Introduction
The current debate over the teaching on Universal Salvation did not come from a new Christian teaching but from an argument on issues seen in the old one. Outside the ancient Christian Church, however, the first attention to this teaching perhaps came from Hosea Ballou, an American pastor who co-founded the first Universalist church in the United States and later on attributed as the father of the American Universalism. He wrote in 1892 a book, which chronicled the history of universalism up to A.D. 553.
The debate heated up when an evangelical philosopher, Thomas Talbott, who wrote in 1995 the book The Inescapable Love, which stirred an evangelical debate over his belief in universal salvation, a teaching that, in the minds of his fellow evangelical opponents, contradicts the prevailing evangelical teachings of an eternal hell (Sielaff, 2010). The Book of Revelation (14: 8-11; Jones, 1966) declared that the worshipper of the beast will face God’s fury and undiluted anger and will be tortured “fire and brimstone” in the presence of the holy angels and the Christ. The tone of the argument goes: If universal salvation is correct, then an eternal hell is non-existent and vice versa. Can two ‘contradicting’, at least in the surface, teachings from the New Testament scripture validly exist? If so, then the principle of inerrancy of the Scripture will be questioned. If the contradiction does not really exist, how come it does?
The teaching of universal salvation itself has many questions to answer in addition to the issue of an eternal hell. With regards to sin, did those who died automatically received forgiveness at the point of death or somewhere before or thereafter? If so, then, does it mean that sin does not exist anymore; or perhaps Christians cannot sin anymore? With regards to Christian faith, does it mean that believing in God and Jesus Christ is no longer necessary for salvation, particularly to those who are not Christians? If so, then, what’s the point of baptism or joining the Christian Church when a person can be unbaptized and non-Christian and still expect to receive salvation? The theological implications in believing universal salvation can be broad.
And, yet, the biblical grounds of universal salvation are perceivable. The apostles and the Gospel writers wrote about it. John pointed out Jesus as the Christ, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world (i.e. save all the people in the world) (1 John 4:14; John 1:29; 3:16-17). Paul taught about it (Ephesians 1:3-14; 2 Corinthians 5:15). In effect, both the teachings on universal salvation and hell can be found mention in the New Testament.
Nevertheless, I prefer to agree with the thesis of universal salvation than otherwise (Marshall, 2004), primarily, on the basis that its roots can be found in the New Testament and, secondarily, the issue of perceived contradictions between the two teachings may be considered one of those that need more discernment overtime to be better understood and, perhaps if possible, reconciled. However, this affirmation comes with an admission of potential ambiguity in areas where the knowing the will of God is not possible. In clarifying this affirmative position, therefore, the approach will be to establish the argument to defend the veracity of the teaching using available resources, primarily but not limited to the New Testament, which is primarily a Christian rather than a Judaist collection of documents.
There are two main issues in interpreting the scriptural texts about universal salvation. First, is universal salvation intended to occur at the point of expiation through the blood of Christ on the cross and not in the afterlife? Sielaff (2010) noted this as the belief of the Calvinists, the Arminians, and the Evangelicals with their insistence of an eternal hell. Second, is universal salvation meant to include those who died in the state of sin from centuries before Christ to the years after His death on the cross and thereafter, e.g. beyond death? It was this belief that Talbott (5) espoused. Scriptural teachings support either or both in one way or another to certain depths.
Universal Salvation at the Point of Expiation
The term “universal” may be understood in a time-limited manner; that is, the salvation of all mankind within a physical lifetime and not extending to those who already died before Christ came and those who died without repentance after He came. In 1 John 4:14 (Jones, 1966), John testified to the early Christians that Jesus, the Son of God, was sent by the Father as “savior of the world”. This testimony, although it covers all people “of the world”, was written in the context of Christ’s mission of salvation before he died on the cross (i.e. “sent as”). Thus, by His death and resurrection, He saved all of mankind from that day thereafter until the end of the world or within the lifetime of each person. There is no clear indication that Christ’s salvific action will extend to sinners who died without repentance; thus, in the context of afterlife salvation. Other passages (e.g. 2 Corinthians 5:15; Jones, 1966) spoke similarly.
Universal Salvation beyond Death
The term “universal” may also be interpreted to extend beyond time and to people, Christians or non-Christians, who died even without repentance from their sins. Talbott (2004) justified his affirmation to universal salvation on the basis of his inclusive concept of the love of God and the unlimited scope of God’s victory over sin. He cannot accept the concept of an “everlasting punishment” as consistent with God’s love and His victory. He contends that a sinner punished in hell (i.e., not saved) constitutes God’s defeat by sin. He interpreted Christ’s welcoming attitude to sinners – tax collectors and sinners (Luke 15:1); the lost sheep (Luke 15:4-7); the lost drachma (Luke 15:8-10); and the lost son (Luke 15:11-32) (Jones, 1966). Unlike the parable of the lost son, which illustrates repentance, the parables of the lost sheep and drachma are particularly powerful as both the sheep and the drachma cannot show evidence of repentance and still the Shepherd sought for them. However, in both instances, Luke specifically indicates, as Jesus said, that the sheep and the drachma each represented “one repentant sinner” (Luke 15:7, 10; Jones, 1966). Thus, unrepentance upon death does not save.
Moreover, in his letter to the church at Ephesus, Paul reiterated God’s promise that He will bring “everything in the heavens and on earth” under Christ (1:10; Jones, 1966). Although this passage refers to the unification of heaven and earth under Christ’s, the term “everything” may be interpreted as a reference to the salvation of all mankind dead and alive, righteous and sinners together. However, verse 13 requires the stamp of the Holy Spirit, which may be interpreted as Baptism, to determine those whom God “has taken for his own”.
Conversely, John the Baptist’s statement referring to Jesus as the One who will “take away the sins of the world” (John 1:30; Jones, 1966) is closest to supporting the “beyond-grave” salvation argument; but only due to its general ambiguity. The passage can be easily interpreted in either sense of the two universal salvation perspectives.
Conclusion
The inherent ambiguity in the biblical passages, which Talbott used in arguing for universal salvation, makes his argument weak and admittedly ambiguous, too. However, despite the ambiguity, it is clear that the teaching on universal salvation is validly supported by the New Testament writers. The ambiguity resides in determining if the teaching refers to the forgiveness of unrepented sins after death in order to insure the salvation of all and to the interpretation of “universal” as inclusive of souls after death. This situation falls under the realm of further discernment of God’s plan as far as revealed in the Scriptures. Correlating these passages with other biblical teachings may help in the discernment. For instance, Luke 15:7, 10 indicates that salvation comes only to those who repent, not otherwise. Thus, as far as this text is concerned, universal salvation cannot extend to unrepentant sinners who died. And, yet, God still amazes.
References
Jones, A. (Ed.). (1966). The Jerusalem Bible. London, Darton, Longman, & Todd; New York:
Doubleday.
Marshall, I.H. (2004). The New Testament does not teach Universal Salvation. (pp. 55-76). In
Parry, R.A. & Partridge, C.H. (Eds.). Universal Salvation?: The current debate. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing.
Sielaff, D. (2010, August). Modern recognition of Universal Salvation. Associates for Scriptural
Knowledge, 10(8): 1-15.
Talbott, T. (2004). Towards a better understanding of universalism.” (pp. 3-14). In Parry, R.A. &
Parry, R.A. & Partridge, C.H. (Eds.). Universal Salvation?: The current debate. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing.
