Work Drained Me

Happy Saturday, dear readers! It seems I missed Friday’s post. Please blame my work on this. I’ve been mentally exhausted most of the week as my tasks have changed on a near-daily basis. On the days that the tasks haven’t changed, I spent most of my time realizing that what I thought would be a relatively easy task is far more complicated than I first thought. And then I’d realize it’s even more complicated than that the next day. So by the time it came time to work on my next post about Spinning Wyrd by Ryan Smith, I had nothing left in the intellectual gas tank. So today, you get some vague ramblings of a software developer.

The big issue I ran into today was discovering that a preexisting piece of software was an architected in a way that made the feature I was supposed to add to it nearly impossible1 to implement without a massive rewrite of the existing code. Since we don’t have the time or budget to rewrite the existing code, that new feature was finally shelved after I spent two days playing “why won’t this stupid thing work the way I think it should?”2

This whole experience is a reminder that project managers and project architects really need to spend more time thinking about a product roadmap for software. They need to try to anticipate what future features might be added so that when they make these architectural and design decisions, they don’t implement something that makes those features nearly impossible — or even just difficult — to implement. No one can possibly envision every feature that might get added to a piece of software in the future, but I’ve encountered more than one scenario like my current one and thought “someone probably should’ve sen this coming.”3

At any rate, my apologies to my readers who were looking forward to more book discussion/Heathen talk. I promise to get back on schedule next week. For anyone who observes it, happy start of Winter Nights on Thursday!

Post History: This post was written on October 12, 2024. There was no proofreading or revision process.

Footnotes

  1. Not completely impossible, mind you. As I’ve thought about it, I think I’ve come up with a workable solution, but it’s ugly. We’ll see when management decides they want to spend the time and money to revisit the feature. ↩︎
  2. Part of what took me so long to figure out why things weren’t working they way I thought they were is because I’m the fourth person to work on this piece of software and the original author who laid out the architecture left the company a couple years ago. So I’ve had to delve into the details of how the software works to a degree I haven’t had to before. Oh, and it’s written in a programming lanuage I’m not terribly familiar with. Fun! ↩︎
  3. For full disclosure that “someone” has been me at times. I’ve made design decisions in the past that I later realized were a mistake I should have anticipated. There’s a whole other discussion to be had about why this sort of lack if foresight is so common. ↩︎

Polytheology: The nature of deities

NOTE: This series is an exploration of my personal theology, which I tend to hold lightly. It is subject to change as I gain new insights. Also, no one should interpret anything I say as the “one true doctrine.”

Happy Monday, dear readers! After last week’s brief detour into a book review, I thought it’d be good to get back into my polytheology series. With that in mind, I wanted to write something about my views on deities and their nature. This topic is near and dear to my heart because I think that, thanks to living in a society that is soaking in Christian hegemony, most people have very Christian and/or monotheistic views about this topic. As a polytheist, I’d like to take a moment to push back against the assumptions this leads many people to hold and offer a different perspective (or more than one).

The first one that I want to tackle is the “omni” attributes of God espoused by Christianity and other monotheistic religions. As an evangelical Christian, I grew up being taught that God was omnipotent (all powerful), omniscient (all knowing), and omnipresent (all present). I’ve seen some people more recently talking about God being omnibenevolent (all good or all loving). While omnibenevolence was certainly something my church ascribed to God, we never used that word.

But in a polytheistic theology, I’m not sure attributing these traits to our deities makes much sense. After all, can you have more than one omnipotent deity? What if they disagree with one another? Who would win the argument? And why would omniscient deities disagree with one another? Wouldn’t they have the same infinite knowledge and therefore come to the same conclusions?

If you look at the Norse myths,1 you start to notice that they don’t really bear out these traits either. After all, the Aesir begin to age and grow weak when the Jotun Thjazi has Loki steal Idun and her life-sustaining apples.2 Apparently, without these magical fruits, even the Aesir are powerless against aging and death. And while one might argue that Odin may have eventually become all-knowing and all-wise,3 he had to gain that knowledge and wisdom through processes that involved things like learning seid-magic from Freyja, hanging himself on Yggdrasil in order to acquire knowledge of the runes, and sacrificing an eye in exchange for a single drink from Mimir’s well. As for omnibenevolence, I think that Loki’s mechanations to bring about Baldr’s death demonstrates that attribute to be not applicable to at least some of the Aesir.

Similarly, our deities are not necessarily uncreated, nor have they always existed. Indeed, the Norse myths talk regularly about the parents of the various Aesir, suggesting they were born into existence just like most living things. In fact, some polytheistic theologians suggest that deities may not have even started out as being deities at first. Many deities may have been a nature spirit or human ancestor that over time became deified.4 This idea draws me back to something I said in my post about the One Eternal Reality:

Of course, I’ll note that the One Eternal Reality goes beyond deities and encompasses humans as well.

This draws attention to the fact that while we and the deities are different, we are not quite as separate and unlike one another as other theologies might suggest. I hope to explore that thought more when I discuss the nature of relationships between humans and deities in my next post in this series.

Post History: I wrote the first draft of this post on October 6, 2024.

Footnotes

  1. I suspect this is true in myths from all around the world, but I’ll focus on those myths I’m most familiar with and which speak most directly to my own spiritual tradition. ↩︎
  2. It’s interesting to note that in the telling of this myth over at Norse Mythology for Smart People, the author notes that the original tale most likely involved not apples, but some other form of fruit or nut. ↩︎
  3. I’m not sure I’m counted among those people. While I believe the Allfather is extremely wise and knowledgeable, I’m not convinced he’s omnipotent even now. ↩︎
  4. Indeed, this is a question i keep coming back to and bringing up to others. What makes a deity a deity? What distinguishes them from an ancestral spirit, a nature spirit, or some other being? ↩︎

Hamingja: Reflections on chapter three of “Spinning Wyrd” by Ryan Smith

Happy Saturday, dear readers! In today’s post, I want to take a brief look at the fourth and final part of the Heathen self that Ryan Smith discusses in the third chapter of Spinning Wyrd.

What jumped out at me is that Smith (or at least those whose views he’s sharing) seems to hold two slightly different views of the hamingja. On the one hand, hamingja sounds as if its an impersonal force, that can be shared, given away, or pooled among people. At the same time, Smith (or his sources) describe the hamingja as a sort of guardian spirit, which in my mind would make such sharing and pooling less feasible. I suppose I’m more likely to lean into the former understanding myself, as the idea of the hamingja having its own intelligence would put me in the same quandry I have over the fylgja.

In many ways, Smith’s discussion of fylgja reminds me of the idea of will, talked about in many witchcraft and other occult communities. I see the will as that part of us which enables us to transform our desires into action, which makes it the root of magic. Smith’s discussion of the hamingja as that part of the Heathen self that most directly allows us to reshape wyrd and help build our reality seems to align with that understanding quite well.

Of course, this idea that hamginja is something we can direct and utilize makes me wonder at the choice to refer to it as “luck,” as that’s a term that I typically see as related to chance and forces beyond our control. This does not seem to fit hamingja as Smith describes it, other than in the sense that Smith notes that orlog has a role in defining and shaping our hamingja. To me, this reinforces the idea that magic and our ability to shape wyrd has its limits, something I’ve explored before in a video.

I think this also makes sense from a Heathen viewpoint, this mutual influence between orlog and our hamingja. it reminds me of the creative tension between two forces that seems to consistently pop up in Norse myth and lore, starting with the mixing of fire and ice in the creation story.

Post History: I wrote the first draft of this post on October 4, 2024. I proofread, revised, and finalized it on October 5, 2024.

Let’s talk about “An Apostate’s Guide to Witchcraft” by Moss Matthey

[Content Note: Brief references to of cults, homophobia, self-hatred, and authoritarian control.]

Happy Monday, dear readers! I thought I’d take a brief break from my polytheology series to talk about a book I recently finished reading. That book is An Apostate’s Guide to Witchcraft: Finding Freedom Through Magic by Moss Matthey. In it, Matthey describes his own experiences leaving the cult he was raised in and finding a home in witchcraft. Along the way, he shares a bit about his own witchcraft practice and offers advice and simple exercises to those readers who might be interested in exploring whether witchcraft might be something they’re drawn to.

In a lot of ways, I found a lot of Matthey’s story relatable. After all, we are both gay men1 who grew up in fairly conservative Christian church2 that essentially taught us to hate ourselves. We both eventually found freedom in our respective witchcraft practices, which bear some unsurprising similarities.

One of the things that I appreciated about Matthey’s approach to the subject was that he was quite clear that he had no interest in spending a great deal of time dissecting the beliefs of “the cult”,3 setting these goals for the book instead:

Through these pages I will introduce you to a world of magic and spirits, where queerness is celebrated and sin does not exist. I will tell you how I left a cult and the lessons I learned along the way. Culture and community will be celebrated through folklore, myth, and folk magic. We may even take a detour into theology and philosophy, though hopefully it won’t be too boring. Above all, we will celebrate the joy and freedom of Witchcraft.

I think he accomplished those goals quite well. I cannot recommend this book enough for those who are coming out of any religion that asserted any degree of authoritarian control. I think those who, like Matthey and myself, experienced abuse and/or trauma due to their sexuality or gender will find it particularly helpful. And if a handful of people read it and find a home in witchcraft, all the better.

Another reason that this book holds special meaning for me is that I think it diversifies the stories available to those deconstructing. I often get the sense that the stories available — both those published in books and those shared less formally — tend to come from who have either found a way to remain in Christianity (albeit a more progressive form) or those who have walked away from religion altogether. While I think both of those trajectories are valid for those who find comfort and healing in them, I don’t think they are the only trajectories available. Also, I feel that the fact that those two trajectories get the lion’s share of the attention means that deconstruction discourse still often focuses exclusively on Christian theologies and Christian understandings of the world. Combined with Changing Paths by Yvonne Aburrow, this book could help provide a needed correction to that.4

Post History: I wrote the first draft of this post on September 28, 2024. I proofread, revised, and finalized it on September 29, 2024.

Footnotes

  1. I want to point out that I’m using these words carefully when describing Matthey. In the book, he notes that he has started to prefer referring to himself as “queer” rather than “gay,” though he affirms the latter is an accurate description. He also notes that his understanding of his sexuality and gender continues to be more expansive. So while everything I’ve been able to find suggests his pronouns are still he/him and it’s okay to refer to him as a man, I want to draw your attention to all this just in case I missed something and am unintentionally misgendering him here. ↩︎
  2. I will note that I don’t feel that my church exerted quite the same degree of control over its members as the cult Matthey belonged to (the Jehovah’s Witnesses) tends to. For example, my family was not instructed to shun me at any time. But that’s the interesting thing you learn when you study cults: There are different degrees of cult behavior, and my church was “bad enough.” For more information on cults, I would recommend Cultish by Amanda Montell in addition to the books by Steven Hassan that Matthey recommends. I will note that I haven’t read any of Hassan’s books, but have looked over his BITE Model of Authoritarian Control (which Matthey also mentions) in the past and consider it an invaluable tool. ↩︎
  3. Matthey only mentions the Jehovah’s Witnesses by name once in the entire book. The rest of the time, he simply refers to it as “the cult.” I’m not sure if this was his reasoning personally, but there are traditions of witchcraft that hold that naming something gives it power, so it is often better to not say the name of those who are a disruptive influence. Again, I don’t know if that motivated Matthey’s choice about how he chose to refer to his former cult in the book, but I think there’s a certain amount of wisdom in that line of reasoning. ↩︎
  4. Of course, once Yvonne’s upcoming book, Pagan Roots, is released at the beginning of next year, I think all three books would make a powerful trio. ↩︎

Medical stuff is such a pain

Hello dear, readers! I’m afraid I didn’t get a chance to write a post for today. Between dealing with health insurance nonsense and uncovering a bit of a concern with my health, I’ve been too focused on on other things.

Before anyone (else) gets too panicked, rest assured that I’m in no immediate danger. However, my primary care doctor and I noticed something that is somewhat concerning. And while it wasn’t concerning enough to put me in the emergency room, she is trying to get me fast-tracked to an appointment in the cardiology department rather than having me get scheduled a month or two out (or however far out they’re booked). I’m reminded of the local commercials they played on the radio when urgent care centers first became a thing. “For those urgencies that aren’t quite emergencies.” That seems to be where I am right now.

Beyond waiting for a couple calls today, I’m just trying to do my job and spend this weekend relaxing. I hope to get back to posting on Monday, since I want to talk a bit about An Apostate’s Guide to Witchcraft by Moss Matthey, which I just finished reading this morning. Then next Friday, I’ll continue my reflections on Spinning Wyrd by Ryan Smith.

In the meantime, I propose an open thread today. Given all the health-related stuff I’m dealing with, I’d love to hear your own healthcare experiences. Feel free to share the good, the bad, or even both. Or talk about something else that interests you. Comments are open.

Post History: This post was written on September 27, 2024 and published immediately.

Polytheology: The One Eternal Reality

NOTE: This series is an exploration of my personal theology, which I tend to hold lightly. it is subject to change as I gain new insights. Also, no one should interpret anything I say as the “one true doctrine.”

We were gathered around the altar in the center of the room. The ritual space was illuminated only by candles. I and the other coven member assisting me were standing. I held my hands over the plate of Ritz crackers we were using for cakes and ale, blessing them. i closed my blessing saying, “…always remembering that we are one and we are of The One.”

That was the scene the evening I unexpectedly added a new bit of liturgy1 to my non-initiatory coven’s ritual. It was a reference to an earlier part in our rite when we establish our circle and invite the powers to join us. After invoking the God and Goddess, we would say, “Hail to the One Eternal Reality, in whom we live and move and have our being.”2

I was always a fan of the concept of the One Eternal Reality (or simply the One). It may be the closest I come to the common belief among some Wiccans that “all gods are one God and all goddesses are one Goddess.”3 Of course, I’ll note that the One Eternal Reality goes beyond deities and encompasses humans as well. In fact, I’d go so far as to suggest that everything in existence is part of the One, so we might see the One as the universe itself.

This is also why I tend not to see the One as an conscious being. i see it as a force or energy. As I worked on this post, I realize that in my theology, the ideas of the One and wyrd are at least closely related. I’m still sorting through whether I think they are synonyms for the same thing or whether wyrd is a sort of result or byproduct of the One. But either way, it is clear to me that they both express this idea that we are all interconnected and our existence and actions impact one another. And this goes for deities, humans, and everything else that exists.

Also by linking this concept to wyrd, I bring in another important aspect of my understanding of the One Eternal Reality: I believe that it is ever changing rather than something static. Furthermore, this means that we as part of the One Eternal Reality and shapers of wyrd are actively changing it. And as I’ve said in other blog posts, this idea is central to both my religious views and my magical practice.4

Post History: I wrote the first draft of this post on September 21, 2024. I proofread, revised, and finalized this post later the same day.

Footnotes

  1. I tended to ad lib certain parts of our ritual, and the blessing of cakes and ale was no exception when that role fell to me. It always made things interesting when another coven member would occasionally like my word choice and want me to repeat it so they could start using it themselves. Of course, I often had trouble remembering whatever I had said in a moment of inspiration. Note to people who circle with me in the future: just record me if you think you might want to capture my words from such moments. ↩︎
  2. This echoes the apostle Paul’s statement about the Christian god, stating “in him we live and breathe and have our being.” I suspect this was an intentional choice, as the coven member who wrote our coven’s liturgy was a former Christian and has studied religion quite extensively during her long life. It’s also interesting to note that this statement is part of Paul’s speech to the people of Athens at the Areopagus. This suggests to me that even Paul acknowledged that this phrase would resonate with the pagans of his day. ↩︎
  3. Some people tend to think that this view is universal among Wiccans. Wiccan author Yvonne Aburrow has a wonderful video challenging this notion, however. Also, Yvonne’s video reminds me that my understanding of the One would probably be classified as monism. That may be helpful for my readers who love all the fancy terms. ↩︎
  4. I’d like to draw attention to the fact that I made it to the end of this post without making a single reference to the movie starring Jet Li. Please clap. ↩︎

The Fylgja: Reflections on chapter three of “Spinning Wyrd” by Ryan Smith

Happy Friday, dear readers! in today’s blog post, I hope to continue my reflections of chapter three of Spinning Wyrd by Ryan Smith. Specifically, I want to explore the third part of the Heathen self that Smith talks about, the fylgja. This is the aspect of the Heathen self that I’ve always struggled with and have my doubts about.

To clarify, I have no problems believing that we have guiding spirits that offer us advice, companionship, and/or protection. and Smith himself notes the similarities between familiars or guardian spirits1 and the fylgja. However, he notes that the fylgja is so linked to the individual that he sees them as “a direct manifestation of of an individual even though they have a significant degree of autonomy.”

For some reason, I struggle with the idea that something so independent from my own mind — to the point of even have its own goals and views — is still a part of me. My mind insists that surely this being must be something outside of myself.

But Ryan Smith also mentions “your spiritual shadow” as an alternate term for the fylgja, which brings the shadow in Jungian psychology to mind. I certainly do consider Jung’s views (or what I’ve heard about them through secondary sources) helpful and useful. So perhaps a part of the self that is so radically different in views isn’t as far-fetched as I might think2

Either way, I do appreciate the idea of having close spiritual allies — whether they are part of the self or completely separate from us — is important and beneficial. Such a guide can offer insights we may not think of on our own or with our conscious minds. They also might even challenge our thought processes and force us to change and grow when needed. So no matter whether the fylgja is truly a part of our Heathen selves or some separate being, I think pursuing a greater relationship with one’s fylgja is well worth the effort.

Post History: I wrote the first draft of this post on September 19, 2024. I proofread, revised, and finalized it on September 20, 204.

Footnotes

  1. Given Smith’s dedication to being inclusive and aware in his Heathenry, I suspect he is choosing his terms carefully to avoid the culturally appropriative term “spirit animal.” I appreciate and share his goal here and encourage anyone who finds my own choice of terms in this or any other post to be a matter of cultural appropriation to point it out to me. ↩︎
  2. Of course, I’ll note that Jung asserted that a major step in self-actualization was to embrace one’s shadow and integrate it into the true self. I wonder if Smith and other Heathens might see a similar integration with one’s fylgja as equally desirable. ↩︎

Introducing a blog series: Polytheology

Happy Monday, dear readers! Today, I would like to announce and introduce a new blog series I’ve decided to work on that I’m calling “polytheology.” This series is going to be an exploration of my theological views as a polytheist.

Theology is fairly important to me. After all, I am a theistic witch and a Norse Pagan/Heathen, so my deities are pretty important to me. So the process of thinking about my deities is pretty important to me as well. After all, I’ve offered a few thoughts about my patron goddess Freyja in the past. I’ve also shared more general thoughts about the nature of deities. To be honest, I think that anyone who spends any time worshiping, building a relationship with, or otherwise working with one or more deities tends to have a theology of some sort, even if they don’t realize it.1

So I decided to start writing down some of my theological thoughts, hence the birth of this series. But why did I decide to name it “polytheology?” For starers, because my theology is polytheistic in nature and I wanted to make it clear that this is different from the theology you might get from a lot of monotheists. Also, I found that more than a couple other polytheists have similarly used the term to refer to their own polytheistic takes on theology. And I think that’s another reason for the term: To acknowledge up front that there are actually multiple theologies within polytheology.

Then there’s the fact that I think my own theology is multi-layered and may represent more than a single theology. After all, i have theology about a specific deity2 and I have theology abut the nature of Divinity in general. These are theologies that operate on different levels, and acknowledging them both makes sense to me.

I think this idea that polytheology actually consists of multiple theologies also might help avoid dogma and strict authoritarianism, something that Yvonne Aburrow has pointed out as a common reason why many Pagans tend to be resistant to the idea of discussing theology in a Pagan context.3

I don’t know how often I will write a post in this blog series. Ideally, I’d love to make polytheology the focus of Monday posts for at least a month or two.4 But that might require a more structured approach to theology than I typically have. So for now, I hope to make this an open series that I will add to as inspiration hits. I hope you will follow along and even hop into the conversation in the comments section of each post, dear readers.

Post HIstory: I wrote the first draft of this post on September 15, 2024. I proofread, revised, and finalized it on September 16, 2024.

Footnotes

  1. This is an idea that Christian author and pastor Trey Ferguson pushed in his book Theologizin’ Bigger. He coined the term “theologizin'” to describe the kind of everyday and often informal thoughts people had about God ever day. ↩︎
  2. And why should a theology of Freyja be the same as a theology of Odin? They’re different deities and the kind of relationships that devotees have with each of them tend to be different, at least in my experience. ↩︎
  3. I also think that presenting and thinking of theology as an ongoing dialogue can help guard against becoming too restrictive and dogmatic as well, as Yvonne noted in their video I linked to above. ↩︎
  4. This is especially true since I’m also trying to put these ideas into a manuscript, which I’ve tentatively titled A Wyrd-Worker’s Guide to Polytheology. I’m hoping that if I ever finish that manuscript and get it published, my readers who end up enjoying this series will check it out. ↩︎

The Hugr: Reflections on chapter three of “Spinning Wyrd” by Ryan Smith

Happy Friday, dear readers! Today, I want to offer a quick review and a few reflections on Ryan Smith’s discussion of the hugr (“mind”) from chapter three of his book, Spinning Wyrd. Smith offers the following expansive idea bout the hugr:

These connotations strongly suggest that the mind was seen as more than just one’s internal thought processes and perspectives but also the kind of frenzied, excited inspiration that drives creativity and understanding. This is also seen in Fire and Ice practice as support for including intuition and emotion as part of the hugr.

I like how Smith explicitly brings up things like creativity and intuition in his explanation of the hugr. After all, I think creativity is one of the greatest gifts of our mind. It enables us to express ideas and communicate things through music, poetry, and other art, which are the foundational elements of group life and culture.

Linking intuition — and the ability to “send out” the hugr in a way way reminiscent of astral travel — to the hugr also appeals to me. In the Christianity I was raised in, certain theologians seemed to go through a great deal of mental gymnastics to separate the “spirit” and the “soul.” And I could see where under such models, someone might try to make astral travel a function of spirit rather than soul. This seems overly complicated to me.1

One of the other things I like about Smith’s discussion on the hugr is that he cites another author2 who suggests that Odin’s ravens Hugin and Munin are actually projections of that god’s own hugr. To me, this suggests that not only is the hugr one of the gifts given by the deities to humans, but it’s one of the things that most make us like them. This places a great deal of importance on the mind, which I think is appropriate.3

Post History: I wrote the first draft of this post on September 12, 2024. I proofread, revised, and finalized it on September 13, 2024.

Footnotes

  1. Lest anyone think I’m picking on the Christians alone, I similarly think New Age and occult systems that try to parse out concept like an “astral body” as separate from the soul to also be over-complicated and silly. ↩︎
  2. Neil Price, whose book Children of Ash and Elm: A History of the Vikings will likely make its way onto my wishlist. ↩︎
  3. Of course, it’s important to note that all four parts of the Heathen self are an essential part of the human existence. I for one reject any notions that we are really just “souls trapped in a body” or any such thing. I embrace the value and importance of my hamr right along with that of my hugr. This is a point I will most likely circle back to when I talk about concepts of the afterlife. ↩︎

A polytheist’s thoughts on “universal salvation” and Christian hegemony

Note: This post is heavily based on a Twitter thread I posted. I’ve edited and added to what I said there to flesh out a few more thoughts in this post.

The other day a Christian’s post about universal salvation came across my Threads feed and I decided to post something to my social media accounts1 about it:

I got a wide range of comments in reply to this, including strong agreement with my point of view, like a friend who shared a tweet from a couple years ago where they expressed very similar sentiments.

Then there were those who offered a different understanding of universal salvation, like this one:

Some were curious and expressed genuine curiosity about the point I was getting at, even asking clarifying questions. Overall I ended up having a number of thoughtful conversations with people. Oh sure, there were the naysayers. One person condemned the whole idea of universal salvation. A couple people simply said I didn’t understand universal salvation or what heaven would be like.2

There was also the fact that people didn’t get the deeper message that I was going for: the Christian hegemony that’s often inherent in many models of universal salvation. Now, I grant you, that’s at least partly my fault. For the sake of brevity, I said something and a lot of people focused on the details of my words. In retrospect, I should have done a better job of explaining my broader point.

But the reality is that many Christians’ idea of “universal salvation” seems to amount to “our understanding of god is still the right one, but our god will still let you into the party despite not believing in him.” In many ways, that still invalidates those of us who honor other deities or practice other religions.3 Josh Scott, lead pastor at Gracepointe Church in Nashville Tennessee actually addressed this when I asked him a question about Christian supremacy during one church service:4

I appreciate Josh’s willingness to point out that Christian supremacy and Christian Nationalism go hand-in-hand and that the former is just the most extreme and most toxic manifestation of the latter. I tried to make this point in a question in one of my follow-up tweets to the universal salvation conversation(s):

I also think it’s important to notice an important phrase uttered by the Jewish journalist in Josh’s story: “[You believe that] I’m okay with God because of Jesus.” The fact is, the very premise that we need to “be made okay with God” upholds Christian hegemony. A lot of us already see ourselves as right with the Divine or numinous. Or if we need to get right or reconnect with the Divine or the numinous, we believe that is a matter for us to take care of for ourselves, not some external savior. So in this sense, many Christians who espouse universal salvation5 push a model that still says we (1) need to be reconciled with the Divine and (2) need a figure from their religion to handle that reconciliation.

This is why I’d encourage those Christians who espouse universal salvation and/or universal reconciliation to dig a little deeper and consider how their understanding of those concepts might still be problematic, especially to those of us who are not Christians.

Post History: I started the first draft of this post on September 6, 2024. I completed that draft on September 7, 2024. I proofread, revised, and finalized the post on September 8, 2024.

Footnotes

  1. I included the tweet in this post. The same post can also be found on Threads and BlueSky however. Similarly, while there were some responses on Threads, I will mostly be showing responses received on Twitter, as that’s where I got the most feedback and engagement. ↩︎
  2. I mean, that may be a fair assessment, but just stating that with no further comment does not actually keep the dialogue going. Tell me where my understanding is wrong, maybe? Many thanks to those who chose to keep the dialogue going, even if they disagreed with me. Of course, I’ll note that I never set down a rule about what universal salvation was. I specifically said “if this is your definition, then I have an issue with it.” ↩︎
  3. There’s a similar problem with claims that “we’re really worshiping the same god anyway.” I’m a polytheist and my deities are not the Christian (or any other monotheistic) god in cosplay., ↩︎
  4. I snagged this clip from the church’s YouTube video of the full service. This clip starts at about the 51:40 mark of the full video. ↩︎
  5. Note that I’m not claiming that all Christians who espouse universal salvation or universal reconciliation hold to such views. in fact, Josh Scott’s church makes it clear that all people are already valued and accepted by God and deny that this was the purpose of Jesus’s ministry at all. However, I think it’s important to discuss that even among “progressive Christians,” a lot of models offered for universal salvation do get pretty messy when viewed through a pluralistic lens. ↩︎

The thoughts of a gay witch living in upstate New York.