home | what's new | other sites | contact | about

Word Gems 

exploring self-realization, sacred personhood, and full humanity

return to the main-page article on "Hell" 

That famous thinkers might have agreed on a particular proposition, such as universalism, of and by itself, is no veridical proof. They, in equal measure, might be famously mistaken. See the “Clear Thinking” page for discussion on the error of “appeal to mere authority.”

All this acknowledged, many of these thinkers, offering more than private opinion, buttress their assertion with good reasoning and logic. These can help us.

There is a Christian website which has compiled a list of notable thinkers on the subject of universalism. It’s a fine collection of argument. See it here and here.

And while most of these apologists for cosmic fair-play seek for support in a Christology – which the afterlife reports deny – even so, I find their analysis compelling.

Among these guardians of universalism, my favorite is Dr. William Barclay, the Greek scholar. He’s featured elsewhere on the WG site. His defense of universalism is offered below.

I AM A CONVINCED UNIVERSALIST
by William Barclay

I am a convinced universalist. I believe that in the end all men will be gathered into the love of God. In the early days Origen was the great name connected with universalism. I would believe with Origen that universalism is no easy thing. Origen believed that after death there were many who would need prolonged instruction, the sternest discipline, even the severest punishment before they were fit for the presence of God. Origen did not eliminate hell; he believed that some people would have to go to heaven via hell. He believed that even at the end of the day there would be some on whom the scars remained. He did not believe in eternal punishment, but he did see the possibility of eternal penalty. And so the choice is whether we accept God's offer and invitation willingly, or take the long and terrible way round through ages of purification.

Editor's note: This view is very much in line with what we learned from Franchezzo in the Dark Realms (see on the main-page).

Gregory of Nyssa offered three reasons why he believed in universalism.

First, he believed in it because of the character of God. "Being good, God entertains pity for fallen man; being wise, he is not ignorant of the means for his recovery."

Second, he believed in it because of the nature of evil. Evil must in the end be moved out of existence, "so that the absolutely non-existent should cease to be at all." Evil is essentially negative and doomed to non-existence.

Third, he believed in it because of the purpose of punishment. The purpose of punishment is always remedial. Its aim is "to get the good separated from the evil and to attract it into the communion of blessedness."

Punishment will hurt, but it is like the fire which separates the alloy from the gold; it is like the surgery which removes the diseased thing; it is like the cautery which burns out that which cannot be removed any other way.

Editor's note: Again, to reference Franchezzo's commentary, the purpose of the Dark Realms is that of "grinding the lust for sin out of the soul."

But I want to set down not the arguments of others but the thoughts which have persuaded me personally of universal salvation.

First, there is the fact that there are things in the New Testament which more than justify this belief. Jesus said: "I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself" (John 12:32). Paul writes to the Romans: "God has consigned all men to disobedience that he may have mercy on all" (Rom. 11:32). He writes to the Corinthians: "As in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive" (1 Cor. 15:22); and he looks to the final total triumph when God will be everything to everyone (1 Cor. 15:28).

parallelism

Editor’s note: Traditionalists will argue, “yes, in Christ all will be made alive – but only if one accepts the atonement of Christ.” But this element of contingency destroys the parallelism of 1 Cor. 15:22. Notice the argument carefully. “In Adam all die.” This is an absolute statement: all who share in the frailty of the human condition will die. There are no exceptions. There is no contingency concerning “in Adam all die – only if one aligns oneself with Adam.” No, there is no opting out of this universal condition. So, too, with the balancing counterpoint: “in Christ shall all be made alive.” This is also a universal statement. There is no contingency allowed based upon possible alliance with Christ. But, it will also be said, is there not a choice involved with coming to God? Yes, there is a choice, and many, provisionally, will say no – but God does not take such denial as final word on the matter. The Dark Realms, as we learned from reports by Franchezzo, Father Benson, and others, are designed to bring minds opposed to God to a better disposition: and this, with no contingency, no room for opting out. In the end, with suffering growing and growing due to separation from God, all – without exception, it appears -- all will yet choose to enter the path of life. And this is why in 1 Cor. 15:28 Paul declares that, at journey’s end, “God will be everything to everyone.” An absolute statement.

In the First Letter to Timothy we read of God "who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth," and of Christ Jesus "who gave himself as a ransom for all" (1 Tim 2:4-6). The New Testament itself is not in the least afraid of the word all.

'punishment' - the pruning of trees to make them grow better

Second, one of the key passages is Matthew 25:46 where it is said that the rejected go away to eternal punishment, and the righteous to eternal life. The Greek word for punishment is kolasis, which was not originally an ethical word at all. It originally meant the pruning of trees to make them grow better. I think it is true to say that in all Greek secular literature kolasis is never used of anything but remedial punishment.

the Greek for 'eternal' means 'of God'; things can last forever but still not be 'eternal'

The word for eternal is aionios. It means more than everlasting, for Plato - who may have invented the word - plainly says that a thing may be everlasting and still not be aionios. The simplest way to out it is that aionios cannot be used properly of anyone but God; it is the word uniquely, as Plato saw it, of God. Eternal punishment is then literally that kind of remedial punishment which it befits God to give and which only God can give.

Editor's note: See a more complete treatise of aionios by Barclay.

Third, I believe that it is impossible to set limits to the grace of God. I believe that not only in this world, but in any other world there may be, the grace of God is still effective, still operative, still at work. I do not believe that the operation of the grace of God is limited to this world. I believe that the grace of God is as wide as the universe.

Editor’s note: Where did the idea of “this world only” come from? Why is it taught that God’s operation of grace toward the world should screech to a halt upon our transition to the next? Churchmen, and kings claiming a “divine right,” have vested interests in painting a picture of God as stern and vindictive. But this is just fake-news. Proclaiming themselves as agents of God, these false authorities portray God in this draconian, fear-mongering way because it fits very well with their schemes of power and control. God doesn't give "second chances", and doesn't need to, because the first one never expires, until we get it right.

Fourth, I believe implicitly in the ultimate and complete triumph of God, the time when all things will be subject to him, and when God will be everything to everyone (1 Cor. 15:24-28). For me this has certain consequences. If one man remains outside the love of God at the end of time, it means that that one man has defeated the love of God - and that is impossible. Further, there is only one way in which we can think of the triumph of God. If God was no more than a King or Judge, then it would be possible to speak of his triumph, if his enemies were agonizing in hell or were totally and completely obliterated and wiped out. But God is not only King and Judge, God is Father - he is indeed Father more than anything else. No father could be happy while there were members of his family for ever in agony. No father would count it a triumph to obliterate the disobedient members of his family. The only triumph a father can know is to have all his family back home. The only victory love can enjoy is the day when its offer of love is answered by the return of love. The only possible final triumph is a universe loved by and in love with God.

[Quoted from William Barclay: A Spiritual Autobiography, pg 65-67, William B Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids, 1977.]

postscript

Florence Nightingale

"I can't love because I am ordered. Least of all can I love One who seems only to make me miserable here to torture me hereafter. Show me that He is good, that He is loveable, and I shall love Him without being told.

But does any preacher show this? He may say that God is good, but he shows Him to be very bad; he may say that God is 'Love', but he shows him to be hate, worse than any hate of man. As the Persian poet says; ‘If God punishes me for doing evil by doing me evil, how is he better than I?’ And it is hard to answer, for certainly the worst man would hardly torture his enemy, if he could, for ever. And unless God has a scheme that every man is to be saved for ever, it is hard to say in what sense He is not worse than man; for all good men would save others if they could…

It is of no use saying that God is just, unless we define what justice is. In all Christian times people have said that ‘God is just’ and have credited him with an injustice such as transcends all human injustice that it is possible to conceive."

Anne Bronte

One of the three famous Bronte sisters, Anne is remembered for being the most pious. Before she died from tuberculosis at the tender age of 29, she admitted to a faith in universalism, as the following poem testifies.

A Word to The 'Elect'

You may rejoice to think yourselves secure;
You may be grateful for the gift divine -
That grace unsought, which made your black hearts pure,
And fits your earth-born souls in Heaven to shine.

But, is it sweet to look around, and view
Thousands excluded from that happiness
Which they deserved, at least, as much as you, -
Their faults not greater, nor their virtues less?

And, wherefore should you love your God the more,
Because to you alone his smiles are given;
Because he chose to pass the many o'er,
And only bring the favoured few to Heaven?

And, wherefore should your hearts more grateful prove,
Because for ALL the Saviour did not die?
Is yours the God of justice and of love?
And are your bosoms warm with charity?

Say, does your heart expand to all mankind?
And, would you ever to your neighbor do -
The weak, the strong, the enlightened, and the blind -
As you would have your neighbor do to you?

And, when you, looking on your fellow-men,
Behold them doomed to endless misery,
How can you talk of joy and rapture then? -
May God withhold such cruel joy from me!

That none deserve eternal bliss I know;
Unmerited the grace in mercy given:
But, none shall sink to everlasting woe,
That have not well deserved the wrath of Heaven.

And, oh! there lives within my heart
A hope, long nursed by me;
(And, should its cheering ray depart,
How dark my soul would be!)

That as in Adam all have died,
In Christ shall all men live;
And ever round his throne abide,
Eternal praise to give.

That even the wicked shall at last
Be fitted for the skies;
And, when their dreadful doom is past,
To life and light arise.

I ask not, how remote the day,
Nor what the sinners' woe,
Before their dross is purged away;
Enough for me, to know

That when the cup of wrath is drained,
The metal purified,
They'll cling to what they once disdained,
And live by Him that died.

--Anne Bronte (1843)