"Thy will be done"

[Mono no aware]

...I do think [universalism is] incompatible with a loving God.

Wow.

Well, only because any gratuitous suffering is incompatible with a loving God.  Since universalism necessarily contains this world and its gratuitous sufferings, I consider it as much a failure (if not more) as any other soteriology positing a loving God.  My objections on these lines are earlier in the thread.

[Jean Carrier]

Aeons upon aeons of suffering that only ends when you get a lucky break on your last incarnation and finally manage to break free of samsaric reality and be fully dissolved into Brahman is not really any less horrific than an eternal hell. Especially when annihilationism is a possibility.

Good point, but it would be said in response that the bliss of being absorbed into Brahman (or brought to the bosom of God) is well worth however much suffering is endured beforehand.  Difficult to imagine, but since we can't quantify heaven, it's still a logical possibility.

Personally I don't consider universalism impossible, but I do think it's incompatible with a loving God.  The Hindu universalists might therefore have the stronger case, since I think in their system Brahma is said to be impersonal.

Is it a union of blissful rapture, though? As far as I am aware, the entire point of the union is that, having attained Moksha, the illusion of the self is dissolved. There is neither experience nor self. Simply Brahma. Of course, since all is really Brahma anyway, wouldn't pain still be experienced unless you're the last thing to be dissolved back into Brahma? Seems like annihilationism in the end anyway. But Dharmic riddles always make head hurt; and I know more about Buddhism (mainly Theravada) than the divers Hindoo sects anyway.

[Michael]

And I don't recall Bulgakov being a universalist.

The following "ages of ages" must therefore be dedicated to this overcoming of satanism in Satan himself. We must remember, however, that this will be accomplished not by individual fallen spirits in their isolation but rather together with the entire world now liberated from the violent dominion of the "prince of this world." And it is especially important to keep in mind the fact that all the holy angels—with Michael and his hosts at their head— who once cast down Satan from heaven, and who also did not spare their souls even unto death [Rev 12:11], will drag Satan back up to the heaven of heavens, to his former place of heavenly glory. God's Word, which limits its revelation only to the life of this age, is silent concerning this event, but it necessarily follows from the general prophecies of universal divinization and apocatastasis, "God will be all in all" [1 Cor 15:28]. And of course the salvation and glorification of Satan is necessarily included in this "all in all."

[Jean Carrier]

Wow, never heard this attributed to him. Usually the Old Calendarists I talked to accused him of heresies related to the Holy Ghost and "Name-Worshipping". What a crazy cat...how can someone even be "Orthodox" and affirm this seeing as they chant anathemas against universalism and Origen in the liturgy (as do the Eastern Catholics)?

[TradGranny]

In universalism, hell is essentially purgatory.

You do know that universalism is a heresy, right?

[Jean Carrier]

In universalism, hell is essentially purgatory.

You do know that universalism is a heresy, right?

Obviously.

What does that have to do with Mono's statement? It was an accurate description of what universalists (at least of the Origenist/Apokatastasis variety) believe.

[Mono no aware]

Is it a union of blissful rapture, though? As far as I am aware, the entire point of the union is that, having attained Moksha, the illusion of the self is dissolved. There is neither experience nor self. Simply Brahma. Of course, since all is really Brahma anyway, wouldn't pain still be experienced unless you're the last thing to be dissolved back into Brahma? Seems like annihilationism in the end anyway. But Dharmic riddles always make head hurt; and I know more about Buddhism (mainly Theravada) than the divers Hindoo sects anyway.

As I remember, there's one Upanishad (a late one) that describes the absorption into Brahma as a state beyond dreamless sleep, which does indeed sound a lot like annihilation.  But most of the others describe it as "the highest bliss" that can't be comprehended by mortal minds.  So it seems to be one of those "the peace that passeth all understanding" sort of things.  I think it's mostly in Buddhism where the cold negative theology really comes in, and liberation is more like the snuffing out of a flame than a gooey heavenly experience (which is probably a reason why Buddhism has always been far more appealing to me than its parent religion—that, and the fact that it matured outside of India and took on far better aesthetics than Hindu garishness).