It would be nice to think that no one goes to hell (universalism). But despite the fact that many have argued that all will one day be saved this is clearly not what the Bible teaches. Numerous passage in the New Testament support the truth that those who reject Christ face the eternal consequences of their decision. For example Paul writes, He will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of God and from the majesty of his power ... (2 Thess. 2:8-9). Roger Nicole asks, 'How can a universalist fairly deal with the many Scriptures that show that life's decisions have everlasting and irrevocable consequences in the life to come?'
Indeed it is the person who has revealed most stunningly the love of God, Jesus Christ, that spoke most frequently of the tragic reality for the lost. Jesus speaks in terms of a fiery furnace, a place where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, of darkness and of being away from the bliss enjoyed by God's people. The fact that Jesus may be using metaphorical language does not take away from the reality that these metaphors are pointing to something truly awful. While God's salvation will not be universal (all people will not be saved) his offer of salvation is universal (God commands all people everywhere to repent, Acts 17:30).
If our Christian lives are consumed simply with seeking the latest experience and being a part of the the Christian scene then we are acting as de-facto universalists who ignore that spiritual need of those that surround us. We have a commission to fulfil!
'If the plight of the unbelievers is what the Bible reveals it to be, it is not an act of love to hide their fate from them [as universalism does]. To do so further blinds them from the remedy God provided. If a person is struck with a deadly disease for which there is a known cure, it is neither wise nor loving to try and convince him that nothing is wrong' (Roger Nicole).
2 comments:
hiya again Paul - just doing one of my passing visits in the comments section! I read a lot more regularly than I comment BTW ...
but wanted to pick up on one particular sentence above that universalism is, "clearly not what the bible teaches."
I don't think I am universalist, but I would contend that the issue is not as 'clear' as stated.
To dismiss most of the early christian history from the schools of Antioch and Alexandra, as well as thinkers like Origen and Clement makes it not so clear. To dismiss the likes of Karl Barth, who denies being universalist, but certainly lays down a theology which leads to a reasonable hope that all will be saved makes it not clear. The roots of our Methodist thinking through Arminius also muddy the waters - where we are happy to take the things we like from Arminius but not happy with his universalist thinking ...
And also just for starters:
Acts 3: 21He must remain in heaven until the time comes for God to restore everything, as he promised long ago through his holy prophets.
Romans 5:18Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men.
1 Cor 15: 22For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.
And my favourite which I think really stands out - Paul quoting Isaiah:
Romans 11
It is written:
" 'As surely as I live,' says the Lord,
'every knee will bow before me;
every tongue will confess to God.'
My point is not that these verses all mean universalism is right, but that they are as open to investigation as the verses pointing to eternal punishment. And deserve thorough and fair mention ...
Add to that, Jesus mentions 'hell' 11 times, money & the poor 24 times each (sometimes together, so lets arrive at 36 times!) and 'love' 51 times in the gospels. My point simply being weight of proof as to the message of Jesus.
I know I don't leave too many messages, but thought I wanted to weigh in on this!
Hope you well Paul - probably catch you at conference!
cheers, j.
Thanks Jools for your comment. It is good to be held accountable for what you write. I am happy to attempt a reply to your comments.
To start with the early fathers. Correct me if I am wrong but I thought that Origen's universalist thinking was so noted because it differed from the teaching of many of the other fathers.
As for Arminius. It is my understanding that he beleived that not all would be saved, as do classical arminians (I am reading a book on arminian theology at the moment but have misplaced it).
Commenting on some of the texts you quote, and others, Roger Nicole writes, 'These Scriptures considered in isolation, constitute a fairly strong case, especially when combined with a deep yearning in our hearts for an ultimate abolishment of evil. We do not, however, have the luxury of dealing with any Scripture in isolation. Specifically, we must note the expressions used to denote the fate of the impenitent.' He then goes on to give referances to the Bible's teaching on 'Seperation from God', 'destruction and death', 'fire', 'darkness', 'the worm that will not die', 'trouble, distress, torment, agony', 'shame and everlasting contempt', 'everlasting chains and gloomy dungeons', 'futility' and 'the wrath of God'. After which he declares, 'Though some Scripture appeals to a universalistic understanding of salvation, in the final analysis the universalist must face the more consistent scriptural treatment of a final judgement to which all humankind is summoned and which issues into a bifurcation of destiny.'
As for your point regarding the number of times hell is mentioned compared to money etc. I do not see the need for an either/or approach. I would prefare a both/and attitude. I think we need to speak about use of money and the need to be rescued from the coming wrath. We would probably disagree on what things the church is underemphasising in our day!
I do realise that we need to be careful in using phrases like 'the Bible clearly teaches' for others, who also respect the word, may disagree that the Bible clearly does teach what we say. Yet, Origen, Gregory of Nyssa, Karl Barth and others aside I am still of the opinion that the Bible clearly teaches that all will not be saved.
Paul
Post a Comment