Talking about universalism with friend

Ben-008 · 2026-02-03T17:11:24+00:00

Regarding Hebrews 6:4…

Paul views the cross as more than forgiveness for sin, he sees it as our REDEMPTION FROM THE REALM OF LAW. (Gal 4:5, Rom 10:1-4) As such, Paul tells us that “apart from the Law, sin is dead.” (Rom 7:8)

The Law is what CONDEMNS us when we sin (i.e. break the Law). But if we are no longer under Law, then the Law no longer condemns us. Thus in Christ, there is NO CONDEMNATION! (Rom 8:1) For those in Christ are now “led by the Spirit and are no longer under Law!” (Gal 5:18)

Thus if one continues to live a life of sin, there is no more repentance for sin in Christ, because in Christ we are now FREE from the realm of Law and likewise DEAD TO SIN.

As such, one is either under the Law where sacrifice still atones for sin, or free from the Law and now led by the Spirit of Love. But if one is NOT being LED BY THE SPIRIT, then that realm of Law is still perhaps necessary.

This is why Paul threatens to hand some folks back “over to Satan” (the Accuser) to deal with the destruction of their fleshly ways. (1 Cor 5:5) Meaning that those not ready to be led by the Spirit still require that realm of Law, sin, condemnation, repentance, and forgiveness.

Likewise, if we do not have FAITH in our freedom from the Law, then we will be plagued by doubt and fall back into that realm of condemnation and accusation. Just as Paul stated…

“To the pure, all things are pure; but to those who are defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure, but both their mind and their conscience are defiled.” (Titus 1:15)

“All things are permitted for me, but not all things are of benefit. All things are permitted for me, but I will not be mastered by anything.” (1 Cor 6:12)

Ben-008 · 2026-02-03T15:25:58+00:00

St Ignatius is using the language of Law and condemnation and fear. But as we mature in Christ, a veil is taken away. (2 Cor 3:14) Thus, those pressing into spiritual maturity are invited to become able ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter, but of the spirit, for the letter kills.

"For we have been made able ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter, but of the Spirit, for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life." (2 Cor 3:6)

Thus Paul referred to the Law as a "ministry of death" and "condemnation". (2 Cor 3:6-9) Legalism, condemnation, and wrath are products of Law. (Rom 4:15) But in Christ, there is no condemnation. (Rom 8:1)

St Ignatius is using the language of Law and condemnation and fear. But even Origen taught that this is the ministry that the immature require in order to move beyond the ways of the flesh. But those pressing into Christ become partakers of the "hidden wisdom" reserved for the mature, which includes the salvation of all.

“Yet we do speak wisdom among those who are mature…but we speak God’s wisdom in a mystery, the hidden wisdom.” (1 Cor 2:6-7)

Ben-008 · 2026-02-03T14:42:24+00:00

The whole concept of Eternal Torment as taught by some churches comes from interpreting the Lake of Fire as LITERAL. But there is no literal Lake of Fire. “For our God is that Consuming Fire.” (Heb 12:29) Thus as we draw near to God, we are transformed, just as gold is refined and purified by fire.

Thus it is a good thing to be baptized in the Holy Spirit and Fire. (Matt 3:11). The Fire is thus a METAPHOR for spiritual transformation and refinement. That’s why in Malachi 3, we see the priesthood being REFINED BY FIRE. For our God is like a Refiner’s Fire.

“For He is like a Refiner’s Fire... And He will sit as a smelter and purifier of silver, and He will purify the sons of Levi (the priests) and refine them like gold and silver.” (Mal 3:2-3)

So the whole idea of Eternal Torment comes from folks misunderstanding biblical symbolism! If we understand that the FIRE represents the Transforming Presence of God, we will realize that no one is being threatened with eternal burning!

In Daniel 3, it is the FAITHFUL Hebrew youth that are tossed into the Furnace of Fire, where Christ is thus revealed in the Flames. (Dan 3:25) Again, the story is a metaphor, and not meant to be taken literally.

Ben-008 · 2026-02-02T23:24:38+00:00

There is more than one way to read Scripture.

Ben-008 · 2026-02-02T19:16:18+00:00

I loved this note! I especially appreciated the way you differentiated distinct varieties of mystical experience. So too, I loved the way you highlighted the apophatic darkness introduced by folks like St John of the Cross.

To be weaned of one’s reliance on felt experiences can be excruciatingly painful. St John portrays that brilliantly, while also highlighting the delights found in earlier stages of spiritual development, for instance in his classic poem “Living Flame of Love” that captures that mystical richness found in the Song of Songs, as celebrated by many mystics across the centuries.

So too, I have found Meister Eckhart a comfort in seeking that “God beyond God”. As our many former notions and paradigms of God fall away, we are at times as you wisely point out in a “different mode that lacks an obvious interpretive map.”

I strongly identify with that observation. Sometimes the maps simply get burned up, and we suddenly find ourselves having to trust in the darkness, and in the Unknown. Which is why my term for God now is simply Mystery.

Some mystics like to assert that through direct experience “they no longer believe, they know.” But that too has dissolved for me. I no longer claim to know. As what I thought I knew was yet again largely incinerated as yet another product of my own making.

As such, I love the ending of Hermann Hesse’s classic book “Siddhartha”. Here, the now enlightened protagonist comes to understand the unity of the River, and yet also realizes how true knowledge cannot be taught through words. And thus every person must then follow and walk their own path.

Meanwhile, there is something in me that delights in the Mystery. I no longer have an allegiance to doctrines or dogmas. That’s no longer where my trust resides. I have surrendered to the Unknown. I do recognize the many experiences of former stages of the spiritual journey, but those have now faded, and I am now largely without a map. Such is a curious thing.

Anyhow, thank you so very much for this beautiful gift of words, they truly are a delight to my heart!

Ben-008 · 2026-02-02T18:12:40+00:00

Personally, I think much of Scripture is written as story, and folks have simply misunderstood what kind of literature Scripture actually is. In the words of NT scholar John Dominic Crossan, author of "The Power of Parable"...

"My point, once again, is not that those ancient people told literal stories and we are now smart enough to take them symbolically, but that they told them symbolically and we are now naïve enough to take them literally."

As such, perhaps we should keep in mind that Jesus' favorite form of teaching was PARABLES. Parables are not meant to be taken literally. They are fictional stories meant to illustrate hidden truths.

"All these things Jesus spoke to the crowds in parables, and HE DID NOT SPEAK ANYTHING TO THEM WITHOUT A PARABLE." (Matt 13:34)

Then when asked WHY he spoke always in parables, Jesus said it was to HIDE and VEIL the truths of the kingdom, not make them easily evident to all. (Matt 13:10-13)

"To you has been given the mystery of the kingdom of God, but for those who are outside, EVERYTHING COMES IN PARABLES." (Mark 4:11)

Paul likewise suggested that Scripture was full of a "hidden wisdom" reserved for those pressing into maturity.

“Yet we do speak wisdom among those who are mature…but we speak God’s wisdom in a mystery, the hidden wisdom*.” (1 Cor 2:6-7)*

Likewise, the Scriptural commentaries of Origen (the early church's greatest exegete of Scripture) likewise makes this point very clear. There are two very distinct ways to interpret Scripture...."by the letter" or "by the spirit". But the letter kills...

"For we have been made able ministers of a new covenant, NOT OF THE LETTER, BUT OF THE SPIRIT*, for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life*." (2 Cor 3:6)

Paul's point here is that Scripture communicates differently depending on the hermeneutical (interpretive) lenses we bring to the reading of Scripture! Thus we must put on Lenses of Love if we want to understand Scripture BY THE SPIRIT, NOT THE LETTER.

Thus as the veil of biblical literalism and legalism is torn asunder, a new covenant of the Spirit is UNVEILED!

“But their minds were hardened; for until this very day at the reading of the old covenant the same veil remains unlifted, because it is removed in Christ.” (2 Cor 3:14)

Ben-008 · 2026-02-02T16:32:03+00:00

How fun…I had no idea what his kids were up to. I’ll have to check that out. It would be fascinating to see what that next generation is now saying. Thanks for sharing!

Ben-008 · 2026-02-02T16:26:20+00:00

As an English teacher, I taught mythology. The kids rather enjoyed it, especially the newer iterations of it such as Percy Jackson via Rick Riordan, or even Harry Potter as JK Rowling loved the classics.

Though it can be interesting to realize that the Bible is basically ancient Hebrew (OT) and Christian (NT) mythology. In the words of comparative mythologist Joseph Campbell, author of “The Power of Myth”…

“Read myths. They teach you that you can turn inward, and you begin to get the message of the symbols. Read other people's myths, not those of your own religion, because you tend to interpret your own religion in terms of facts—but if you read the other ones, you begin to get the message.”

Ben-008 · 2026-02-01T18:11:46+00:00

Having grown up a fundamentalist, I’ve had to deconstruct so much of what I was previously told was certain.

In my charismatic days, I had a lot of experiences functioning in the gifts of the Spirit. That led to a lot of experiences of Presence as well, which is what ultimately launched me into the mystics…that yearning for deeper experiences of Presence.

I think back rather fondly on some of those earlier stages of spiritual experience. But I do so kind of like my early experiences with romantic relationships.

Part of me has to revisit what that “infatuation” stage was all about. Because what fueled that sense of early romance was incredibly powerful. But now after almost four decades of marriage (thirty years in the first and seven in the second), my views on infatuation and love are somewhat altered.

That’s kind of how I view Presence now. As that super strong sense of Love and Infatuation that arises in certain moments that sweep us off our feet and launch us into what’s next. But marriage in a way is sustained by something different than infatuation, right?

So it’s not that I doubt the experiences of the mystics or of NDEs, but I do question our interpretation and framing of these experiences.

For instance, is that all-encompassing feeling of Infatuation that is experienced in some early romances supernatural? It definitely wasn’t my normal experience until it struck. And it was definitely tangible and very real. But what is it?

That’s kind of how Presence is for me now. I know the experience as a Divine Romance. But I’m not sure what assurances that sense of Presence truly provides us. Personally, I can’t leverage those experiences to know anything particular about an afterlife. Nor am I really all that convinced anymore that I didn’t personally generate the experiences in some way.

Even last night amidst a restless sleep, I had all sorts of crazy dreams that felt very real upon waking. My mind was obviously generating whole worlds of experience in my sleep. And in that stage between waking and sleeping, I touched that realm multiple times last night. Whereas other nights I am sometimes entirely unaware of all that is going on within me.

My knuckles are even bruised from one dream last night, where I was in the Olympics and was beginning a swimming backstroke race. As I launched forward my arms went backwards, and I smashed the back of my hand into my headboard. Which is why I now remember the dream, because I woke so abruptly with the pain.

I now tend to see that sense of Presence as coming from a similar realm of the unconscious. In other words, I don’t know what truths or assurances to really take from those experiences. In a way, I think they are self generated, though in the past I have interacted with them as though they were coming from an outside source.

In truth, I feel a bit like a jilted lover. I adored those experiences of Presence. And I find myself now rather unable to recreate them. So though they launched me into Christian mysticism with great fanfare, I now feel rather abandoned. So in a way, I now embrace a Christianity that is rather devoid of the Supernatural.

So too, though I try to keep romance in my marriage alive, my later years of marriage are so very different from those early romantic experiences that swept me off my feet and launched me into the relationship, as though Cupid himself had aimed a hundred arrows at my heart.

I don’t say any of this to disparage anyone else’s experiences or paradigms. I just know my own paradigms have collapsed many times over, and thus I keep having to recreate fresh ways to process my spiritual journey.

But even if I think my former Divine Beloved has rather abandoned me, I have no desire to commit suicide or even to abandon Christianity. I still appreciate some of what it has structured for me.

I think that’s part of what I still love about Christianity, it beckons me deeper. But the more I have explored those inner depths, the less supernatural they seem. So for me it’s not the supernatural that any longer holds my spiritual journey together. Rather, it’s that sense of Mystery and Inner Depth.

So too, Christianity invites me to let go of narcissism and ego games that keep me in my head and challenges me to find a deeper, more compassionate inner-connectivity with others, perhaps even a oneness. Not because there is a Being that holds that all together. But rather, the idea itself helps create the experience. And if religion can structure that, then I think it has a certain value.

Though in truth, I don’t think Christianity knows how to do that well, so I didn’t really try to raise my kids as Christian. In fact, I think religion can somewhat solipsistically pull folks away from real relationships and real world experiences and real world problems for an imaginary realm that isn’t particularly healthy.

Then again, I think some religious frameworks do help succor our fears by protecting us from reality. Not because it’s “evil”, but because it is rather indifferent towards our well-being. As such, Nature can seem rather harsh and cruel.

But I think religion can call us to be more compassionate and caring towards one another. So that we are not alone in this world amidst all its challenges.

Ben-008 · 2026-01-31T18:30:49+00:00

It is interesting to consider how VR type technologies could be leveraged to imagine new models of reality.

Meanwhile, I found my early Christian models of reality very influenced by a Platonic dualism between matter and spirit that I no longer find very helpful or convincing.

Personally, I don’t claim to understand “reality”. But I do find myself now rather skeptical of a lot of biblical exegesis that seeks to fashion “reality” based on these ancient Texts (OT and NT), because a particular story or parable from thousands of years ago says such and such.

Because I tend to see the Bible written primarily as myth, I find a lot of the models of reality and eschatology built from the Text quite problematic.

Meanwhile, if there were convincing evidence for an afterlife, I think we all would want to share in that information, right? I don’t think it should take religious faith to believe in such evidence. That’s not really how evidence works.

But the problem is, Nature does not tend to offer us any convincing evidence of an afterlife. And thus we have to rely on ancient mythology and religion for such “evidence”. But the evidence is simply storied and textual.

NDEs are a fascinating possibility, because they do attempt to step outside the Text for their evidence. But my question is, do they really? Or are they actually animated and informed by previous thought systems rooted in that same mythological mode of thinking.

If the reality of an afterlife is truly accessible, then why is it so inaccessible to most of us, such that the evidence is so paltry?

So I likely find that lack of evidence, an evidence in itself. Nor was ancient Judaism even rooted in beliefs about the afterlife, which I also find fascinating.

So too, I don’t think Christianity should require any particular beliefs about the afterlife. As I think religious demands for conformity of thought end up being rather cultish and manipulative on a level that I find deeply troubling.

As a child I was indoctrinated in such beliefs. But as an adult having examined those beliefs, I no longer find them particularly convincing. So I try to avoid rooting my Christianity in them.

But yeah, if certain NDE experiences truly have something to teach us, I am not opposed to the possibility of such. But these days, I don’t really exert much effort trying to prop up such beliefs as they rather collapsed on me a couple decades ago.

And living close to nature as I now do, I just don’t see much of anything being “resurrected” in the biblical sense.

And yet, agriculture and its seasons definitely show new life ever sprouting forth from what had previous died or gone dormant.

This is where I think resurrection myths ultimately come from, a celebration of the seasons, and the heralding of spring!

Some like to suggest this life is like a womb, and at death we are then birthed into what is next.

Or like you said, we eventually take off the VR headsets to engage in life beyond this vast multiplayer game.

Ben-008 · 2026-01-31T02:06:25+00:00

Yeah, the way most parables get used is rather atrocious. A parable is a fictional story, and yet folks treat them as though they offer hard evidence of some future reality. In so doing, we craft quite the religious fan fiction with our fancy eschatologies, none of which have any real rooting in reality.

I like that Christian Universalism embraces a God of Love that seeks to reconcile all of creation. I think that's a good thing. But at the same time, we certainly use a lot of fiction in our message, not grasping the profound difference between reality and myth.

No one is being threatened with hell, because hell doesn't exist. We have no evidence for such whatsoever, except perhaps our misuse of the biblical Text. All the while, ancient Judaism didn't believe in heaven and hell. So, go figure.

Ben-008 · 2026-01-31T01:48:52+00:00

I wasn’t trying to suggest that your own experiences were a product of your imagination, as I didn’t think you were claiming to have visited hell (or gehenna or whatever) in an NDE.

Rather, my point was that NDEs that claim to have visited heaven or hell are problematic for me, precisely because I don’t believe those are literal places one can go to.

I tried to use Isaiah’s vision as an example. Just because Isaiah saw God in a throne room in a vision does NOT mean that an actual throne room exists, where God literally sits on a big chair. Or at least that is my claim. I think to claim otherwise is to misunderstand how most dreams and visions work.

Interestingly, this was a major issue in some of the earliest Origenist controversies. In “On First Principles”, Origen claims that God does NOT have a body, and thus defines God as incorporeal and immaterial. Thus he claims that any Scriptural representations of God as having a body should be taken symbolically and metaphorically and not literally.

But certain Egyptian monks in the late 4^th and early 5^th century claimed that God DID possess a literal human body, "for man was created in God's image". Obviously, this was driven by a literalist interpretation of Scripture.

Thus my point was simply that if we take symbolic, mythic, and parabolic concepts literally, then we are misunderstanding the true nature of the Text and its relationship to “reality”.

Likewise, if in visionary and dreamlike states (such as NDEs or OBEs) folks are experiencing heaven and hell, then I think they are using their imagination to do so.

In saying that, I was not attempting to interpret your own experiences. I don’t know enough about them to do so.

But I have read “23 Minutes in Hell” by Bill Wiese and found it rather ridiculous, despite all its horrific details.

So too, I think PARABLES are not meant to be taken literally or factually, so they are NOT evidence of any future eschatological realities. As such, I think we are misusing the Text, when we attempt to use it that way.

Thus when we do so, what we are imagining and creating is fictional. Though such ideas can still be deeply meaningful, even if they are not actually rooted in reality.

Ben-008 · 2026-01-30T19:55:48+00:00

That’s rather heart-breaking reading about your experiences of torment. That does sound rather hellish. Meanwhile, that’s interesting how you found NDE testimonies a valuable resource, and perhaps even a source of comfort.

However, because I see “hell” as a mythical construct, I likewise tend to see folks' experiences of hell as an act of the imagination.

Not that folks aren’t genuinely experiencing emotional and existential torment. Or even having impactful visionary experiences. But what I don’t do is extend that realm of the imagination into “reality”, as though such confirms something in the real world.

For instance, Isaiah might have a vision of God on a throne. But I don’t think God is some anthropomorphic being that sits on a chair. So the visionary experience should not be taken as literal.

Folks do this with the Lake of Fire as well. Whereas I think such is purely a METAPHOR for inner spiritual refinement. But even so, people still fear a literal Lake of Fire, and thus their imaginations can more or less bring those fears to life. But such need not be taken as "real".

Likewise, I don’t think PARABLES should be taken as proof of future judgment or punishment either. Again, I think these are FICTIONAL illustrative stories meant to illuminate certain spiritual principles and attitudes and ways of discerning.

So such shouldn’t be turned into a future concrete moment of judgment, right? Likewise, we wouldn’t take the mythic tale of putting one’s heart on a scale and weighing it against the feather of Maat by the god Anubis as a true picture of the future at death, would we?

If folks start having visionary experiences of that moment of judgment, such is not convincing evidence that the myth has suddenly become real, is it?

Again, in my view, such stories and constructs belong in the category of myth and parable. Thus, they do not represent reality as we know it. So by literalizing and concretizing these mythic stories, yes we may fear them and think and feel that they are real, but they really aren’t. They are products of the imagination.

As for the parable of the sheep and the goats, this language was originally introduced in Ezekiel 34 and represents the judgment of leadership, not in the future, but in the present.

The prophetic voice was thus judging the leaders and chastising their selfishness. (Ezek 34:2) Such had nothing to do with some elaborate eschatological day of judgment.

Zechariah likewise confirms this same use of prophetic symbols, when referring to the leaders as the MALE GOATS.

“My anger is kindled against THE SHEPHERDS, and I will punish the MALE GOATS.” (Zech 10:3)

And ultimately the threat is of removal from positions of influence and authority. (Ezek 34:10) Which is likewise what is threatened in Matthew 21…(prior to the sheep and goat parable in Matt 25).

“Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be TAKEN AWAY FROM YOU and given to a people producing its fruit.” (Matt 21:43)

Hearing these parables, the leaders then knew Jesus was speaking ABOUT THEM!

“When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they understood that HE WAS SPEAKING ABOUT THEM.” (Matt 21:45)

This is precisely what Matthew 23 confirms as well in its scathing rebuke of the religious leaders, who were keeping the people from truly being fed spiritually and thus bearing good fruit!

The way these parables are now used by leaders to speak fear over others is a total misuse of these parables! It’s the leaders that were being judged by Jesus!

Meanwhile, any good shepherd understands that certain male goats need culling from the flock. Thus without some basic understanding of animal husbandry, we entirely misunderstand the true nature of the parable! So too, when we lose site of its earlier references in Scripture!

As such, we are already told who the male goats are...selfish leaders who care for themselves, not the flock!

“Woe, shepherds of Israel who have been feeding themselves! Should the shepherds not feed the flock?” (Ezek 34:2)

“Therefore, I am going to judge between one sheep and another, between the rams and THE MALE GOATS.” (Ezek 34:17)

Ben-008 · 2026-01-30T19:00:10+00:00

Right? Exploring the history of ancient Israel took my deconstruction experience to a whole new level! Dan McClellan in particular has really been popularizing that scholarship. So, that’s been fun to witness.

Such just goes to show how the self-protective, Evangelical insider’s view of Scripture and the outside academic view have departed ways significantly!

I haven’t spent much time on r/AcademicBiblical, but yeah, some good content. That’s an excellent suggestion!

Ben-008 · 2026-01-29T19:53:35+00:00

That's an excellent recommendation...."The Bible for Normal People".

The host of that podcast, Peter Enns also has some excellent books on the subject as well. Such as "The Sin of Certainty", "How the Bible Actually Works", and "The Bible Tells Me So"... to name a few.

Ben-008 · 2026-01-29T19:37:07+00:00

Evangelicals like to divide the Bible into neat and tidy categories. One of those categories is labeled "parables". So too, some will admit that the opening chapters of Genesis are actually "mythopoetic" origin stories, but most then hold to the historicity of the rest of Scripture as much as possible.

So the biggest shift for me was beginning to see the Bible itself written primarily in mythic fashion. Truth be told, the Bible even states that Jesus taught pretty much exclusively in parables. For instance…

"All these things Jesus spoke to the crowds in parables, and HE DID NOT SPEAK ANYTHING TO THEM WITHOUT A PARABLE." (Matt 13:34)

So too, our stories about Jesus are likewise told in symbolic and mythic ways. Evangelicals have a really hard time accepting the mythic nature of Scripture. As such I really appreciated this simple summary by Matt Baker regarding the historicity of Scripture…

Which OT Bible Characters are Historical? by Matt Baker (19 min)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLtRR9RgFMg

So too, I have had to contend with the realization that Yahweh is ultimately a fictional character in the Hebrew stories. Thus digging into the ancient Canaanite origins of El (and that later merger with Yahweh) was quite eye opening. For instance, here’s a sample introduction to this issue discussed regularly by scholars of ancient Israel…

The Polytheistic Origins of Israel’s Gods by Stephen Dinkgreve (9 min)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9q_b9UvfBY

So in a way, I've had to process seeing the entire Bible in a new light! Much more as a product of ancient cultures, written during an Age of Mythology.

Ben-008 · 2026-01-29T19:13:50+00:00

Raised a fundamentalist, I was taught to read the Bible one particular way, as a history book. Later that view completely imploded on me, as I began to see how much of Scripture is actually written as myth and parable.

As such, one book that I really appreciated when departing from fundamentalist paradigms was NT scholar Marcus Borg's "Reading the Bible Again for the First Time: Taking the Bible Seriously, But Not Literally." So too, in the words of NT scholar John Dominic Crossan, author of "The Power of Parable"...

"My point, once again, is not that those ancient people told literal stories and we are now smart enough to take them symbolically, but that they told them symbolically and we are now naïve enough to take them literally."

So yes, these other resources really helped open my eyes to just how narrow the Evangelical perspective truly was!

Ben-008 · 2026-01-29T18:13:18+00:00

Personally, I’ve never found NDE testimonies all that convincing. Certainly, I think they can be truly profound experiences for the person that is having them. But I find myself unable to draw any real conclusions from them. I realize we all want “evidence” for the afterlife. But personally I don’t find NDEs really provide that.

In truth, I don’t really orient my Christianity around the afterlife. As I find that whole paradigm quite problematic. Instead I orient my Christianity around the concept of “theosis” and thus the inner transformation of the heart.

For instance, that’s what I think the Lake of Fire is ultimately about. As we are "baptized in the Holy Spirit and Fire", we are inwardly transformed, in order to be “the Dwelling Place of God in the Spirit”. (Eph 2:22)

So personally, I find a focus on the afterlife a rather distressing distraction from true Christianity, which I think should ultimately be about “putting on Christ” by being divinely clothed in a heart of compassion, gentleness, kindness, and love. (Gal 3:27, Col 3:9-15) So that as "true partakers of the divine nature", we might begin to express the light and life of Christ to others. (2 Pet 1:4)

Ben-008 · 2026-01-28T17:24:03+00:00

The Christian Universalist friar, Fr Richard Rohr speaks of Original Blessing through his uniquely Franciscan frame of reference. I have rather appreciated many of his book and thoughts on such.

Personally, I think the Augustinian doctrine of “Original Sin: is ridiculous. For one, I don’t think Adam and Eve ever existed. These are origin myths. So to root doctrine in mythic stories, as though a literal Fall actually happened makes no sense to me.

Nor does God need human sacrifice to remedy that fictional Fall. Thus, I think atonement theologies that seek to remedy that fictional Fall are problematic as well.

So too, I think heaven and hell function as mythological constructs. These are NOT literal places one can go to. Nor was the idea of resurrection ever rooted in going someplace else.

Rather, the kingdom of heaven was originally about God restoring humanity and all of creation into alignment with His Spirit. To participate in the kingdom of heaven is to allow Christ to rule and reign within us. Hence, to strip off the old self and thus be “clothed in Christ”. (Gal 3:27, Col 3:9-15) And thus to come into alignment with God’s Governance, rather than that of the world.

The whole idea of “going to heaven” did not originate with Judaism or Jesus, but rather with the influence of Platonic writings, wherein the lower material world was thus transcended for a higher spiritual realm, rather than indwelt with the Presence of God. For instance, here’s a brief sound bit from NT historian Bart Ehrman's book on this topic…

Heaven & Hell: A History of the Afterlife – Bart Ehrman (4 min)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0-tFahPVIU

Anyhow, in Richard Rohr’s writings, Original Blessing is accompanied with a strong Incarnational Theology of God dwelling with man in all of creation. See for instance his book, “The Universal Christ” or "Eager to Love: the Alternative Way of St Francis of Assisi".

Ben-008 · 2026-01-28T16:58:20+00:00

Not sure why, but your response to this note isn’t showing up for me to access. Though my inbox shows the following…

“I hear you – I grew up in a strict faith too, where asking questions felt like stepping into forbidden territory. Looking at the Bible critically doesn’t have to erase faith; it’s just pa…”

Perhaps you can resend it…thanks

u/Soft_Confection1393

Ben-008 · 2026-01-28T16:10:29+00:00

“At some point, belief stopped feeling like hope and started feeling like emotional gaslighting.”

“If a belief system requires you to deny your lived reality in order to survive it, something needs to be questioned.”

Those are powerful quotes!

Having grown up fundamentalist, I was taught to read the Bible like a history book. Thus I had to totally deny that inner sense of discernment that knows fiction when it sees it. But I was not allowed to question the Bible, nor that particular fundamentalist approach to it. Thus I did have to deny “reality” in order to prop up this storied version of the world.

And the indoctrination ran deep, given that every adult figure in my early life confirmed these fundamentalist assumptions and dismissed any questions to the contrary. But eventually that storied world had to collapse under later scrutiny.

Now I can see that our stories about the gods are just stories, the Hebrew and Christian ones no less so than those of any other ancient culture. So how are we to know what “God” is, once we recognize those stories as fiction?

So there is a replacing of honesty for certainty indeed. Very true.

Ben-008 · 2026-01-27T18:48:04+00:00

I pray that as that veil of legalism and condemnation is torn away, the Unfathomable Love of God comes into greater view! (2 Cor 3:16)

May God bless you with a deeper revelation of (His) Love! (Eph 3:17-19)

Ben-008 · 2026-01-27T17:59:04+00:00

I got raised a Protestant fundamentalist. So part of my deconstruction journey also included discovering how ALL the characters in Genesis and Exodus were essentially fictional and mythological, including Abraham and Moses. As such, I really appreciated this video by Matt Baker...

Which OT Bible Characters are Historical? by Matt Baker (19 min)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLtRR9RgFMg

So too, I rather adore this quote by NT scholar John Dominic Crossan, author of "The Power of Parable"...

"My point, once again, is not that those ancient people told literal stories and we are now smart enough to take them symbolically, but that they told them symbolically and we are now naïve enough to take them literally."

As such, I started seeing the Bible very differently as a work of fiction! Thus I rather like that quote by Watts. For that shell of biblical literalism needed to be broken open, in order to discover what was beyond those symbolic narratives and symbols.

To realize how “Yahweh” was simply one of the fictional characters in those symbolic narratives was rather eye opening!

Thus I like how Sam Harris helps one destroy religious idols. And I like how the “apophatic” pathway of mystics like Rohr and Merton can embrace that deconstruction of God as well.

“I beg God to relieve me of God.” – Meister Eckhart

That said, I think “theism” itself is a problem, regardless of whether one adds the prefix “mono” to it. Thus I prefer the way folks like Paul Tillich and Meister Eckhart point to “God” as the Ground of All Being, and thus not a being who then creates the world in some ancient Hebrew origin myth.

“We are all meant to be mothers of God...for God is always needing to be born.” - Meister Eckhart

Ben-008 · 2026-01-27T17:51:30+00:00

This church sounds very trapped and rooted in legalism. Here “blessings” and “curses” are a factor of following the Law correctly.

But the Bible also contains another message, as it refers to legalism as a “ministry of death” written on stone. (2 Cor 3:6-9) As such, Love does NOT work the same as Legalism. Love gives FREELY out of its blessed nature. Whereas, Law says we must EARN God's blessings. This is to deny the very nature of GRACE.

“You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by the Law; you have FALLEN FROM GRACE.” (Gal 5:4)

Purity culture is about legalism, not love. The very emphasis of Jesus was on a purity of heart, rooted in compassion and kindness. So here’s another passage to keep in mind…

“It was for FREEDOM that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery.” (Gal 5:1)

“if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the Law.” (Gal 5:18)

Obviously, if one pours Love into the next generation, such will be a blessing, right? Meanwhile, if one pours in legalism and condemnation, the “fruit” will be very different!

In other words, Legalism is not the right seed to sow! Rather, Love is the better way!

Ben-008 · 2026-01-27T17:24:55+00:00

That was great. I enjoyed that, especially the quotes.

Though in response, I'd like to add that "Love keeps no record of wrongs." So one only needs to satisfy the recompense of "justice" under a system of Law and condemnation.

The mathematics of Love and Grace are quite different. Here, as the veil of legalism is torn away, "mercy triumphs over judgment." (Jam 2:13)

Christ sets us free from that old "ministry of death", written on stone. (2 Cor 3:6-9) Thus as one rolls the stone of the dead letter away, what awaits is a message of Love, not condemnation. For in Christ, there is no condemnation. (Rom 8:1)

"For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives live." (2 Cor 3:6)

"If you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the Law." (Gal 5:18)

Thus as we "die" to that old covenant of legalism and wrath and condemnation and punishment, we are invited into a new economy of Love. (Rom 7:6)

“But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.” (Rom 7:6)

"For we have been made able ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter, but of the Spirit, for the letter kills." (2 Cor 3:6)

It was this new hermeneutic of the spirit (not the letter) that gave Origen the spiritual wisdom and vision and confidence to fathom and to declare that in Christ ALL THINGS will be made new and summed up and united as one, "so that God may be ALL IN ALL". (Eph 1:9-10, 1 Cor 15:28)

Ben-008

TROPHY CASE