood, especially in the religious circles where it is considered a heresy, such as conservative Christianity. Personally, I think a majority of people who believe and transmit these misconceptions are just ignorant of the actual concepts behind universalism. However, there is a minority which deliberately propagates these misconceptions, despite knowing they are false, often in order to deceive and confuse that uninformed majority. This minority tends to contain the religiously educated, such as theologians and pastors, who possess hostility towards universalism. This intense hatred can have a multitude of bases, of which I discussed here.

The first misconception I will examine is that universalism is absolutely inclusive; that is, universalism advocates the theory that all life paths are equally good and that every single path leads to God.

The origin of this particular misconception probably arose from the fact that universalists are extremely inclusive in general. We believe God's love and redemption is all inclusive (i.e., everyone will eventually be saved). We attempt to be all inclusive in our love and respect of people. Universalists are frequently religiously inclusive, believing that there is not one religion or sect/denomination which contains absolute truth and is the sole path to salvation, redemption, enlightenment, or whatever else you happen to call it. Many of us are inclusive in that we do not reject people because of their race, gender, sexuality, or religion.

Since exclusivity is usually the rule in organized religion, all of this inclusiveness is shocking. As an example, fundamentalist Christians strongly believe that the only path to God is through their specific denomination of Christianity and that all others will be condemned to an eternity of torment in hell. It's an "us versus them" mentality. God is with them and against everyone else. With that type of world view the inclusiveness in universalism appears both extraordinarily radical and immensely heretical. Given that, it's honestly not surprising some would assume that this inclusiveness would apply to everything.

However, that is blatantly false. Although I believe that there are countless paths which lead to God, including paths in organized religion, individual spirituality, and even agnosticism and atheism, I do not believe that all paths do so. Unfortunately, there are people in this world who have dedicated their lives to certain goals and created paths to attain those goals which actually push them away from God. These negative paths include a penchant for violence, an obsession with amassing vast wealth and material goods, a desire for absolute power (over one person all the way up to a country or even the world), and unrestrained narcissism.

While universalists believe that God completely loves the people who are currently navigating those negative paths, that does not mean we believe those paths to be acceptable. Those paths guide the people on them to be hateful, judgmental, and selfish.  In short, those paths do not lead the people on them to God. This is because, in each of those paths, the individual is focused solely on him or herself. Those paths which do lead to God teach the people on them love, forgiveness, and selflessness. As I said earlier, there are countless paths leading to God. But these paths are not equal. Even though they are heading in roughly the same direction, some are longer and bumpier, while others are shorter and smooth. It is up to each individual person to discover the best path for him or herself. 

I believe this misconception is harmful because it encourages the idea of exclusivity. The underlying message of this misconception is that inclusiveness is evil because universalism is evil, and since inclusiveness is evil, exclusiveness must be good. I know that reasoning sounds rather simple, but I have witnessed it, and similar lines of reasoning, at several Southern Baptist churches. Exclusivity is exceptionally dangerous. Those who are "in" see themselves as righteous and superior, while seeing those who are "out" as depraved and immoral. Taken to its extreme, those who are "out" become perceived as sub-human.

The inclusivity of universalism, although not absolute, does endeavor to extinguish the "us versus them" thinking and believing.  Too frequently does the doctrine of an organized religion call for non-violence and peace, yet violence, which can be physical, mental, or emotional, is employed to settle tiny theological deviations. We spill human blood over matters that hardly matter. It's disgusting and pathetic.

Instead, by resisting our natural instinct to group together and fight those who are different from us, we can eliminate much of the suffering in the world today, making a better and happier world for every single person.

Fear and Organized Religion

Fear is one of the most basic, primitive, and powerful human emotions. It comes in a variety of distinctive nuances, including anxiety, paranoia, dread, terror, phobias and panic. It can be rational or irrational. No matter what form it possesses, fear is frustrating, for it cannot be easily dismissed or ignored. We all experience fear at times, although most of us are not inclined to admit it. Some fears are universal: fear of death (either our own or of a loved one), fear of the future, and fear of punishment. Others are more individual. For example, before I became ill a year and a half ago, I was absolutely terrified of hypodermic needles. Anytime I saw one, even on TV, I had a panic attack. Just thinking about them could make me break out in a cold sweat. The fear was so intense that it became a danger to my health. The only vaccines I got were those required by law for school. Despite having asthma, I refused to get the annual influenza shot. The first times I had blood drawn and an IV inserted was when I began showing symptoms of leukemia, just after my 20th birthday.

When I reflect on these facts now, after hundreds of needle sticks in the past 18 months, I feel rather foolish. Of course needles are not pleasant, but they did not deserve the fear I had attached to them. Luckily, the object of my fear was a relatively insignificant part of my life and could usually be avoided. Unfortunately, that is not always the case. The universal fears I mentioned earlier are neither minor pieces of our lives, nor can they be circumvented. These profound fears leave us open to manipulation and abuse by organized religion.

Organized religion in its most conservative forms, such as fundamentalist Christianity and Islam is guilty what author and counselor Boyd Purcell calls "spiritual abuse" or, in extreme circumstances, "spiritual terrorism". Basically, spiritual abuse is the use of fear to control and manipulate members of a church. Since a majority of fundamentalist believers were raised within their sect or denomination, ideas are instilled at a young and impressionable age. This is where the fear originates. Children are instructed to believe certain doctrines and to comply with specific rules. They are then warned that questioning the doctrines or violating the rules will result in severe divine punishment.

Within fundamentalist religion, the fear results from the perceived negative characteristics of God. Although God is often attributed positive traits, such as being all-loving, fatherly, merciful, etc., fundamentalists tend to believe that God exhibits negative traits, such as being wrathful, judgmental, and cruel. Fundamentalist leaders describe in great detail the ever-lasting torment awaiting unbelievers in hell. Believers are threatened with a supposedly all-loving God's condemnation to hell eternally for even minuscule infractions. This fear stifles intellectual curiosity and spiritual growth. For the leaders, however, this fear ensures them constant power, with an army of loyal believers too scared to even consider challenging the status-quo. Depending on the individual's personality, this fear can cause immense damage. To honestly believe that God will send billions of people to hell and torture them eternally is horrifying. Although many are able to bury this teaching in the depths of their mind so they do not have to actually contemplate its true significance, some cannot. Of course, this leads to skepticism of their beliefs, a forbidden activity which ushers in even greater fear.

I have written before how I myself was caught in this perpetual cycle of fear and doubt and doubt and fear. Escape took years and I suspect the wound will never totally heal. I am left with one nagging question: Why has such fear of God been allowed to propagate?

Much of the fear can be traced to an aggressive thirst for power. During the late Roman Empire and the Middle Ages, Christian kings and emperors used Christianity to justify the conquest of vast territories in order to convert the pagan inhabitants to Christianity. Of course, there had to be an incentive for the pagans to convert. Fear of eternal damnation in hell coupled with the promise of eternal bliss of heaven persuaded conversions by the thousands. God was subverted from a redeemer of broken souls to a political tool.

That power grab continues to this day. Churches fight for members and political influence. Fear allows church leaders to control the rank and file. If any of them cease to toe the party line, a warning is conveyed, usually thinly disguised as concerned advice, that God is not pleased with their actions and that their soul is in jeopardy. This happened to me several times. Once, I asked a question in Sunday school class about how ancient cavemen fit into the story of Genesis. My Sunday school teacher later pulled me aside and in a “concerned” voice told me that God was upset and angry that I was reading such books because it showed that I lacked faith in Him. She admonished me to dedicate everything I did to Jesus or risk being left behind when the Rapture came (which we believed was imminent). It was all I could do not to burst into tears right then. I cried myself to sleep for weeks in terror.

As a universalist, I now discern what this fear genuinely is: toxic and soul-killing. I believe that the doctrine of hell has wreaked incalculable devastation on humanity. It has created a god who is astonishingly cruel and shallow. Is it not shocking that so many have rejected this god as an impossible monster? Regrettably, when this distorted version of God is rejected, many abandon hope for God at all. I did so myself for several years.

Universalism does not just reveal the love of God. It reveals that God is Love. Fear of God, fear of hell, fear of death, all are vanquished, for "perfect love drives out all fear" (1 John 4:18). God loves every human being He has ever created with an unimaginable intensity. To feel God's infinite love is beyond indescribable. It is as if all the fear and all pain are erased in an instant. But it's not just the love that is moving. It is the sorrow. The deepness of the sorrow God feels for His children's suffering. Every ounce of pain and every drop of misery His children endure is acutely felt by Him.

Fundamentalist religion is so caught up with doctrines, laws, and absolute perfection that they miss the point entirely. It should proclaim the love and closeness of God. Instead, it declares that we are separated from God by our own sin and weakness. It tells us God gives us but one chance to get it right while living on an Earth filled with hardship and pain. If we fail, God will throw us away like garbage. But this is a lie. God is always with us. Nothing could keep God away from us. He desires so intensely for us to see Him as He really is: our Creator and our Father whose strength more than makes up for our weakness and who will never abandon a single soul he has made. He aches for us to trust Him so He may heal the destruction fear has caused. Although the first step away from the organized religion which has ravaged us is scary, we have nothing to fear from the God who loves us.

Existence of God

In the 21st century, few issues are debated with as much passion and intensity as whether or not God exists. One of the reasons I often refuse to enter this dispute is because it almost inevitably descends into ad hominem attacks. To me, the purpose of any debate is not to defend my beliefs and/or an attempt to change someone's mind. The point is to learn and understand. You must enter a debate with a willingness to modify your beliefs. However, that almost never occurs in a debate about God's existence. People often initiate this debate for the sole purpose of converting their opponent. They have no actual desire to honestly consider their opponent's point of view.

The main rationale for this, I believe, is the profoundly personal nature of this enigma. An individual's belief or disbelief in God helps to compose the foundation of that person's identity and the meaning they place on their life. It is so integral to who we are and how we perceive the universe that the notion of changing is absolutely terrifying. I have firsthand experience of this both ways. As I have mentioned before, I was raised a conservative Christian, became an agnostic leaning towards atheism, and then proceeded back to theism, albeit in a radically different configuration than before. Both transitions were an emotional roller-coaster. It's a transformation of your complete self; your soul is ripped apart and pieced back together. Nothing is left unscathed.

Unfortunately, we do not get much assistance either. Of course, both sides claim evidence for their belief, but neither side can reasonably, empirically, scientifically prove their theory. No one can hold up an item or event and say "Here is proof beyond all doubt that God does/does not exist!". Despite all the books, the arguments, the claims, and, sometimes, even the threats, in the end, we have nothing but our own faith to rely on.

Although I do consider myself a believer in God, my beliefs often leave me feeling extremely isolated. My religious journey has put me on a controversial path. A majority of religious believers consider me a heretic. They are certain that I shall be tormented in hell for the sin of advocating universalism. A couple even seemed to take pleasure in this fact, something beyond my comprehension. On the other side, I am a scientist. Religious belief is generally regarded suspiciously. Although I have discovered that a belief in God of some form is more common in scientific circles than the evidence first suggests, it is not a topic widely discussed. In fact, it is almost a taboo subject. To top it off, because of the staunch fundamentalist Christian beliefs in my family, my own beliefs must remain hidden from them.

So, I am an exile in the religious world and an outlier in the scientific world. Honestly, it is not a place I ever imagined I would end up. The isolation itself is a challenge. It forces me to examine my beliefs all the more. However, despite the isolation and the doubts, I feel secure in my faith. When someone asks me why I believe in God, I find it difficult to answer, especially if I am attempting to explain to a non-believer. The only way I understand how to explain it is a deep and profound certainty. I know it in the very core of my being stronger than I know anything else. It is the astounding realization of God's absolute and unconditional love for myself and all others. It is the enduring recognition that no matter how terrible things get, no matter how alone I feel, God is always with me and supporting me, even if I am not always aware of it at that moment. It is the undeniable comprehension of what it means to say that "God is love". But what genuinely amazes me is that is it so far beyond anything I expected to ever find. I went from sheer terror of God to complete trust in my Father and Creator. It is worth being the outlier, the exile, and even the heretic for, a billion trillion times over.

Of course, I realize that my feelings and my experiences cannot prove a single thing to another person. Nor do I attempt to make them. I believe each person must find their own path. I enjoy sharing my beliefs and experiences with others, and in turn, I love learning about theirs. Instead of being a debate, it should be a dialogue. If we become convinced of our own superiority, we shall lose valuable interactions and insights from those who have chosen a separate path. Both sides can learn much from the other.

Concepts of Hell

The primary reason I left conservative Christianity as a teenager was my utter revulsion in the idea of hell and in a God who would send people there for nothing more than being born into the "wrong" religion. As I mentioned in my post Fear, Anger, Guilt, and God last week, total terror of hell was drilled into me from a young age and continues to haunt me to this day. However, even within the small churches my family attended, there was no single conception of hell. Ideas about hell differ as much as preferences for things such as music or food.

In this post, I would like to examine the ideas of hell I was exposed to as a child in a conservative Christian community. I realize that it will be in no way exhaustive of all the ideas about hell that can be found within Christianity, let alone the entire world. To examine every view of hell in all of human history, one would have to write an immense book, so I am just going to stick with my personal experience.

The three main views of hell I encountered are: Eternal Physical Torture, Seperation from God, and Annihilation.

Eternal Physical Torture

This is the most traditional view of hell in the Christian church. It is what appears in most people's minds when they imagine hell. It is the hell at the center of the Earth, home of naked, bright-red demons, blood-curdling screams, the smell of burning flesh, volcanoes of fire and brimstone, and rivers of lava. In this hell, the damned keep their bodies (and, of course, all sensation of pain) and are eternally and gruesomely tortured by Satan's demons, if not Satan himself, using methods scarcely imaginable to those still living.

This version of hell seems to be derived from Tartarus in Classical mythology. Tartarus was the ancient version of hell. While all dead souls inhabited the underworld, the underworld itself contained a deep pit, where the wicked were harshly punished for their sins. Much of our imagery for this hell comes from Dante Alighieri's Inferno, where Dante himself takes a journey through hell with the ancient poet Virgil as his guide. The idea that hell has distinct levels and punishments for different types of sinners comes from the Inferno.

This form of hell is the most common in Christianity and Islam. It is, in my opinion, also the most vile. As a universalist, my one and only creed is that God is love. Although I do not claim to fully understand God (not even close), I know that God would not, and could not, do such a thing to creatures He loves. All sins, no matter how depraved or evil, are still finite. Yet, this version of hell condemns man to infinite punishment. To put it simply, that punishment just does not fit the crime.

Separation from God

This view of hell is becoming more and more popular lately. It is a more "metaphorical" take on hell. Instead of souls being actually physically tortured, souls are sent into a dark abyss, to a place of tremendous mental and spiritual suffering. While not being subjected to physical torment by demons, they are totally separated from God for all of eternity. Some describe this hell as less of a place and more of  a state of being.

Although this hell is marginally better than the hell of Eternal Physical Torment, it still involves God eternally torturing a person. Any type of eternal torment is unjust because of the finite nature of human sin. Again, I do not believe a God of love would allow His children to be subjected to eternal damnation. It makes God out to be a monster who cares nothing for justice but a reveller in the agony of lesser creatures.

Annihilation

The doctrine of annihilation holds that, instead of eternally tormenting the wicked, God will just permanently destroy them. Some annihilationists believe evil souls will first be punished in the hell of Eternal Physical Torment before being annihilated, while others believe that they are annihilated upon bodily death, since the soul is not immortal.

Again, this version of hell is slightly less revolting than the last. At most, malevolent people will only endure a finite punishment before ultimately being destroyed. It would be as if they never existed in the first place. Nonetheless, if I reflect on this for too long, it makes me nauseous. The thought of God just snapping His fingers and the offending person is instantly gone is sickening. What if that were me? I must admit, the idea of losing my consciousness to pure oblivion is quite scary to me. I do not know anyone who is not somewhat afraid of that, although many pretend not to be. How could a loving God do such a thing?

For me, the answer is simple. He cannot. Not because He does not have the power, but because He could never discard one of His beloved children, no matter what they had done.

Please do not get me wrong, I do not think bad people get a free pass. There are consequences for harming other people. Yet, an eternal hell is not the answer. God loves all of us too much to lose even a single one of us. Heaven could never be heaven unless everyone made it there eventually. For, how could a good person in heaven be happy knowing someone they love is forever suffering in hell or just simply gone? How could God ever be happy or satisfied knowing that He had failed some of His children?

Hell is mostly a human creation. As a species, we are obsessed with "fairness". Obviously, people do not always get the punishment they deserve in this life. Hell is a handy way to comfort  people who have been harmed by awful people. Unfortunatly, hell has morphed from being solely a place of punishment to a place of vengeance. Hell has been used by ambitious men to gain power. They threaten their followers with hell for disobedience and teach that anyone outside their little sect will burn forever. Most of the time, these groups are small and radical enough that they are classified as cults. Occasionally, however, they can become leading sects or denominations in one of the world's major religions with the ability to influence thousands, if not millions, of religious believers.

Self-righteous individuals even take great pleasure in "knowing" someone is going to hell. The famous fire and brimstone preacher Jonathan Edwards said that "The view of the misery of the damned will double the ardor of the love and gratitude of the saints of heaven." Think about that quote for a moment. Really think about it. He is asserting that if you go to heaven, you will spend some of your time gazing at the damned souls in hell and enjoying their severe suffering. It's beyond disgusting.

Hell has done nothing but traumatize children and cripple adults with fear. It has driven genuinely good people away from God. I do not claim to have the answers. I am not even sure I am asking the right questions. All I know for sure is that my God would never harm one of His children in such a savage way, nor throw them out like yesterday's garbage. My God is a God of love, who will not rest until every last one of His children has returned home to Him.

Fear, Anger, Guilt, and God

In my first post on this blog, I detailed my life and my religious beliefs as they evolved over time. Much of my description focused on the horribly negative emotions I associated with God, including my considerable fear of His punishment, my raging anger at His egregious injustice, and the immense guilt I felt for experiencing the fear and anger, the certainty that I was a completely bad person, and the guilt itself.

Thankfully, my personal discovery of universalism eliminated a vast majority of these feelings. However, even today it can continue to be a struggle. This has always been something I find quite challenging to discuss. I suspect this is due to the guilt. When I was younger, it always felt like I was the only one combating doubts about God and religion. Everyone else was "superior" to me because they did not question (at least, I thought they did not; in reality, I am sure many of them did) God or whatever the pastor preached. This was one of the primary reasons I characterized myself as a bad person. I never expressed these emotions to anyone for fear of being reveled as a fraud.

The time (summer of 2009) around my transformation to universalism was not a pleasant period in my life. I had just recently dealt with two extremely difficult personal problems. Only two months after this transformation, early symptoms of my current illness began to show. The first time I was admitted to the hospital, a CT scan revealed a massive cyst in my abdomen, which the doctors logically assumed to be the cause of my symptoms. All of a sudden I was informed that I required emergency surgery. Up to that point in my life, I'd never even had an IV put in, let alone a major and risky surgery.  To top it off, I was at school in New York City, 1500 miles away from my family, who was unable to come and be with me.

Although it pains me to admit it, I was terrified. All the previous fear of God that universalism had taken away from me instantly came flooding back. I could not suppress the thought "What if I was wrong?" and that God might be punishing me for my new found beliefs. I began to feverishly pray silently, apologizing to God for ever doubting in Him and pleading that, if I did not survive the operation, not to send me to hell and torture me forever and ever. It was all I could do not to start crying in front of the doctors and nurses.

By the time the operation was over and I was wheeled up to my hospital room, it was after midnight. Physically, I was pretty uncomfortable; enough so that I could not sleep. Mentally, I was a disaster. I was overwhelmed with guilt. It was paralyzing, like there was a tremendous weight crushing my chest, and I struggled to breathe. For several months, I had considered my revelation of universalism a gift from God and cherished the happiness and the peace of mind it had brought me. Yet, as soon as a substantial threat had come along, it was as if I threw it all out the window. I was incredibly ashamed of myself. Worse, I was scared that God was also ashamed of me, or even angry at me.

I wish I could say these feelings were resolved quickly and easily, but they were not. It took several weeks.  Eventually, I came to understand that God was not angry for my lapse. Actually, I believe He was genuinely sorry for the terror I had endured. I realized that He wanted me to reach a position where, even in life threatening situations, I would trust His unconditional love to save me and holding not even an infinitesimal fear of being thrown away like a piece of garbage. How I recognized these things, I honestly cannot say. They are just something I know. And yes, I am very much aware of how idiotic that sounds.

I also wish I could say that situation was the end of those disturbing feelings. But it wasn't. I still must occasionally battle them. Since becoming sick, my life has been put on hold. I was forced to take time off school and move back home. There are many nights where I lie sleepless in awful pain, angry. I bitterly ask God, "Why has this happened to me?", "Why are you punishing me?", "What have I done to deserve this?". Of course, I always feel guilty for my outbursts later.

Yet, I still wish I had the answers to my questions. Basically, I long to know why I must suffer, why we all must suffer. Because of this mystery, many conclude either that there is no God or that He does not love us unconditionally. But, as trite as it sounds, I know in my heart that He does. I know that He loves me and I know that He loves every single individual He has created. I know that, no matter the outcome of my illness, good or bad, God will support me every step of the way, even when I do not even realize He is there.

Conceptions of God

Probably one of the extremely few points all the major religions agree upon is that God is beyond complete understanding by humans. We might be able to discern many of God's specific attributes or perceive pieces of His character, but, as God is infinite, we are unable to fathom Him in His totality.

Several days ago, while just randomly surfing the Internet, I came across a website. It was kind of a New Age spirituality blog. Unfortunately, that is not a movement I identify with in any way or am even interested in (no offense to anyone who is; I having nothing against New Age beliefs, I just don't relate to them) so I did not think to bookmark the site. However, I did quickly take a peek around and ended up reading a couple paragraphs concerning our flawed perceptions of God. It suggested that phrases such as "I love God" are ultimately pointless because you do not actually love God Himself, but only the conception of God you've constructed in your mind. Basically, this author of this site felt that you cannot have any feelings toward, and, therefore, any relationship with, God, since those feelings and the relationship is directed towards a perception that does not actually exist.

To say this idea disturbed me is an understatement. Although my heart instantly concluded it was false, my brain was not so quick to come up with a valid counterargument.

The idea that my personal conception of God is not accurate is not shocking in the least. I have always known that how I imagine God in my head is nothing more than an estimation that my brain can handle. God is infinite. He knows everything that can be known about a universe which is itself so enormous and complex we cannot comprehend it, let alone its Creator. Personally, I do not believe God meant for us to be able to totally understand Him. We are just too small. To realize that our images of God are finite, imperfect, and exist merely for our own convenience is a sign of a mature and modest person. Only arrogance could convince someone that their image of God alone is perfect.

However, does the fact that we require a simplified image of God mean that our feelings toward Him and our relationship with Him are worthless? If so, it renders much of religion, especially the monotheistic religions which stress a personal relationship with God, utterly meaningless.

After pondering this proposition for awhile, I realize it is absurd. One of my stanchest religious beliefs is that God deeply desires a personal relationship with all individuals. However, if our flawed conceptions of God hinder every single one of us from having a meaningful relationship with Him, it would mean that God knowingly created us this way. Considering God longs for relationship, why would He deliberately do this?  Such a contradiction would be damaging to both humans and God.

While no one person perfectly understands God, we do have the ability to learn more and more about Him. As I have grown up, my internal image of God has changed considerably, growing more mature and complex. This has occurred in a multitude of ways: reading sacred religious texts, reading about universalism, writing, contemplation, and prayer. I genuinely believe this will continue if only because I desire a closer relationship with God. My closeness derives from my awareness of God's nature. I'm fully aware of the limitations of my awareness. There are many aspects of God I do not know, and some I doubt I will ever know. But my imperfect understanding does not mean my relationship with God is meaningless. We are meant to have a relationship with God, despite lacking His intelligence.

I feel it is important that everyone know the limitations of their mind when it comes to perceiving God. But to completely dismiss the possibility of a relationship with God because of these limitations is overkill. We deal with limitations in every part of our life: school, career, family, etc. Yet most people don't just give up. My relationship with God is probably one of the most crucial parts of my life. To throw it away because of limits not under my control would be foolish. God had a reason to create us the way we are. I highly doubt He meant for us to ignore Him just because we don't know everything about him. How depressing the world would be without the promise of a Father who supports us through all troubles and loves us more than we can comprehend.

Governor Robert Bentley

I read over twenty blogs where religion is the main focus, which is why I was surprised to see so few posts on the controversy surrounding Alabama Governor Robert Bentley's recent comments. Shortly after his inauguration on January 17th, Bentley was giving a speech at a Christian church and said:

"Anybody here today who has not accepted Jesus Christ as their savior, I'm telling you, you're not my brother and you're not my sister, and I want to be your brother."

Bentley apologized two days later, saying:

"If anyone from other religions felt disenfranchised by the language, I want to say I am sorry. I am sorry if I offended anyone in any way."

However, to me, this apology rings hollows, as it is a typical politician's apology. He is sorry that people "felt disenfranchised" and were "offended". He is not sorry for his words, he is sorry those words offended people and got him into trouble. Look up any news article about a public figure (politician, celebrity, etc) apologizing for something and an overwhelming majority of the time, their apology follows the same format: they are sorry that people got upset, not for what they did or said.

Whether Governor Bentley is truly remorseful about what he said, I do not know. I hope he is. What actually bothers me, however, is the prevalent thought behind his statement. Many people in the Governor's state, Alabama, were not upset by his words.

Governor Bentley considers himself a Southern Baptist, along with about 25% of Alabama's population. This is the same denomination I was raised in for most of my life. One of the primary reasons I left Christianity as a teenager was because of the attitude towards non-Christians I found in Southern Baptist churches. The part about non-Christians burning in hell was deeply disturbing, but it was not actually the worst part. It was the hypocrisy. Time and time again, I heard sermons about "loving our enemies" and "helping those who were less fortunate". Yet, at least when it came to non-Christians, reality did not match. It was almost as if non-Christians were "tainted" with sin and evil. We were indirectly encouraged not to hang around non-Christians for fear that their "badness" might rub off on us and then we too would be "tainted". If an adult found out we had a non-Christian friend, they would push us to proselytize them, something I was never able to bring myself to do. But I saw others do it. I saw my friends do it to their friends. And I saw the pain in the eyes of the rejected when their former friend would no longer play with them. But we were taught to isolate ourselves from these "sinners". We made assumptions about their behavior: they stole, they lied, they disrespected their parents. We feared their sins would negatively influence us and lose our salvation.

Later, in high school, I found myself on the other side. Several times a friend discovered I was not a Christian. They would attempt to convert me, tell me they were concerned for my soul, and beg me to accept Jesus as my savior. Once they failed, as they always did, they would become more and more distant until they eventually stopped speaking to me at all. It hurt. Badly.

The constant proclamation of "love the sinner" had an unspoken caveat: "love this sinner, but only if he/she is willing to convert to our brand of Christianity". This has created an "us vs. them" mentality. They see non-Christians as outsiders, people who must be resisted, sometimes even fought. It is this mentality I believe is behind Governor Bentley's comment. I'm not surprised he does not see non-Christians as his brothers and sisters, when he belongs to a branch of Christianity with this strong "us vs. them" attitude.

God individually created every single human being on this planet. If we have the same Father, how can we not be brothers and sisters? We are siblings, and it's time we started acting like it. I believe that if everyone on Earth treated all others like family, this world would be a much more peaceful and happier place. The "us vs. them" mentality brings nothing but conflict and pain. You cannot claim to love God and yet reject large parts of His creation and you cannot claim to be a good person and refuse to help those who do not share your beliefs.

It's the End of the World!

Or, at least, you'd think it was by listening to the countless groups warning us that the end of days is almost upon us.

A little research is enough to show me that these kind of pronouncements are nothing new. Humans have been predicting the end of the world for thousands of years. Yet, recently, it seems that Armageddon prophecies have become mainstream. It's not just some odd preacher on the street corner commanding you to "Repent for the End is Nigh!". It's a pop-culture phenomena and our insatiable appetite for the last days is fed by books, documentaries, TV shows, and even big budget Hollywood movies.

It began with the Y2K craze in 1999 as people panicked about the imminent failure of all computers when the clocks rolled over to the year 2000. After the new millennium came in with a glaring lack of catastrophes, our fervor only grew. Soon, word spread about the supposed "end" of the Mayan calendar on December 21/22 , 2012. This time, the end of the world is being portrayed through a more religious lens, rather than a technological one. Although exact dates vary, a multitude of Christian groups are preaching that Jesus' Second Coming will occur within the next few years and true Christians must be ready for His return and the chaos of Armageddon. A group of Christians in Nashville, Tennessee is proclaiming that Jesus' return is scheduled for May 21st, 2011, only 4 months away. They believe Christ will then shepherd all true Christians up to Heaven and leave the rest of us to face the horrors of Armageddon, culminating with Judgment Day on October 21st, 2011.

The point of this post is not to disprove these dates. To be blunt, I think they are all BS. There are numerous reasons I believe this, but that is also not the point of this post. The point of this post is to ask a question.

Why are we so obsessed with the end of the world? The end of the world is not just a curiosity, it is a multi-million dollar business. People don't just want to know when it is, they want to know what it will be like, what to expect. When it becomes an element of a religious belief system, they want to be reassured that their group will be saved and all the "others" will be punished for their lack of faith. A few groups even believe they can hasten Armageddon by helping to fulfill certain events the Bible mentions must occur before Jesus can return. The best example of this are Christians lobbying for the government of Israel to destroy the Dome of the Rock and rebuild Solomon's Temple in Jerusalem, an act they presume must transpire before Christ's Second Coming.

Honestly, I think part of the answer is simple: laziness. Our world has countless problems, a majority of them man made. Fixing them is an overwhelming (and sometimes seemingly impossible) task. Wouldn't it just be easier if the world ended? Why should we worry about how our carbon dioxide emissions are warming up the Earth? Or be concerned about the increase in poverty everywhere, from the poorest villages in Africa to the must affluent cities in the US and Europe? Why anguish over the growing racial and religious tensions on an ever more connected globe? Or be anxious over dwindling food and water supplies? These complications will vanish when Jesus returns. He'll fix everything! No need for us to lift a finger.

Except, I do not believe God works that way. The Bible itself says in the first chapter of Genesis that humans were given dominion over the Earth and the living things which inhabit it. This means we are the guardians and caretakers of this planet and the life which we share it with. We can't walk away just because the clean-up job is difficult.

However, I do not believe this is the full picture. There is another dimension to the desire for hastening the end-times: fear. Fear is a powerful motivator because it bypasses reason and logic. Churches preach the end of the world to scare people either into converting or, if they already belong, not sliding into "immoral" behavior. If an individual is truly convinced the world is coming to an end and all he/she is required to do in order to receive a free ride up to Heaven before everything goes down the drain is join a particular church and follow their rules, fear of being "left behind" can quickly overpower you. The thought of being trapped in a hell-on-Earth scenario is terrifying. Combine that with the common images of an angry and vengeful God who wants nothing more than to harshly punish your tiniest sin, and who wouldn't want an early exit?

Please forgive me for being repetitive, but again, I do not believe God works that way. He did not put us here so we can dig ourselves into an enormous hole and sit around waiting for Him to teleport us directly to paradise while billions of other people on this planet suffer. God did not intend for us to live like nothing matters because the "End is Nigh!". I believe He intended us to live like every single day is a new opportunity to ease the suffering of others and learn to become better people. Instead of paying hundreds or even thousands of dollars on billboard guessing yet another "exact" date of Christ's return, those churches should be feeding the hungry, ministering to criminals in prison, and comforting the sick in the hospital, to name only a few more worthwhile activities.

The reason we do not know our end, whether is be our own personal death or Armageddon, is so that we may focus our time and energy to helping those less fortunate. It is a goal we all should strive for every day, no matter if we are Christian, Jewish, Muslim, pagan, atheist, Buddhist, or anything else. We should not obsess over our end either, or be afraid at our lack of knowledge, because we have nothing to fear. God is not the vengeful, judgmental old-man in the sky, counting down the days and hours until He can punish us severely for the smallest missteps. He is our Father Who loves us unconditionally and Who created us out of that love. He put us on Earth so that we may learn the Golden Rule.  As God, He knew we would make mistakes along the way, but He offers us His instant forgiveness, just as any human parent forgives their wayward child. He does not eagerly await our deaths, either as an individual or as a species, in order to punish us, but lovingly awaits the homecoming of the children he adores.

Fear of Armageddon is nothing but a distraction to living our lives and making the world a better place. Because, who knows how much time we have remaining? :P

The Omni-Charateristics of God (Part 5: The Problem of Evil)

This will be my fifth post in a five part series discussing the common characteristics of God and how I see them in light of my universalism. The five parts are:

1. Omnibenevolence (God is all-loving)
2. Omnipresence (God is present everywhere in space and time)
3. Omniscience (God is all-knowing, past, present, and future)
4. Omnipotence (God is all-powerful)
5. The Problem of Evil (The question of why, if God has the above 4 characteristics, evil exists in the universe)

In my final post in this series, I will discuss what is commonly called the Problem of Evil. Basically, why does pain and suffering exist in the world, if God is omniscient, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent? For me, it is the most significant problem in theology.  Before I begin writing, I wish to make one thing clear. Many philosophers and theologians have proposed solutions to these problems, and others have created counter-arguments. However, I do not wish to give an overview of these arguments. Dozens of books have been written on this subject, and I doubt I am able to do a better job than them. What I desire is to write about my personal thoughts on this dilemma from the perspective of my universalism. 

Our world is full of suffering. Natural disasters, plagues, famines, wars, and death. No individual on this planet can escape pain for his or her entire life. Yet, we are told that God is all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-loving. How can this be?

In the creation story of Genesis, the Fall of Man is brought about when Adam and Eve gain the knowledge of good and evil. This is often seen to be humankind's downfall. If only Eve had obeyed God and not eaten the fruit! Yet, I feel too few people critically think about this story. What is it that separates us from other animals? Consciousness, free-will and morality. Because we are self-aware and free, we have the ability to make decisions, not on instinct, but on knowing the difference between right and wrong, good and evil. If we had not eaten the fruit of this tree, we would be innocent. But innocent is not good. For how can one be good if one does not know what good is?

Yes, the knowledge of good and evil is a burden. It makes our lives infinitely more complicated than bacteria, plants, or animals. And our ability to choose means we will choose wrong, and we will suffer. But who would honestly give up that knowledge? Theoretically, an "innocent" person could kill millions. Of course, they would not be evil, because they would not know their actions are evil. To me, the thought is terrifying. Without this choice, we cannot better ourselves. Without this choice, we cannot become more like God. I believe God knew exactly what kind of universe He was making. He knew the pain it would involve. I doubt He made this decision lightly. But He also knew the kind of creatures it would eventually create. Not ignorant robots, but human beings not only made in His image, but who learned to grow into His image.

Theoretically, God has the power to stop all suffering. Yet, I believe God gave us free-will. Truthfully, it was probably the hardest thing God has ever done, just as it is hard for any parent to send a child into the world, knowing the child will suffer. But God knows we must make these choices for ourselves for them to have any true meaning. We cannot remain children forever. God desires a relationship with beings who can understand Him, at least in some small way. And the only way God has the power to achieve this is to give up His control over us and grant us the ability to choose, the ability to learn.

Evil, however, can only be defeated by love. God's love, unlike His knowledge or His power, has no limits. Yet, it cannot prevent our current suffering. God loves us so much, He is willing to let us suffer now for a greater existence later. I realize this is probably little comfort to those in pain. What I do find comforting, however, if knowing that we do not suffer alone. God suffers with us. Every tear we shed is matched by one of His. God's love for us allowed Him to create a universe where we would learn the difference between good and evil. God's love for us allowed Him to give us free-will. God's love for us allows us to love Him back.

As a universalist, I believe God never abandons a single soul, no matter how "evil" it may be. God sees our suffering and understands our sins. He wants nothing more than to guide us toward Him. Yet He would never force us. God desires freely given love, for love forcibly taken is worthless. Evil is the absence of love, and God works tirelessly to reveal His love in a way which does not violate our free-will. Yet God does not work in vain. Although I may not understand why certain terrible events occur, I trust God to hold us through the pain. Eventually, I believe, it will be worth it. By learning the difference between good and evil, we will become more like God and truly be His children. During the painful journey, we must remember not only our destination, but the loving Father who is with us every single step of the way, who will wait until every single one of His children comes home. We must remember His promise: 

God will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away." (Revelation 21:4)

The Omni-Charateristics of God (Part 4: Omnipotence)

This will be my fourth post in a five part series discussing the common characteristics of God and how I see them in light of my universalism. The five parts are:

1. Omnibenevolence (God is all-loving)
2. Omnipresence (God is present everywhere in space and time)
3. Omniscience (God is all-knowing, past, present, and future)
4. Omnipotence (God is all-powerful)
5. The Problem of Evil (The question of why, if God has the above 4 characteristics, evil exists in the universe)

For my fourth post in this series, I examine God's omnipotence. The word omnipotence comes from the Latin words "omnis" (all) and "potens" (powerful, mighty). To say that God is omnipotent is to say that He is all-powerful. Similar to omniscience, saying God is omnipotent is controversial.

The first problem with omnipotence is giving it a detailed definition. What exactly do we mean when we say "God is all-powerful". Do we mean to God can do absolutely anything? Or are their "limitations" to God's power? If so, are these limitations intrinsic or are the self-imposed?

Slight warning: This post gets a bit philosophically deep. I hope I am expressing these concepts in the clearest way possible, but I realize I might not be, so if you find something confusing, it is most likely my fault. Please feel free to ask for any clarification in the comments.

The Paradox of Omnipotence:

The most obvious limitation to God's ability to do absolutely anything is formulated in the Paradox of Omnipotence. This paradox can take many forms, but most commonly appears as the question "Can God create a rock so heavy He cannot lift it?". If God cannot create such a rock, then He is not omnipotent. If He can create such a rock, then He cannot lift it. Again, He is shown not to be omnipotent. The obvious solution usually given to this issue is to formulate that God can only do things which are logically possible. God cannot create a rock He cannot lift, draw a circle whose ratio of circumference to diameter is anything but π, or any other logical impossibility. 

The limitation of God's power to logical possibilities is an intrinsic limitation. It is not that God chooses to lack the ability to do the logically impossible, but that the logically impossible is meaningless when describing what God (or anything for that matter) is able to do. Assuming God does exists, He himself would be logically consistent (since, if He wasn't, He wouldn't exist) and a logically consistent being acts only in logically consistent ways, not because of a lack of power to act otherwise, but because there is no otherwise way to act.

Overall, this solution is fairly uncontroversial and widely accepted in the most Christian denominations.While this paradox deserves genuine thought and consideration, most religious thinkers and believers do not feel it threatens God's omnipotence.

God's Nature:

Another difficulty with God's omnipotence deals with God's nature. Most belief systems assign specific characteristics to God, such as God being all-loving or God never lying. This situation presents us with three options:

1. God can, and does, violate these characteristics when He wants to. God could hate someone or God could lie if He choose to, even if He generally does not.
2. God can violate His nature if He wants to, but chooses not to. God could hate someone or God could lie, but He does not ever do something which goes against His essential nature. This would be a self-imposed limitation.
3. God cannot violate His nature even if He wanted to. It is not possible for God to hate someone or for God to lie. This would be an intrinsic limitation.

First, I will state that my personal beliefs rule out the first option. I am sure there are people who disagree with me on this, but the whole point of this series is to analyze the characteristics of God from my universalist perspective. My belief in God's infinite love for every living being means God cannot hate someone or lie to them.

This problem presents more of a challenge than the last one. While it is obvious that God cannot do anything logically impossible, the exact definition of "logically impossible" is fuzzy here. Is it logically impossible for God to go against His own nature? If so, option 3 is the solution. If not, option 2.

Personally my answer is easy: I don't know. I say this because there is no practical difference between option 2 and option 3. I believe that God does not violate His own nature. Whether this is because doing to is a logical impossibility or whether it is God's own choice is irrelevant, because the outcome is the same for both options.

God's Omnipotence vs. Human Free-Will:

To begin this section, I will state that I do believe in free-will, and my following argument is based on the assumption that free-will is true. Sometime in the future I will post on why I believe this to be so, but I do not want to make this post excessively long.

The last question I will address is the interaction between God's omnipotence and our own free-will. Does God's omnipotence violate our free-will? Before we can answer that, we must ask another question: Does violating our free-will go against God's nature?

These questions depend greatly on the definition of free-will. Obviously, humans do not have absolute free-will. For example, we do not choose the circumstance of our birth (the timing, location, our gender, our genetics, our family, etc). Many circumstances of our lives are not in our control, but in God's. In this case, God's omnipotence could be said to violate our free-will. Or we could say He does not because we have no control over those choices and, therefore, they do not fall under the category of free-will. This problem lies mostly within the realm of semantics.

However, there are many aspects of our life we do have control over. We control who we are friends with, the kind of job we have, and our personal belief system. We choose whether or not we believe in God and, if we do, what kind of God we believe in. Personally, I believe that God could violate our free-will in these circumstances, if He chose. But, I also believe that, because God is all-loving, God respects our free-will to make our own choices and therefore would not violate those choices. Our purpose in life is to learn to be good people. While there are many paths to this goal, we must choose our own path or we are nothing more than God's robots. It is our free-will which defines us as human beings. If God desires a true relationship with us, He cannot violate our free-will.

These are by no means the only arguments against omnipotence. It is a complicated topic, philosophically and religiously. I do not believe in a God who is absolutely all-powerful, for such a God defies logic. Yet I cannot actually define the limits of God's power. I do not  feel God would violate His own nature or our own free-will with His omnipotence, even if He could. I have no way to prove these propositions, they are just what I believe.

Basically, I am not comfortable giving God the label omnipotent. There are limits, both intrinsic and self-imposed, on God's power. However, His power to love us, forgive us, and heal us are infinite, and these are the powers of God I consider absolutely vital. Many religious believers make this claim, yet their theology does not support it. They point to these amazing characteristics of God with one hand, and everlasting torment for a majority of humanity with the other. It is absolutely ludicrous. God's power is not demonstrated in fear, abandonment, and torture, but patience, mercy, and above all else, love.

What Does it Mean to Love Our Enemies?

Several weeks ago, Richard Beck of Experimental Theology made a post that I have not been able to stop thinking about. He talked about the disconnect between the love Christians preach to the love Christians practice. The reason I appreciated this post so much is it put into precise words a phenomena which I had difficulty describing, but whose existence helped drive me away from Christianity.

I grew up going to conservative Southern Baptist churches and love was frequently the topic of sermons. This included God's love for humans, our love for God, and our love for each other. It was the last one which bothered me. Countless times I was reminded that Jesus said "You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you" (Matthew 5:43-44).

No matter what happened, we were to love our enemies. No matter how we felt, we were to love our enemies. No matter how they insulted us, stole from us, or physically harmed us, we were to love our enemies.

In words, it sounded great. It still does. But I did not see it practiced. At least, I did not see it practiced in any substantial form. What I repeatedly saw felt more like judgment. Anyone whose views or lifestyle did not conform to the church's was demonized. Unfortunatly, I experienced much of this personally, from my step-father. Liberal politicians on the nightly news were accused of murder and sexually deviancy. Homosexuals and feminists were blamed for destroying families. Even strangers were targets. If someone cut him off on the road, the string of insults that would follow could be rather nasty. Yet, when I would ask why he hated these people, I would always get them same reply: "I don't hate them. I'm a Christian. I love them."

So what exactly was this love? How could love allow for such seeming cruelty? In his post, Beck wrote that:

"As best I can tell, [loves] means the following: To love someone is to wish that they go to heaven."

Personally, I felt it had even a narrower definition. To love someone is to wish they would convert to Christianity (and, of course, to claim conservative our views). To love someone means to proselytize them, to "save" their soul. It did not mean to truly listen to them. It did not mean to learn about their life and to have compassion for their unique sufferings. It did not mean to forgive them when they actually harmed you (since I do not believe mere disagreement on political or social issue can usually be classified as "harm").

Love became some strange ideal, something that existed only in theory, not a concrete action with practical value. 

As a universalist, I believe God's love for us is not only unconditional, but involved. It is not just an emotion He possesses for us, but an action He directs at each one of us individually. He supports us during periods of suffering. He teaches us lessons throughout our life to forge us into better people. He even forgives us when we screw up, and helps us return to the correct path. God's love is NOT passive, and ours should not be either.

For me, to genuinely love your enemy can be quite hard. Our first instinct is towards anger or revenge. But love demands it must be towards understanding and forgiveness. People injure others when they have been hurt themselves: they are suffering, so they force others to suffer. Love stops this viscous cycle. To love your enemy represents that you have a profound desire to help end their suffering NOW, not a hope they will be blissful in some distant afterlife. It means you must see past the exterior of anger, greed, jealously, and hate, to an interior person who is in deep pain, allowing you to forgive their transgressions.

How often have you accidentally hurt someone when you have been preoccupied with your own pain? I know I have. Maybe that guy who cut you off today just lost his job. Or the woman who is rude to you is preoccupied with how she is going to afford food for her children this week. Or the person who roughly bumps into you and walks away without apologizing just found out their child has a terminal disease. If we truly knew the reasons behind people's bad actions, I believe we would be sympathetic more often than judgmental or wrathful.

Unfortunately, we cannot see people the way that God can. In some ways, it might be easier for Him to love us than for us to love each other. He sees our pain and suffering, so He understands why we lash out at others. We do not have that luxury. When we love our enemies, forgive them, and offer them our help, it means we are giving them the benefit of the doubt. They might have hurt us, but that does not mean they are bad people. It means we sympathize with their hidden pain, because we too are human. It means we recognize that love is not just a dream for the future, but a healing force in the present.

The Harassment of Gay Children and Teens

First, I wish to apologize for my lack of posting lately. I have been sick for awhile now with a so far unknown illness, and there are times when I am just not able to write everyday.

The past few weeks, I have seen a flood of heartbreaking stories about children and teenagers taking their own lives after being relentlessly bullied, often because they were (or perceived as being) gay. Every single news story has brought tears to my eyes.

Although I personally am straight, two of my  three best friends are gay. Growing up, I saw them struggle, not only with bullies at school, but with their own families. In middle school, my male friend (having come out only to me and my two other best friends) would continue "dating" girls so the popular kids wouldn't call him a "fag" or "homo" all the time. In high school, we stayed up with my female friend all night when she was devastated at her father's reaction to meeting her first serious girlfriend (she is getting married to this women in the spring, and I couldn't be happier for her).

Because I have seen firsthand what such hate can do, these stories don't just make me cry, they absolutely infuriate me. The adults who attend churches where homosexuality is condemned and who lecture their children on how homosexuality is evil,  and who then claim they are not to blame for these suicides because they never explicitly told their children to torment their gay peers, infuriate me. The people who protest laws meant to protect homosexual and transsexual children and teens from harassment, claiming they violate their rights of free speech and freedom of religion, infuriate me. And the teachers who do nothing or who blame the victim for being "different" (which I realize is probably a small minority of teachers, but I have encountered them), infuriate me.

Homosexuality is not a choice, just as heterosexuality is not a choice. It is something programmed into our DNA, just as is our skin-color, gender, and height. Your religious beliefs do not give you the right to torment someone into suicide for a characteristic they have no control over. It is especially sickening in Christians. Do they truly believe Jesus would have treated homosexuals so poorly, especially the children? Dan Savage (who started the It Gets Better Project) wrote about this as well, in extremely blunt words:

"The kids of people who see gay people as sinful or damaged or disordered and unworthy of full civil equality—even if those people strive to express their bigotry in the politest possible way (at least when they happen to be addressing a gay person)—learn to see gay people as sinful, damaged, disordered, and unworthy. [...] And while you can only attack gays and lesbians at the ballot box, nice and impersonally, your children have the option of attacking actual gays and lesbians, in person, in real time. [...]You don’t have to explicitly “encourage [your] children to mock, hurt, or intimidate” queer kids. Your encouragement—along with your hatred and fear—is implicit. It’s here, it’s clear, and we’re seeing the fruits of it: dead children."

Despite advances in the past couple decades, homosexuality in many areas of the US is not tolerated and homosexuals themselves are not welcome. A gay child growing up in such an environment is irreparably damaged. Their own parents teach them they are "wrong" and that God is angry with them. Are we really surprised that some of them have taken their own lives?

The central tenet of my beliefs is God is love. God loves everyone absolutely equally. Personally, I do not believe God hates, or even disapproves, of homosexuals. Why would God create gay people and then punish them for expressing their unchangeable homosexuality, when He places no such restraints on heterosexuals? It makes no sense.

We must change the attitudes of society. Children are dying by their own hands because they are so terrorized by a world that hates them for who they are. It's shameful and disgusting. We must change, or more children will die and we will have no one but ourselves to blame.

The Omni-Characteristics of God (Part 3: Omniscience)

This will be my third post in a five part series discussing the common characteristics of God and how I see them in light of my universalism. The five parts are:

1. Omnibenevolence (God is all-loving)
2. Omnipresence (God is present everywhere in space and time)
3. Omniscience (God is all-knowing, past, present, and future)
4. Omnipotence (God is all-powerful)
5. The Problem of Evil (The question of why, if God has the above 4 characteristics, evil exists in the universe)

For my third post in this series, I continue with God's omniscience. The word omniscience comes from the Latin words "omnis" (all) and "scientia" (knowledge). God's omniscience is His quality of being all-knowing, i.e., God knows everything in both space and time. For me, it is the most challenging characteristic of God to understand. Even worse, God's omniscience is perhaps His most controversial aspect, since it seems to be in conflict with the idea of human free-will. Despite these issues, I believe God's omniscience to be vital in His relationship to His creation.

The reason I consider God's omniscience so problematic to understand is because it is virtually impossible for a finite human to relate to such a characteristic. The other three characteristics in the this series (omnibenevolence, omnipresence, and omnipotence) are easier to comprehend, even if unattainable for humans. Omnibenevolence is just unconditional love extended to all people, and most humans experience unconditional love through the parent-child relationship. Omnipotence, while far beyond human capability, is easy to imagine, and frequently bestowed upon literary, television, or film characters. Omnipresence is formidable, but still within the limits of comprehension. Omniscience, though, is downright inconceivable.

When you genuinely begin to ponder omniscience, the shear size of the information in the universe is overwhelming. Everything truly means everything- the actions and thoughts of all living beings down to the nerve impulses in their brains, the changing positions of all the stars in the planets in all the galaxies, the location of every single proton and electron...the list is practically infinite. My comparably small mind cannot even begin to fathom the sheer amount of information an omniscient being would have to know, let alone how all this knowledge is comprehended.

However, it is not this perplexity which makes God's omniscience so fascinating. It is how God's omniscience appears to clash with the concept of free-will. Before I begin to discuss this, I will state that I plan to argue this from premise that free-will is factual, because I believe it to be. Sometime later, I will post on exactly why I accept free-will over determinism.

The argument that free-will conflicts with God's omniscience generally takes this form: If God is all-knowing, He knows all of your future actions before you are even born. Therefore, you cannot change those actions, because that would violate God's omniscience, which is impossible. Therefore, you do not have free-will.

To be honest, I do not have a quick answer for this paradox. Many of them have been proposed, some of them philosophically complex. Personally, I believe, there are two main options: God has what philosophers call "middle knowledge" or that God has the potential to be omniscient, but He deliberately limits His omniscience in order to give His creation free-will.


Middle-Knowledge: To say that God has "middle-knowledge" means that God knows how an individual will act beforehand because of His knowledge of the individual, but the choice behind the action still belongs to the individual. When you know a person intimately (their previous actions, thoughts, biases, dreams, fears, needs, desires, etc) you can accurately know what action they will take. Even humans can do this with our close family and friends: we know them well enough that we can know how they will act in specific situations, but that does not mean their action was predestined. Because God knows us perfectly (i.e., He possess all knowledge about us, even what we keep secret from everyone else), it is possible He knows how we will react in all situations without affecting our free-will.


Deliberate Limitation: To say that God deliberately limits His omniscience means that God could selectively stop Himself from gaining certain bits of knowledge, even if He has the ability to do so. While God might know some future happenings (like, the next time Mt. Vesuvius will have a major eruption or the next star in the Milky Way galaxy to go supernova) he would stop himself from knowing future human actions (like whether I will murder somebody in the future or whether an individual will ever choose to believe in Him). In this situation, God would know everything accept the things that, if he knew them, would threaten our free will.

These are by no means the only explanations, but I personally believe they are the most reasonable. Nevertheless, I do not claim to have a specific answer to this question. The only answer I can give is "I don't know". What I do know is that, regardless of how God's omniscience functions, I believe God knows us better than any other person on Earth, including ourselves. It is this knowledge which allows God to be so forgiving to each of us. God is compassionate when we make mistakes and sin because He knows why we make them. He understands our pain, fear, and anger and the reasons we lash out at others. This does not mean he approves our actions or that remorse for the pain we cause is unnecessary. What is does mean is that, no matter how badly we screw up, God is still there for us, God still forgives us, and God still loves us.

Prayer

For the first two decades of my life, prayer was not important to me. When I was young and we prayed in church, I would go through the motions like everyone else. My eyes would be closed, my head would be bowed, and I would attempt not to fidget too much. If the pastor was leading us in prayer, I might even mentally repeat his words in my head, but rarely did I actually pray. Usually, I was bored and just wanted the service to be over soon.

Sporadically, however, I might break the pattern and ask God for material possessions, like a new set of Legos or whatever other toy I had recently been begging for. Nothing I ever prayed for then was serious. Prayer also was never scheduled for me. I had many friends who prayed with their families before bed every not, but this was not a tradition my family followed. Nor did we pray before meals, except for Thanksgiving and Christmas. Prayer belonged solely to the realm of church.

When I was slightly older, and the teachings of my church began to have more of an impression on my young mind, I was conflicted about prayer. On one hand, I knew I was supposed to pray to God. Good Christians prayed to God all the time, right? If you did not pray to God, how would you prove you were a Christian and, therefore, get into heaven? Yet, I absolutely loathed it. God scared me. Why would I want to pray to Him? At the time, I was convinced God hated me. Why would He listen to my prayers if I was such a bad person? Time and time again I would try to conquer my fear. I thought if I prayed more and promised God I loved Him, he wouldn't hurt me. But in my heart I knew those promises weren't true, and even worse, I knew that God knew they weren't true.

Once I was able to cease attending church, my weak attempts at prayer stopped too. I felt no desire for God or communication with Him. Actually, I desperately yearned not to believe in Him. 

Recently, however, prayer has become absolutely vital to my life. Universalism brought about a radically new view of God and a great longing to communicate with Him. I began to pray daily. Usually, my prayers take place at night. I'm a night owl (if you couldn't tell by the timestamps on my posts) and that is when I feel the most comfortable.

For me, prayer is like a conversation with God. I actually talk to God. Putting this into words actually makes it sound kind of stupid, but I talk to God about being upset, or angry, or scared. I talk to God about the worries I have about my friends and family. I talk to God about my frustration at being sick. I even talk to God about theology. I ask for patience and strength. I ask for understanding. I ask for guidance to become a better person. Rarely do I ask for something material.

The best part though, is I do feel God listening to me. It is when I pray that I am best able to perceive the pure love of God, and it never ceases to amaze me how strong His love really is. Before, prayer bored me or scared me. Now, I can talk to God for hours and not even realize the time slipping by. Nothing in the whole world makes me feel like I do when I pray. God feels my pain with me and sharing it with Him is extraordinarily comforting. Often, I cannot even say my prayers have an end, for I drift off to sleep immersed in my connection with my Father.

It is through prayer that I am starting to understand the nature of God, as much as a human possibly could. It is the foundation of my relationship with God, it is how I most directly experience the love of God, and it has become the best part of my day and an integral part of my life.

The Omni-Characteristics of God (Part 2: Omnipresence)

This will be my second post in a five part series discussing the common characteristics of God and how I see them in light of my universalism. The five parts are:

1. Omnibenevolence (God is all-loving)
2. Omnipresence (God is present everywhere in space and time)
3. Omniscience (God is all-knowing, past, present, and future)
4. Omnipotence (God is all-powerful)
5. The Problem of Evil (The question of why, if God has the above 4 characteristics, evil exists in the universe)

For my second post in this series, I continue with God's omnipresence. The word omnipresence comes from the Latin words "omnis" (all), and "praesentia" (presence), and it's literal meaning is pretty self-explanatory. Basically, it means God is everywhere. While simple enough to define, I feel the implications of God's omnipresence are deep and complex.

Personally, I believe in the concept of panentheism. Panentheism contains two aspects of God: transcendence and immanence, both of which form part of His omnipresence.

God's Transcendence-

To say God is transcendent is to say that He exists outside the physical world, away from time and space. This is the picture of God most religious people seem to have (even if they do say things like "God is with you!"). They imagine God as a distant entity, observing us, and judging us, from far away and only rarely interjecting into the world. Its almost as if God's transcendence is viewed a superlative human being with supernatural powers and a rather nasty temper.

My picture of God's transcendence is quite different. I see it as the ineffable part of God, the part that is vast consciousness we are too microscopic to comprehend in any way. It is God who is Mystery. It is the God which created the universe, with its billions of galaxies, trillions of stars and planets, and who could count every single subatomic particle He used to build it all. It is the God who designed the laws His universe is founded on, allowing everything from the Big Bang, to nuclear fusion in the core of a star, to the unique density curve of water, and the evolution of single-cells to human beings.

God's Immanence:

To say that God is immanent is to say that He completely permeates the physical universe and exists within the space and time of this universe. As I noted above, I feel this quality of God is often ignored, even if a belief in it is professed. For me, it is easy to understand this seeming paradox. During the most challenging moments of our life, God's presence can seem extraordinarily remote, almost like He is indifferent to our sufferings. At the same time, the idea that you are not important enough for God's attention is common. I cannot tell you how many times thoughts like "Out of the almost 7 billion people on Earth can God actually give a damn about me?" have crossed my mind, and I greatly doubt I am alone.

However, once self-doubt has been put away, God's immanence is more clearly seen. If God's transcendence is His Mystery, than God's immanence is His Love. It is God's immanence that allows Him to enjoy and even grow a personal relationship with each being in His creation. In His immanence, God becomes a parent and a friend, allowing us to relate to Him, instead of being overwhelmed by the vast mystery of His transcendence.

God IS with us always, even those times when we cannot perceive His presence. Even better, God is not following us around with a clipboard, taking notes and docking points every time we screw up. He is here to support us, guide us, and love us, no matter our past crimes.

Yet God's omnipresence does not end with God being with us. God is also within us. Although the most common belief about human creation is that of creatio ex nihilo (creation from nothing), I believe in creatio ex deo (creation out of God). We are literally children of God, and our souls were created from God Himself. We can never be separated from God because we are made from God.

God's omnipresence encompasses His transcendence, His immanence, and His creation of us from Himself. Since omnipresence brings together aspects of God which almost seem contrary, I believe it is hardest to understand. Despite this challenge, I find great comfort as it allows us to be in awe of God's mystery, experience His Love, and know the Source from which we came and to which we will eventually return.

God's Injustice

One of the most common criticisms of universalism is that it is unjust. The lack of a form of eternal punishment, whether conscious torment or complete annihilation, means that universalists are focusing only on God's love and mercy and totally excluding His judgment.

This criticism can be narrowed down into two schools of thought:

First are those who equate "no eternal hell" with "no punishment". This is a simple misunderstanding. Punishment is important. Any decent parent punishes their children, and since God is the perfect parent, His punishment would be perfect. Its purpose is for correction and reconciliation, not torment.

Second are those who believe you cannot have justice without eternal punishment. They see anything other than nonbelievers and unrepentant sinners in hell as injustice. In my opinion, this approach is completely irrational and does a huge disservice to God.

In The Republic, the philosopher Plato, using the voice of his mentor, Socrates, creates a dialogue around the question "What is justice?" With Socrates as a guide, the characters in The Republic outline the perfect city-state modeled with justice as the centerpiece. This dialogue is eye-opening in that is proves not only that justice is difficult to define, but that it is almost impossible to create a perfectly just world.

One of my favorite quotes from The Republic is "The highest reach of injustice is to be deemed just when you are not." (Book II). I believe this perfectly describes the god of eternal punishment. This god commits acts of unspeakable horror, all in the name of justice. Logically, it makes no sense. Finite crimes committed in a finite period of time, no matter how terrible, do not deserve infinite punishment. 

Almost every human today considers Adolf Hitler to be the face of evil. Yet Hitler's systematic torture and murder of 7 million people is nothing, absolutely NOTHING, compared to what this god does. The current lifetime of the universe (almost 14 billion years) is infinitesimal to the amount of time this god will torture sinners and unbelievers.

But that is not even the worst part. The worst part is that all of this is supposedly done out of love, from a god who is love.

As I mentioned earlier, through The Republic, Plato does a wonderful job of showing you how difficult it is to define justice, and I in no way claim I know what justice is in every circumstance. Only God knows. But, I do know what love is. I know how it feels and I know how it acts. The Bible itself knows:

Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails. (1 Corinthians 4-8)

I know that God is Love, and no God who is Love could ever abandon and torture one of His children eternally, with absolutely no hope of redemption. No good human would do such a thing to their enemies, let alone anyone they truly loved. Is God worse than us? The mere thought is horrific!

Love NEVER fails, and because God is Love, God NEVER fails. Losing even one of His children forever is failure. Not only would it be torture for the lost soul, but it would be torture to God Himself. Think about the person you love most. Could you ever be happy knowing they are being forever tortured? So how could God be happy knowing one of His children is lost eternally? Heaven cannot exist if even one soul is missing.

Eternal hell also fixes nothing. Will a woman who has been raped feel better knowing her rapist is in hell? Or a father who has lost his only child? Maybe for awhile. But does the eternal torture of the rapist and murderer do anything to heal the woman and the father? Not a thing. It might satisfy their desire for revenge, but it serves no redeeming purpose. Their pain and anger need to be healed by reconciliation and forgiveness. Since rape and murder are acts so damaging to the victims, it is doubtful this can occur during this lifetime. But if they are ever to occur, the perpetrators themselves must also be healed and redeemed, and an eternal hell precludes this from happening.

Justice and love are not exclusionary. On the contrary, they can exist in harmony. I believe God will eventually create justice for every singe being in the universe. But eternal hell is neither just nor loving, and it is definitely not of God. 

The Omni-Characteristics of God (Part 1: Omnibenevolence)

This will be my first post in a five part series discussing the common characteristics of God and how I see them in light of my universalism. The five parts are:

1. Omnibenevolence (God is all-loving)
2. Omnipresence (God is present everywhere in space and time)
3. Omniscience (God is all-knowing, past, present, and future)
4. Omnipotence (God is all-powerful)
5. The Problem of Evil (The question of why, if God has the above 4 characteristics, evil exists in the universe)

 I begin with God's omnibenevolence, which, for me, is His most important characteristic. The word omnibenevolent comes from three Latin words: omnis (meaning "all"), bene (good/well), and volo (want).

Basically, to say that God is omnibenevolent is to say that He is perfectly good, totally merciful, and all-loving. But how exactly do we define these three pieces of omnibenevolence and what do they mean for our relationship with God?

Perfectly Good:

To be perfectly good means to have no trace of evil. To be sinless. God is never jealous or selfish. He never acts out of anger. Everything God does he does for the benefit of His creation. It is God himself who decided what is good and what a person must do to be good. First, it was the 10 Commandments. Later, Jesus shortened this to "love God and your neighbor". For an individual to be good, he or she must follow God's example. Being good is what brings us closer to God.

Totally Merciful:

Saying God is totally merciful means that God is always willing to forgive sin. As a universalist, I take it a step further. I believe God always forgives sin. God does "not [count] men's sins against them" (2 Corinthians 5:19). God has already forgiven your sins, even the ones you have not repented or even committed. This does NOT mean repentance is not important. It is vital. Yet God's forgiving grace covers you no matter what. Mercy, as opposed to strict justice, allows us to learn compassion for others, again helping us become closer to God.
  
All-Loving

Last, and most complexly, God's omnibenevolence means God is all-loving. God's love extends over all His creation. It is infinite. There is no way to exhaust God's love. God loves every human equally, the worst no less than the best. This love cannot be earned, it is freely given by God; it is unconditional, and does not require that the love be returned. Nothing you do will make God want to love you less or stop loving you.

Yet love is a complicated word. What do we mean by love? How does God love?

There are several different types of love, including:

• Parental love: The love a parent has for a child. Often considered the closet humans can get to unconditional love.
• Philos love:  The love between good friends with no sexual feelings.
• Romantic love: Love between individuals which does involve sexual feelings.

The love often used to describe God however, is called agape. In my opinion, it is a combination between parental love and philos love. God loves us unconditionally like a parent. He is our creator and sustainer, and we are His children. It is why many address Him as "Father". Yet I do not feel parental love completely represent the love of God. He is also our friend. A parent's job is to nurture, protect, and discipline, and God does these things. Yet it is in friends that we confide in. God is our confidant. He knows our every thought. He discerns our motive for every action, good and bad. He understands us far better than we understand ourselves.

For any human to know us the way God knows us, to know every fleeting thought crossing our mind, would be terrible. How many of us entertain thoughts we do not truly mean or thoughts we would never act on?

However, it is different with God. His unconditional love and his absolute understanding means we should not feel anxious or embarrassed that he knows us so intimately. It means we can share our hopes, dreams, fears, and problems without anxiety over being judged negatively.

It is omnibenevolence which make God our God. It is how he creates a personal relationship with all individuals in his creation. It is why we worship Him, pray to Him. It allows Him not to be just our parent, but friend, confidant, and partner. Most importantly, it is why we trust Him and have confidence that, no matter our suffering, God is with us and will never leave us.

Defining My Universalism

Like any theological concept, the idea of universalism will have varying meanings for different people. In my last post, I discussed how I do not see universalism through the lens of Christianity, despite the commonality of that view. In this post, I will attempt to put forth in more detail exactly what I mean when I state "I am a universalist". The best way I perceive to do this is with a list of what I do believe, what I do not believe, and what I am unsure of.

1. I believe God is absolutely unconditional love and that this love extends to all people indiscriminately, regardless of their beliefs or actions.

2. I believe that, because God is love, God will not allow any of his creation to be lost forever. In the end, all people will be saved.

3. I do NOT believe this means a person is allowed to do whatever he/she pleases and still "get into heaven". I do believe there are consequences for our negative actions, especially those which we do not repent. Universalism is NOT an excuse to sin. It should be an excuse to become a better person when you realize that all people are truly equal in the eyes of God.

4. I am unsure of how exactly sin in punished. I have heard of many options, including a temporary hell of corrective punishment (like a purgatory) or reincarnation (where important life lessons are repeated until properly learned). While I lean toward the former explanation, I have not yet formed a final decision.

5. I do believe that, whatever form punishment may take, God does out of love and concern, not anger.

6. I do believe there are many paths to God and to being a good person, and that a belief in God (theism) is NOT necessary to be a good person.

7. I do NOT believe that all paths lead to God, nor that all paths are equal. Every major religion has (in my opinion) valid paths to God. But every major religion also has paths that I consider lead away from God. Any belief system can lead to God, but when twisted for selfish personal gain, it will quickly lead the follower down a destructive path away from God.

These 7 statements sum up my universalism and my belief about God. Obviously it is not perfect. There is a certain degree of uncertainty (especially in point 4) that I hope to write on in more detail with a later post. Until then, I hope this explanation will at least assist you in understanding more precisely what I mean when I say "I believe in universalism".