The Bible Undressed

            In the previous two posts I considered the problems with using belief (in God or Jesus) as the basis for salvation, and suggested an alternative for judgment (the Bill and Ted rule: Be excellent to each other!). But is there yet another possibility as to who is saved and who is lost? There was a belief promoted by some in the early church that may surprise you: in the end everybody gets saved!

            What?! No way! You mean, even Hitler?!  Stalin?!  Trump?!  How can that make any sense? No Christian would suggest such a thing! Would they?

            Actually, the concept of universal salvation, that all people will eventually be saved, goes back to early Christian thinkers. And it may even be in the Bible if one looks for it. The concept has a fancy name: apokatastasis, meaning literally “to restore,” as in restoring all things and all people to God’s original intent. The word is found in the New Testament:

[Peter preaching] “…that He may send Jesus, the Christ appointed for you, whom heaven must receive until the period of restoration [Gr: apokatastasis] of all things about which God spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets from ancient time.”  Acts 3:20, 21

Do the people on the one side get to go over to the other eventually?

            There was a prominent and prolific theologian of the 3^rd Century by the name of Origen who considered such a view. You can find his teachings online if you want more detail, but he believed that all the creation was going through a refining process, as if by fire, as noted in Acts 3:21. Thus in the end all would be saved. Even Satan! Now, later Origen was condemned as a heretic (he also believed in reincarnation as part of the process), but he was nonetheless a significant influence during his time.

            You may be familiar with the Apocalypse of John (aka Revelation) found at the end of the Bible, but that was not the only ‘apocalypse’ written. The Apocalypse of Peter was another. It is estimated to have been written in the first half of the 2^nd Century (so obviously not really written by Peter). You can find it online for free; I recommend you read it. It details what happens in the afterlife; more about the punishment side of things than the reward side. It details the various appropriate punishments people have to endure for their various sins. For example, if you blasphemed with your tongue then you would be hung up by your tongue. It is sort of a forerunner to Dante’s Inferno. However, there is an escape clause: “Then I [Jesus] will grant to my called and elect ones whomsoever they request from me, out of the punishment. And I will give them [i.e. those for whom the elect pray] a fine baptism in salvation from the Acherousian lake which is, they say, in the Elysian field, a portion of righteousness with my holy ones.” So, the ‘elect,’ those already saved, can ask for salvation for the souls suffering punishment. A “Get Out Of Hell Free” card, so to speak. Although it was considered Scripture by some Christians this text was eventually excluded from the Bible, and this teaching may be one reason.

            But what does it matter what these other writing say? Only the Bible matters! Well, there are verses in the Bible that universalists point to in support of this concept, in addition to Acts 3:21. Here is the apostle Paul contrasting Adam and Jesus:

So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men. For as through the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous.  (Romans 3:18, 19)

Some people interpret this as saying that Jesus’ sacrifice for sins is so powerful that just as all became sinners through Adam, so all will be made righteous through Jesus. Paul does use the word “all” after all. Then in his letter to the Philippian church he speaks of Jesus’ humble self-sacrifice:

For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.  (Philippians 2:9-11)

Is Paul saying, as in Romans, that Jesus’ sacrifice is so wonderful that every person will end up being saved through that redemptive act? It can be read that way, although others may argue that bowing and confessing does not equate with actually being saved. And this in his letter to the church in Corinth:

For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. The last enemy that will be abolished is death.  For He has put all things in subjection under His feet. But when He says, “All things are put in subjection,” it is evident that He is excepted who put all things in subjection to Him. When all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all.  (1 Cor. 15:25-28)

Look how many times Paul uses the word “all.” Do you think he really means “all?” It certainly seems so! However, one can assert that being in subjection does not necessarily equate to being saved (as in the Philippians verse). But Paul says “all things” not just all people. I sense he is saying that God will set everything right, so that He “may be all in all.” How can God be “in all” if sin and corruption and therefore punishment still exist? You can certainly interpret it otherwise, but I think that as in those other passages Paul believes God is so mighty and the redemption of Jesus so powerful that even those who are now sinners will be made right, as God originally intended. Who are we puny sinners to stand in the way of God’s perfection? But you are free to think differently, of course.

            Now, here are two verses from one of the Pastoral Epistles. Most scholars think this was not written by Paul but by a later disciple using Paul’s name, but it sounds similar to what Paul said in those other verses:

This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony given at the proper time.  1 Timothy 2:3-6

For it is for this we labor and strive, because we have fixed our hope on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of believers.  1 Timothy 4:10

So, God wants all men to be saved, and Jesus was a ransom for all, not just some. That second verse seems to emphasize that Jesus is not just the savior of the believers, but of all men.  Here is one from a different author:

He Himself is the propitiation [or, satisfaction] for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.  1 John 2:2

I find that one interesting because he specifically tells the Christians he is writing to that Jesus is, not just can be but is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world, and not just for those Christians, not unlike the statement in 1 Timothy 4:10. There are more such verses. You can do an online search for “Bible verses that support universal salvation.” Here’s one site listing 76 verses(!): https://www.patheos.com/blogs/keithgiles/2021/07/76-bible-verses-to-support-universal-reconciliation/

            But, aren’t there passages in the Bible which argue against universal salvation? Certainly. Just look back at the previous post, where I cite the Matthew 25 parable of the sheep and the goats. The ‘goats,’ the unrighteous, “will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.” That definitely does not sound like all will be saved. Earlier in the Gospel of Matthew Jesus describes the process of judgment as a net being used to gather all the fish which are then sorted: “So it will be at the end of the age; the angels will come forth and take out the wicked from among the righteous, and will throw them into the furnace of fire; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” (Matthew 13:47-52)  That certainly does not sound like all will be saved! Ouch!

Make your life choices carefully:
the consequences are dire!

But I suppose one could argue that even in that last parable the fire is not described as permanent and unchangeable. Maybe that is just part of the refining process, the purification by fire that Origen and others advocated. Sure, they will suffer in the fire, but eventually they will be purified and ready for Heaven.  Well, I should include this parable: in Luke 16 Jesus tells of a poor man and a rich man who both die. The poor man is comforted by Abraham while the rich man is in torment. Abraham tells him: “And besides all this, between us and you there is a great chasm fixed, so that those who wish to come over from here to you will not be able, and that none may cross over from there to us.” That sounds rather definitive. However, this is a strange parable. It is the only one in which Jesus gives a character a name. Also, his description of the judgment and afterlife is unlike what he says in his many other teachings on the subject. Did Jesus really tell this parable, or did the author include it incorrectly, thinking it was from Jesus? Either way, it seems to go against the idea of universal salvation.

            Well, did Paul believe something different than what Jesus taught? It is possible! In Paul’s letters he says very little, almost nothing about the specific teachings of Jesus. He never claims that he personally met Jesus or heard him teach. We really don’t know how much of Jesus’ teachings he actually knew. Paul’s only concern is that Jesus died and was raised, for the sins of the world. Nothing else seems to matter to Paul, as he told the church in Corinth: “For I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified.” (1 Corinthians 2:2)  So, maybe Paul did not know exactly what Jesus taught about judgment and afterlife and had to develop his own theology about it. I think it’s hard to know.

            I wonder if, at least in part, the doctrine of universal salvation is a reaction to the concept of Hell, a place where sinners are in torment for all eternity. ALL ETERNITY! That’s a long time! If you think about it, that is the worst possible punishment imaginable; nothing else comes close. Is that really what the religion teaches which also claims ‘God is love?’ Would such a loving God create a scenario in which billions are born into this world only to die and be cast into Hell for ALL ETERNITY?!

OK, maybe some people do deserve to go to Hell!

            Now, Jesus definitely used the image of fire, and he says there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, but he never says that will go on forever. Think of his image of weeds being thrown into a fire: weeds burn, and if they could experience pain then they certainly would, but they also burn quickly and then are gone. They don’t burn forever. It seems to me being thrown into a fire to be destroyed is bad enough, but no, that’s not enough for most Christians. There has to be torment for ALL ETERNITY! If the Bible clearly taught the idea I can understand believers being stuck with it and having to accept it, but it does not. Jesus’ words on the matter are entirely consistent with the unrighteous being consumed and then gone. This is an eternal punishment, destruction for all eternity, but it does not mean eternal torment, just eternal non-existence. The Soul Nazi says: No eternal life for you! (Excuse the Seinfeld reference.)

            Speaking of that, in the first post of this series (#60) I quoted that well-known verse John 3:16. Many Christians quote it but they don’t seem to listen to it: “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.” So, the believers shall NOT perish but HAVE eternal life. What then of the unbelievers? They SHALL perish and NOT have eternal life. If nobody perishes and all have eternal life then the verse makes no sense; it is meaningless. Yet people quote this verse and still insist that all will have eternal life in some place, either Heaven or Hell. That’s not what the verse says!

            Before you quote this verse let me get to it: in Mark 9:42-50 Jesus says the sinners will “be cast into hell, where ‘their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched.’”  First, the English word “hell” is never used in the Bible; other words are mistranslated as ‘hell.’ In this case the Greek word is ‘Gehenna,’ related to a valley associated with fire and misery and death (not life). Second, Jesus is quoting from the last verse of the book of Isaiah: “Then they will go forth and look on the corpses of the men who have transgressed against Me. For their worm will not die and their fire will not be quenched; and they will be an abhorrence to all mankind.” These are not living people being consumed by worms and fire; there are so many corpses that the ‘worm does not die’ and the ‘fire is not quenched.’ It is the worms and the fire that live on, not the corpses. Read it carefully. Jesus said the ‘worm’ will not die; he did not say the ‘people’ will not die. The corpses are of people who are dead.

            Well, there are entire books written about the judgment as presented in the Bible (a very readable one is Heaven and Hell by Bart Ehrman, 2020). I just find it strange that so many Christians are so glued to the idea that those ‘sinners’ (never referring to themselves, of course) will have to suffer not for a hundred years, or a thousand years, or a million years, but for ALL ETERNITY! This is the way your ‘God is love’ wants it? The worst possible punishment ever conceived? And you condemn other humans for their petty sins while endorsing such a monstrous idea? Is religion really just a front for venting your anger toward people with whom you disagree? An excuse for thinking of the worst possible fate for your enemies? Do you embrace the concept of Hell and reject the idea of universal salvation because instead of loving your enemies, as Jesus said in Matthew 5:44 (and Luke 6:27), you actually want to see them ROAST IN HELL FOR ALL ETERNITY?!

An Angel Leading a Soul into Hell
Hieronymus Bosch (c.1450–1516)

            I wonder if Paul could not handle such a concept and if that is why some of his writings suggest God will make everything right in the end. And so with the Apocalypse of Peter, and Origen and others, even to today, as there are still those advocating this idea of universal salvation.

            Tell the truth: do you wish that all the sinners, from Hitler, to Mao, to the 9-11 terrorists, to your non-Christian neighbor go to Hell for all eternity, or would rather have then reformed, refined and be saved in the end? What does your answer say about yourself?  And your religion?

(scroll down to enter comments and questions)

Thinking exercises:

1. Think of the worst person in history. If God gave you the choice of putting that person in eternal torment or purging him/her of their sin so they could be saved, which would you choose? Which do you think God would choose? If your answer is not the same as God’s, why is that?

2. Jesus said “love your enemies, do good to those who hate you” (Luke 6:27). Will Jesus follow his own advice at the judgment? Or is eternal torment consistent with loving your enemies?

3. Is the concept of Hell necessary in order to scare people into adhering to a religion so as to be saved? Do you think God can discern the difference between those who are merely trying to escape Hell and those who actually love and honor Him? If God is worthy of our eternal praise and worship then why is the scary concept of Hell necessary?