Apokatastasis

[Thomas]

On the question of apokatastasis —

Those who know me here will know my allegiance to Christian apophatic theology ... and might know that the Fathers to whom I refer on these matters: St John, St Paul, Gregory of Nyssa, Dionysius the pseudoAreopagite, St Maximus the Confessor, Eriugena ... all held, to some degree, and idea of apokatastasis.

St Maximus, in Questiones et Dubia 19, commenting on the notion of apokatastasis as found in Gregory of Nyssa, who in turn was following Origen, writes that the Church knows or recognises three kinds of restoration:
The first meaning applies to the restoration of the individual through virtue; in this case restoration means the return to the primordial condition of man's goodness.
The second meaning applies to the restoration of the whole nature of man during the resurrection of bodies: the ontological condition of paradisal incorruptibility and immortality is restored.
The third, and here Maximos refers specifically to Gregory of Nyssa, applies to the restoration of the powers of the soul to the state they were created, before they were altered by sin.

To understand this, one needs to understand the idea of the free will of man, a question brought out in the Christological disputes which came to a head at the Council of Chalcedon (451), and continued afterwards with the disputes with the Nestorians and the Eutycheans, and the arguments regarding the divine and human nature of Christ that arose, such as monothelitism and monophysitism.

As Maximus was a champion both of the orthodox Christology, and the correction and restoration of the teachings of Origen and Evagrius, his theology is a useful access point to the idea of apokatastasis.

Above all, writers such as Maximus and Dionysius saw that carnal man would all too readily turn a doctrine into one of self-justification, and chose rather to "honour the truth by silence" than to let it fall into the distortions of the carnal mind.

Apokatastasis seems to suggest the annihilation of evil, because the effects of sin are healed. This will be achieved by the expulsion of evil from the souls in the continuation of the ages. All restored souls will come to know God and see that he is anaitios tês hamartias, not responsible for the existence of sin, which is the same as saying they will know the true nature of good and evil.

The "perverted" powers of the soul will then cast off the memories and the effect of evil, and in a way similar to the thought of Gregory of Nyssa, this involves a trial by fire, a punishment and/or purification.

St Maximus suggests that all souls will have a knowledge of "good things" (agatha), but not necessarily participation in them. Here we can see signs of something other than a universal restoration.

Irenaeus and other fathers talk of the rewards according to merit in this life, based on the Parable of the seeds, Matthew 13:8-9 "and they brought forth fruit, some an hundredfold, some sixtyfold, and some thirtyfold. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear."

Salvation of all is not an ontological necessity, although it seems to be strongly suggested as the rational consequence of the restoration of the powers of the soul.

Maximus names the will as at least one of the powers of the soul that will be restored. Does that mean that gnomic will (the deliberative will particular to the fallen nature) will be transformed into natural will?

If so, and that seems most likely to be the case, this is the boldest statement in support of the apokatastasis that we can find in the writings of Maximos. How can it be possible not to repent and to beg for the forgiveness of God in the most profound and sincere way, once our will has been restored to the natural will which is subject to God's will?

St Maximus does not speculate beyond the moment when the human being has knowledge (epignosis) of God. This does not necessarily mean the participation in Him, simply knowledge of Him. That knowledge will, nevertheless, be 'entire' and 'complete' and 'perfect' according to the soul's attainment of virtue in this life.

Thus some will be close to God, and some will be distant; some a hundredfold, some sixtyfold, some thirtyfold, and again, in the 'many mansions', some will be close to the Temple that stands at the centre of the Celestial City, some will be at further remove ... but all will be at the place they should be, according to their attainment in this life, and all will be at the fullness of their being.

The question is, how can we understand the restoration of the natural will in the soul, with everything this entails about the passions and the tendency to sin?

Will it be possible for human, angelic and even demonic souls, at the moment of their bodily and psychic restoration, to repent, to be forgiven and be accepted in the kingdom of God (since they cast off their deliberative, gnomic will, and should be able to see the difference between good and evil), or will the return be restricted to the ones who repented during life on earth?

This is the big question.

If no repentence is possible, then what 'good' in in punishment? None. Then what is the point?

Either repentance is possible, and the 'pain' and 'torment' is in realising the truth, and how far shoert we have fallen of our potentiality ... so this is not a punishment inflicted by God, so much as a remorse at the realisation of a degree of error and self-will ... and contrition.

If repentence is not possible, then the judgement is final. Again, God does not inflict pain or torment, but rather the human soul has, by its own determination, consigned itself to non-reality; it has no place in the scheme of things, and the best biblical signifier of this state is gehenna — the place where those who have no place are disposed of ... the idea of flame, fire, torment, etc., is just the language of the volative will ... the reality is more frightening — the utter extinction of the soul.

This idea is unthinkable ... but the idea of a God who is the plaything of man, of man who can do what he likes in life because God will forgive him regardless, is equally irrational ...

So as long as man is free to accept God, he is free to deny Him, and if he is free to deny Him, there must be a logical consequence of that act.

Thomas

 

[iBrian]

If repentence is not possible, then the judgement is final. Again, God does not inflict pain or torment, but rather the human soul has, by its own determination, consigned itself to non-reality; it has no place in the scheme of things, and the best biblical signifier of this state is gehenna — the place where those who have no place are disposed of ... the idea of flame, fire, torment, etc., is just the language of the volative will ... the reality is more frightening — the utter extinction of the soul.

This idea is unthinkable ... but the idea of a God who is the plaything of man, of man who can do what he likes in life because God will forgive him regardless, is equally irrational ...

So as long as man is free to accept God, he is free to deny Him, and if he is free to deny Him, there must be a logical consequence of that act.

Thomas

Isn't this a contradict to the claim to Free Will in the thread that inspired this one?

After all, it is a Hobson's Choice - you appear to be suggesting that we have Free Will to choose between Christian God and Total Annihilation. That's no real choice at all.

Yet you seem to suggest that any other possibility is unpalatable - but isn't this simply the case of trying to define the Divine by our own subjective demands?

This is probably the best quote of all:

Maximus and Dionysius saw that carnal man would all too readily turn a doctrine into one of self-justification

Isn't this exactly what has happened to all organised Christian belief - one where doctrine has became focused on self-justification? Heck, all organised religious belief?

 

[Dondi]

Thus some will be close to God, and some will be distant; some a hundredfold, some sixtyfold, some thirtyfold, and again, in the 'many mansions', some will be close to the Temple that stands at the centre of the Celestial City, some will be at further remove ... but all will be at the place they should be, according to their attainment in this life, and all will be at the fullness of their being.

If this be the case, then the enjoyment (or conversely, the despisement) of God is only a matter of degrees. There doesn't appear to be a line of demarcation one way or another. When James and John asked Jesus if they could sit on his right side or left side, He said it wasn't up to Him, it is really up to the degree in which they drank out of the same cup and baptised with what Jesus was baptised, as given by the Father. (James and John's respond, "We are able" indicates they weren't, but by virtue of their pride in thinking they were able. They hadn't been tested yet.)

Such a position, depending on how close one is to God, will determine the place one will find themselves in that city, as it were. I suspect that God would be there to meet the person wherever they happen to be, in order to encourage and draw them to Himself, if indeed universal restoration is in the plan. If one has some indignation against God, then that will have to be dealt with before moving closer. The prodigal son made the choice to leave, so must he make the choice to come back, to open arms, of course.

What we then have is a sweeping panorama of the extant world population throughout history at various distances from the true level of attainment and relationship of God, and that the process of reconciliation will continue until everyone is brought in, until everyone of His 100 sheep are back in the fold, He is not content with just 99.

 

[taijasi]

by virtue of their pride in thinking

I'm not sure I follow?

...

Well AMEN Brothers, you have it all worked out!

Such a pity though, isn't it for some, that we have to sit waaaaaay in the back here, clapping and whooping and hollering and cheering ... while you guys take all the credit.

Oh well, we'll just remember to say, "We knew them when ..."

 

[wil]

Namaste Thomas,

Well I'm just a simple fellow and often get lost in all the jargon, but on this we seem to agree but on different planes.

What we then have is a sweeping panorama of the extant world population throughout history at various distances from the true level of attainment and relationship of God, and that the process of reconciliation will continue until everyone is brought in, until everyone of His 100 sheep are back in the fold, He is not content with just 99.

Now this one is interesting, while as I don't believe in G!d fussing or worrying about being content or contentment, (well don't believe 'Him' to be fussing or worrying at all, about anything as fussing and worrying and contentment and Him are us making G!d in our image...but) the rest of it...is inevitable.

Tis only the how we will all discuss till 'Kingdom come' as it were.

I don't see any repentment, or worship, or savin' a need to be goin on...

process of reconciliation will continue

now that...to me that is it all.

But what is that process? As discussed before I don't buy any wishy washy lightin bolt throwin, river partin, plague dispensin, baby killin G!d. I believe in principle and natural law not all of which we come close to identifying.

That we as beings of light from the one, in the one, with the one, part of the one, will eventually understand we are all one and return to the one.

No matter how many lifetimes it takes. G!d is love and Love is patient.

 

[taijasi]

Thomas, I would like to think your OP a bit further through before saying more (if at all), but meanwhile, the following Biblical Teachings - which I think have some relevance here - come to mind:

"So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen." (Matthew 20:16)

"Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me."
(Matthew 25:40)

"For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."
(Matthew 5:18)
​

Coincidentally, these three teachings are all from Matthew. But I believe the Wisdom is apparent elsewhere. Also on this topic:

"Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ"
(Ephesians 4:13 ... see also the next two verses, noting v.15 especially)

"And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me."
(John 12:32)

"Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out" (Rev. 3:12)
​

So, there's Sts. Paul and John for ya.

 

[Thomas]

Hi Brian —

After all, it is a Hobson's Choice - you appear to be suggesting that we have Free Will to choose between Christian God and Total Annihilation. That's no real choice at all.

I think the point here is accepting that we do not determine reality. Rather like the decision facing us environmentally at the moment ... we have the freedom to choose to continue as we are, or alter our lifestyle, but if we choose to continue as we are, then all the evidence suggests that lifestyle is unsustainable, and the consequence inevitable. It's that order of Hobson's Choice, it seems to me ... ?

Thomas

 

[Thomas]

If this be the case, then the enjoyment (or conversely, the despisement) of God is only a matter of degrees.

Quite so ... but each will enjoy his or her own degree 100%.

There doesn't appear to be a line of demarcation one way or another.

Not there, but there is here ... here we have the opportunity to poisition ourselves nearer or further.

And on from that, the freedom to position oneself not at all as it were, in which case there is no place to go ... this is why the apophatists see evil as the ultimate privation of everything. It is the total extinction of the person.

I suggest that is closer to what the Gehenna analogy was pointing toward.

What we then have is a sweeping panorama of the extant world population throughout history at various distances from the true level of attainment and relationship of God, and that the process of reconciliation will continue until everyone is brought in, until everyone of His 100 sheep are back in the fold, He is not content with just 99.

No, everyone will be brought in who wants to be brought in, but those who don't, won't be forced. Scripture is quite plain on that.

It's not a case of the contentment of God, that's an anthropomorphism. It's a case of what is, is. If man chooses extinction rather than salvation, then God will be 'content' with that.

Thomas

 

[Thomas]

Hi Wil —

That we as beings of light from the one, in the one, with the one, part of the one, will eventually understand we are all one and return to the one.

I'm not with you Wil ... Does this not mean that what we do in life doesn't matter, one way or the other, in which case the whole thing is rather meaningless, isn't it?

I don't think you mean that, I'm saying I don't get how the good that we do counts, but the bad that we do doesn't count?

No matter how many lifetimes it takes.

Well there you're non-Christian ... so really I'm discussing a different paradigm.

Thomas

 

[Dondi]

by virtue of their pride in thinking

I'm not sure I follow?

All I mean by that is that pride is what drove James and John to say 'we are able'. They thought they were being virtuous in their pride. But were basically shot down by Jesus. In essence, Jesus told them, 'go back to square one'.

Well AMEN Brothers, you have it all worked out!

Such a pity though, isn't it for some, that we have to sit waaaaaay in the back here, clapping and whooping and hollering and cheering ... while you guys take all the credit.

Oh well, we'll just remember to say, "We knew them when ..."

Sarcasm, on the other hand, is not a virtue.

 

[wil]

Hi Wil —

I'm not with you Wil ... Does this not mean that what we do in life doesn't matter, one way or the other, in which case the whole thing is rather meaningless, isn't it?

I don't think you mean that, I'm saying I don't get how the good that we do counts, but the bad that we do doesn't count?


Well there you're non-Christian ... so really I'm discussing a different paradigm.

Thomas

Namaste Thomas,

Plenty of Christians have and do believe in reincarnation just because I do, doesn't mean I'm non Christian. Some folks think Catholics aren't Christian you know Thomas...no use name calling in a middle of a discussion is there?

Of course the bad counts...hasn't every wrong thing you've done in your life, every 'sin' lead you to be the person you are today...it is all G!d it is all good. Some meant it for evil but G!d meant it for good, have we not learned anything from Joseph and his brothers?

I believe our souls are in training here in 3d, living the experiences we need to move onto the next plane. Some of can listen and learn, others need to touch the stove to know it is hot.

What is it that was said....ye without sin cast the first stone?

And of course good counts, it is all part of our learning curve.

So your paradigm is not that we will all return to G!d? I guess I really have issues reading...

 

[Dondi]

Now this one is interesting, while as I don't believe in G!d fussing or worrying about being content or contentment, (well don't believe 'Him' to be fussing or worrying at all, about anything as fussing and worrying and contentment and Him are us making G!d in our image...but) the rest of it...is inevitable.

Tis only the how we will all discuss till 'Kingdom come' as it were.

I don't see any repentment, or worship, or savin' a need to be goin on...

process of reconciliation will continue

now that...to me that is it all.

But what is that process? As discussed before I don't buy any wishy washy lightin bolt throwin, river partin, plague dispensin, baby killin G!d. I believe in principle and natural law not all of which we come close to identifying.

That we as beings of light from the one, in the one, with the one, part of the one, will eventually understand we are all one and return to the one.

No matter how many lifetimes it takes. G!d is love and Love is patient.

"How think ye? if a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains, and seeketh that which is gone astray?" - Matthew 18:12

"He spake also this parable; A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came and sought fruit thereon, and found none.
Then said he unto the dresser of his vineyard, Behold, these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and find none: cut it down; why cumbereth it the ground?
And he answering said unto him, Lord, let it alone this year also, till I shall dig about it, and dung it: And if it bear fruit, well: and if not, then after that thou shalt cut it down." - Luke 13:6-9

I'm not a big proponent of reincarnation, though I respect your opinion, Wil. I don't think that we necessarily have to return to earth in order to grow toward God through a series of incarnations. I think we will still be learning how to deal with people in the coming Kingdom. It's just that we will have the full spectrum of light available to show us the way.

 

[Thomas]

Plenty of Christians have and do believe in reincarnation just because I do, doesn't mean I'm non Christian.

'Fraid it does. The reincarnation thing wasn't a belief until it came across from Asia in the last century.

Some folks think Catholics aren't Christian you know Thomas...no use name calling in a middle of a discussion is there?

It's not a Catholic thing tho'. The Orthodox Patriarchates, the Reform churches ... I'm not sure what 'Christian' traditions do teach reincarnation? I'm saying reincarnation is not a Christian thing.

So I'm not name calling ... I'm just saying.

Of course the bad counts ... hasn't every wrong thing you've done in your life, every 'sin' lead you to be the person you are today ... it is all G!d it is all good.

Then if it's all God, it's all good ... and there is no such thing as bad.

In which case the whole message of Christ is false.

So I'm sorry, but your argument collapsed under its own inherent contradiction. It sees to me you want the benefits, but not the logical consequence of those benefits.

Some meant it for evil but G!d meant it for good, have we not learned anything from Joseph and his brothers?

I think you'll find the moral of the story is God brings good out of the bad, but does not will the bad — so it's not what God willed, and it's not good.

By your argument, any suffering anyone inflicts on another is 'good' because God will bring some good out of it. Again we're into self-justification, it seems to me.

I believe our souls are in training here in 3d, living the experiences we need to move onto the next plane. Some of can listen and learn, others need to touch the stove to know it is hot.

OK. But again, that's quite a modern doctrine, it's not Christian, and you can't just tag it on to Christianity, any more than you can tag Christianity onto any doctrine.

And of course good counts, it is all part of our learning curve.

So if the good counts with God, so does the bad. That's the point Jesus was making, and that's the point you seem to miss? You can't have it both ways.

So your paradigm is not that we will all return to G!d? I guess I really have issues reading...

My paradigm is that we all have a choice, and there are consequences...

More to the point, and I think this is the point ...

I'm saying, and the saints are saying, that to assume an eschatalogical condition as a given is a dangerous game, and to assume that we're all saved, regardless, is playing roulette with one's soul.

Thomas

 

[Dondi]

It's not a case of the contentment of God, that's an anthropomorphism. It's a case of what is, is. If man chooses extinction rather than salvation, then God will be 'content' with that.

While God might be beyond the limits of human comprehension, remember that He made us in His image, so we can derive from this that there is a certain shadowy resemblance in our own emotions, wants, and needs that must have been imprinted upon that image from the source. Otherwise, we might as well believe in a Deistic God.

Did not Jesus, God in the flesh, have compassion for people? Did He not lament that He desired to gather Jerusalem like a mother hen to her chicks, but they would not? Does God not so love the world?

100 sheep are 100 sheep, not 99.

 

[wil]

Who do others say I am? some say Elijah, some say John....

No reincarnation is not in the bible.

Why is that child blind? A sin of his or his fathers? How does a newborn sin in this life?

Reincarnation is not from the last century of Christianity, it is from the first (and second and third.... ) century of Christianity.

That dang heretic Origen was condemned by the Pope in 533 for perpetuating such beliefs... Just because some can grasp the concept, but others can't doesn't discount it all.

I personally can't explain it all, it is one of those things that is beyond words for me. But I've run into enough people who have talents and memories beyond capable of gathering in one lifetime....it makes me know that either they don't exist or the dogma is wrong. As a Christian there are so many truths found in the bible and the teachings of Jesus...I'm not about to toss the baby out with the bathwater because someone tells me I have to.

You say I am not a Christian, but you are not name calling? Interesting.

 

[Thomas]

Who do others say I am? some say Elijah, some say John....

Yep. But they're not talking reincarnation, they're talking about 'speaking from the spirit of ... ' — that's well documented.

No reincarnation is not in the bible.

No, it's not. That's precisely my point.

On the one hand you argue against stuff that in the Bible on the basis that it's probably myth, fireside tales or a fabrication to suit some self-serving agenda ... then you argue for stuff that's not even in the Bible!

Why is that child blind? A sin of his or his fathers?

Neither.

How does a newborn sin in this life?

"And as in Adam all die" 1 Corinthians 15:22.

Reincarnation is not from the last century of Christianity, it is from the first (and second and third.... ) century of Christianity.

No it's not. The pre-existence of souls was a speculation of Origen, but not reincarnation, Origen never preached reincarnation.

Metempsychosis was a theory in Hellenic philosophy, but not Christian theology.

That dang heretic Origen was condemned by the Pope in 533 for perpetuating such beliefs...

No, see above. What was condemned was the doctrine of the pre-existence of souls, not the migration of souls from one body to another ...

I personally can't explain it all, it is one of those things that is beyond words for me.

Doesn't matter, you do not set the paradigm for Christianity, nor do I.

And again, stuff like the Eucharist, or miracles, you dismiss in an offhand way, just because you 'can't explain it all' and because 'it's beyond words' for you ... you believe things you want to believe, even when they're not in Scripture, and don't believe things you don't want to believe, even when they are ...

As a Christian there are so many truths found in the bible and the teachings of Jesus...I'm not about to toss the baby out with the bathwater because someone tells me I have to.

Wil, you've tossed shedloads of stuff out of the Bible because it doesn't fit your idea of things ... and there's a big difference between tossing the baby out with the bathwater, and believing there's a baby in the bath when there isn't one.

You say I am not a Christian, but you are not name calling? Interesting.

No, I'm just stating the case, not offering an insult.

Thomas

 

[wil]

No one said it was an insult. I'm perfectly fine with my beliefs, and I realize no one holds a corner on truth or belief, despite what is written and argued for centuries. There is a reason it continues to be discussed, contemplated, and debated...

I see the Christ in you despite what you see in me. It is all G!d, all good. I'll continue to follow my elder brother and wayshower whether folks wish to push me off the path or not.

 

[Thomas]

I'm perfectly fine with my beliefs.

And I'm fine with what you believe. But I do wish you'd acknowledge the contradictions.

You refute everything that doesn't meet your tastes, insisting that what Scripture says is a fabrication, either at source or in interpretation ... then you insist you have the right to define as 'Christian' stuff that's not even in Scripture ...

It is all G!d, all good.

You see? Christ never said that. He is quite emphatic that the opposite is the case.

I'll continue to follow my elder brother and wayshower whether folks wish to push me off the path or not.

I fear one day you might find you've been following your own reflection ...

Thomas

 

[wil]

Thomas,

It is not I that tosses aside parts of the bible...but scholars who have found where stuff was added, what doesn't belong, which letters from Paul were inserted. Not me...I don't have that education to do such things.

But who am I to believe, those that studied this for their lives and stand on the shoulders of those that came before them? Or those that simply have faith and this is the word of G!d and nothing should be touched?

Everything I have done you can do and more...a paraphraze, but how many folks you included say....gosh I wish he didn't say that.

I and the father are one...and we are all G!ds children and we are all his brothers and sisters and we are all G!ds....don't your own scriptures say that?

There are many parts of the bible you and others choose to discount or ignore yet you wish to accuse me with a poiinted finger of doing the same thing?

Sorry it don't matter how many saints dance on a head of a pin to me... They can have as many councils, cardinals and popes as they like...they are not the be all and end all...and we can read the bible and commune with Jesus/G!d/Spirit thru the mind of Christ within us...and not need an intermdiary, interpreter or go to church every Sunday.

I don't deny the Eucharist....I love breaking bread and drinking wine with my Jewish brethren after shavos...just as Jesus did....I commune with my friends.

 

[taijasi]

If man chooses extinction rather than salvation, then God will be 'content' with that.

Your God, Thomas, YOUR God ... and only because that is how YOU have imagined HIM (sic).

Further, the lost ONE of the 100 is every bit as important to GOD as the ninety and nine ... but only if WE really do matter (so to speak) to God. That is, if God not only LOVES us, but also - very truly, in any number of WAYS (PLURAL, my friend) ... NEEDS US. sighhhh

But we have been over this, and as far as you're concerned, we are totally superfluous to YOUR GOD ... as all HE apparently wants from us is our occasional marvel, and - oh that's right - Sunday WORSHIP.

Well your worship, this is why I am NOT a Catholic, why I am happy NOT to count myself among conventional Christians ... and - even though you've got it about as screwed up as the Good Lord Jesus the Christ could possibly imagine it - it is perhaps also why it is so important to dialogue ... and see if that process might, even in some small way, help us (inch just a TINY bit closer) toward the LIGHT.

But if in that light, all that's possible is for you to stand and discharge corrections to everyone around you who doesn't have it right, then how do you ever expect (or do you ever?) to join forces with those who - some of them - HAVE had it `right' all along? For, they are all around you, they assist (YOU even) on every side ... and they work from within. But they are NOT lost, I can assure you, with this business of bashing the other man over the head with this is what you must believe in order to be a Christian ... and Thomas, even if you are glad to smile, substitute the word CATHOLIC for Christian, and feel all the better, warmer inside for it, I assure you, that changes the fundamental, Cardinal SIN in no wise.

Perhaps I just missed that wonderful, celebratory event wherein God the Almighty FATHER, perhaps with Christ HIS Son in tow, came down and laid the crown upon your heaven-raised forehead, charged YOU with the task of reforming HIS theology single-handed ... and asked that in EVERY case possible you ferret out those of us, HIS misguided SHEEP who clearly don't know wth we're talking about, as we insist on crazy, mixed-up, screwed up notions like: We have all been here before/We have all been here before ... and of course, GOD does consider us important for God's Creation (hence, we do matter).

Indeed, we must STAMP OUT THIS FLUFF, and get back to the hardcore, Catholic catechism, theology lessons and reminders about what saint did what back in whenever it was ... and so on, ad infinitum. Dammit, where's my rosary, what did I do with that handful of Byzantine icons (perhaps I lost them because I abhor the style), and WHY on earth am I growing more disgusted with this whole ENTERPRISE (SIC) every single time I pass the Catholic church up the road, watching the new Sanctuary addition take final shape and so forth?

One positive thing I will dwell upon here. A part of me, yes, is as disgusted as ever to see this kind of thing happening (on this thread, and I do not feel that Thomas, or even Thomas and Dondi should incur my wrath ... although, if they THINK their God has wrath, then they apparently have never met ME, because I will make your God look like a Spring Picnic that NEVER ends, with no rain, and no ants, and nothing but Joy and a wonderful time for all - and in that, I will have proved my point ). I am not totally disgusted, and if you want to know the truth, I try to keep a positive focus as I pass by that church, and think good, positive thoughts, remembering that my own neighbors (and others that I know) are Roman Catholic ... and that many cannot help it. Or, even though they could, they choose not to - and that, in itself, is not a total loss, even if it may be cause for some lament.

What I believe, is that you will have your chance, the Life's Review will soon find you ... just exactly where you need to be, as everyone else, following upon your transition. It will be confusing for awhile, as you try to put together these pieces, and understand - where is my God, where is the Christ, where is that Table, where is my mansion, or my room in it ... and why are things here so strange?

I can only hope, at that point, that you either find me, or one like me (and far more learned, ideally) - but most important, one who has learned Forgiveness, and is capable of practicing that, as well as showing you around `the place' (ha!) ... because Friend(s), you're gonna NEED it. You will be led from scene to scene, locale to locale, time to time, even era to era, and what you will be shown will quickly overwhelm you. Never will you be without assistance and guidance, as that world is just as this one, and if anything it will be far easier to correct your errors and view the Instant Karma taking effect(s).

But as the greatest lesson you will find yourself(ves) struggling with will be the FORGIVENESS of your own, little self(ves) ... I suggest you get crackin' now ... and learn to extend that all around you, even to the people now who you deem so misguided, so small in their understanding of these heady theological matters, and of course, even the RIFF-RAFF, the heretics, the trouble-makers, the sowers of dissension & discord (for oftentimes, even when & where we have the best of intentions in mind, this is nevertheless how we have been perceived, and what we have ended up being - how ironic!), etc.

You may find yourself surprised, however, and begin to perceive the subtle irony, once you catch a glimpse of your own, former self(ves) ... as there are connections there (to fools like me) more than distinctions, similarities (both positive and negative, even neutral) more than differences, and sure enough - you will one day see - it's the same bridge we have always been working on, rather than separate, isolated and disparate efforts. What a pity that our views on the original Bridge-Builder in this case, should lead to such enmity, such discord, such strife.

`Oh come off it, it's just a silly online discussion. This means nothing in the bigger picture.'

Hmm, perhaps not. And then again, perhaps it is indicative of precisely those reasons why God's Plan is held up at this stage (and in recent centuries). As long as one man insists that God's Plan cannot be held up, as we're just like ants, at best, and thus God (through no ill-will or intention, but, as through necessity) will simply crush whatever lies in God's Way ... then surely, this man will not feel the impelling, impending need to GET IT RIGHT. Instead, all he will believe or perceive, is that he already DOES HAVE it `right.' Yet he will one day realize, he was in the wrong - all along.

The other man may says we must recognize the importance of cooperation with the Divine, yet if his own life shows a certain disorder, a manifest chaos, a fascination with the Mysteries yet an expressed confusion where these Mysteries should work out (even as they have and did for Christ Jesus) ... then is it any wonder that people simply puzzle, and Truth, so important for that individual, ends up taking a back seat, once again, to the little self (and talk of `what is right')?

Now which is which, and who is who; are you not like me, and I like you?
What fools we are, thus to be so blind; when God is present in every heart and mind!

Reminds me a bit of the friend who said to me:

"I see!" said the blind carpenter to his deaf wife, as he picked up his hammer and saw!
​

I recommend going to the Wiki article on Sophia, scrolling down to the section on the Acts of Thomas, and checking out the overview of what that perceiving Soul had to share with us regarding Christ and His Church, and our relationship with the Divine. At least then, you had it right ... my Friend.

{Or perhaps I have simply confused this work with the Gospel of same, which features such passages as:

...the Kingdom of God is inside of you, and it is outside of you. When you come to know yourselves, then you will become known, and you will realize that it is you who are the sons of the living Father. But if you will not know yourselves, you dwell in poverty, and it is you who are that poverty.
​

Sure. I'll go with that! Either way I can only sigh. Oh, what have we become ... and what can you possibly give to the rich man, who already (thinks he) has all? }