Many are fascinated about the afterlife whether they follow God or not. Within Christian circles, the specific afterlife topics that are discussed the most are, not surprisingly, heaven and hell. Some believe in both as real locations that people will be transported to after they die. Others believe in heaven but not hell because they cannot reconcile the notion that God would want to save humanity and at the same time establish a place of punishment for those who do not follow him. And there are other viewpoints somewhere in the middle of these two. Historically, there have been three prominent viewpoints of hell. Two are theologically sound depending on how one interprets some specific verses, and the third is undoubtedly heretical in that it goes against the orthodox teaching of the church over the past two thousand years and uses poor exegesis of Scripture in an attempt to prove their position. This article is a refutation of Christian Universalism. For broader understanding, a definition of each of these positions will be provided before discussing the fallacies of Christian Universalism.
Eternal Conscious Torment
Eternal Conscious Torment (ECT) is a position that holds all people who choose not to accept Jesus as their savior will be punished in a place of torment for all of eternity. This viewpoint is derived from many different passages of Scripture[1] which mentions the eternality of hell. It is not a place anyone should want to go, and it is not a place anyone should hope their enemies are sent. Each of these passages emphasizes the fate of everlasting punishment or torment.
Annihilationism
Annihilationism is a position that agrees with ECT in that all people who choose not to accept Jesus as their savior will be punished in a place of torment, with the addition that God’s mercy will allow their souls to be fully consumed and destroyed in the fires of hell, essentially erasing them from existence. Several specific verses can be interpreted to arrive at this position.[2]
Both ECT and Annihilationism are valid theological positions that have been held by the church over the past two millenniums. Christian Universalism, however, has a very small amount of support in the early church and is widely considered as heretical today.
Christian Universalism
Christian Universalism (CU) is a position that holds all people will eventually be allowed into heaven. Those who choose not to accept Jesus as their savior will be sent to hell for a period of time to be purified in fire. CU is also known as restorationism or apokatastasis (ἀποκατάστασις). Proponents argue that the belief in apokatastasis by some early church fathers is evidence that it is a viable theological position, but they fail to accept the concerns raised in the Second Council of Constantinople that led to this viewpoint being ruled as heretical. Apokatastasis proponents also fail to balance what they say is early church support with the early church’s overwhelming acceptance of ECT. As an aside, it should be noted that other early church leaders espoused theological ideas which were also ruled as heresy. Arius’ view of the substance of Jesus is one good example. The fact that a member of the early church believed something is not enough is establish sound theology. Especially if the same person was later ruled to be a heretic. It is valuable, however, to review the totality of thought from the early church on this topic.
Some of the early church leaders who taught apokatastasis were Origen[3], Gregory of Nyssa[4], Didymus of Alexandria, and Diodorus of Tarsus. This spans the timeframe of approximately CE 185 – 390. Proponents of CU point to this early acceptance as evidence that the early church believed in a universal restoration of all things. Reading the works and theological positions of church leaders from the first few centuries helps us understand what they believed. We derive some tradition from these writings but must remember that nothing they wrote is authoritative or canonical. Historically, those who strayed from established beliefs or customs of the church were labeled as heretics. One who studies the works of the early church fathers should do so broadly to understand the majority opinion on topics. Reading just those who support one’s opinion is no better than proof-texting biblical texts. The support for apokatastasis in the early church is limited compared to the support for other viewpoints on hell. It likely began with Origen, but one earlier leader had some views that leaned toward apokatastasis.
Clement of Alexandria is often touted as one who promoted apokatastasis citing his writings in The Stromata, but this is a misrepresentation of his work. He mentions the advent of Christ three times as he argues that those who died prior to the advent were offered salvation because it would be unjust otherwise.[5] He skirts the issue in another writing without taking a clear stance on the topic, again mentioning the advent.[6] In context, his assertion was not for a universal apokatastasis, but for this narrower viewpoint of preaching to the pre-advent dead according to his interpretation 1 Peter 3:18-19. To reiterate this point, one could read a later writing by Clement of Alexandria, which states, “All souls are immortal, even those of the wicked, for whom it were better that they were not deathless. For, punished with the endless vengeance of quenchless fire, and not dying, it is impossible for them to have a period put to their misery.”[7] It is fair to say that some of Clement’s writings lean in the direction of apokatastasis and his work may have influenced Origen who then influenced others, but one cannot hang universal salvation on his writings.
Origen is likely the true origin (pun intended) of universalist teaching within the church. He taught that all humans and the fallen angels, including the devil, would be restored through a series of punishments.[8] He also inferred that the punishment would be worse for some, presumably those who committed greater evils. Origen believed there would be a “perfect restoration of the whole of creation.”[9] Ilaria Ramelli has posited that Origen may have been influenced by some apocryphal works, namely, the Apocalypse of Peter and the Life of Adam and Eve, both of which have universalist overtones of salvation for sinners after death.[10] The Apocalypse of Peter is particularly interesting because it was likely available to Origen since research has shown high plausibility that it was written in Alexandria.[11] Unsurprisingly, Gregory of Nyssa, a student of Origen, espoused similar viewpoints about humans being cleansed of evil through fire leading to the restoration of all people and the devil.[12]
Modern proponents further claim that Origen should be held in high regard due to his status as the head of the catechetical school in Alexandria. However, research from Grafton & Williams shows there is no evidence for a formal catechetical school established by the bishop of Alexandria.[13] They also point out that Origen’s theological research was funded by a patron, named Ambrose, and he was never the head of an official school.[14] This does not mean he was not a theologian, but the established church did not officially appoint him to lead a school or hold a leadership position. He was ordained as a priest sometime after CE 218, but the leaders in Alexandria were unhappy with this appointment and officially defrocked him and banished him from the city in CE 231. The final nail in the coffin for Origen’s theological positions came
in CE 553 when the Second Council of Constantinople ruled his views to be heretical with a strongly worded statement, “If anyone teaches the mythical doctrine of the pre-existence of the soul and the apokatastasis that follows from it, let him be anathema.”
So, the notion that the first 500 years of Christianity had great support for universalism or apokatastasis is greatly overstated. The reality is that a few people believed, wrote, and taught about apokatastasis while the overwhelming of early church fathers believed in eternal conscious torment. CU proponents also often cite specific Bible verses in support of their beliefs. As with most exegetical processes, verses taken out of context and strung together can be made to support almost any theological position. Some of the key verses used to improperly support this belief are exegeted below:
Jesus provided a contrast in Matthew 25:46 of the eternity for his followers and those who chose not to follow him, “And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.” The argument of CU is that the Greek word in this passage, αἰώνιον (aiōnion), is translated incorrectly when rendered as “eternal” and they propose it should be translated as an “indeterminate age” or something similar. A historical analysis of this word shows it being used as far back as the fifth century BCE by Heraclitus and Empedocles in their philosophical works. The works of Plato provide a semblance of the words meaning in 360 BCE where he uses the lemma, αἰών (aiōn), as “timeless, ideal eternity, in which there are no days or months or years” and χρόνος (chronos) as time that was created with the world. Aristotle combined both of these words to mean “a period of time” while Philo agreed with Plato and used αἰών as eternity.[15] Even more interesting, in the Hellenistic age, αἰών is used as the name of a god of eternity worshipped in 200 BCE. How αἰών and its derivatives were translated in the Septuagint in the second century BCE is also of importance. The word is used to describe the name of God as lasting forever, as the covenant with Israel being eternal, and as the barriers in the earth being eternal.[16] We see similar use throughout the New Testament as well. If CU proponents want to argue that αἰών does not mean eternal they will also have to stipulate that the reward of the righteous will only last for an “indeterminate age,” (Matt. 25:26), that God himself is not eternal (Rom. 16:26), that God does not have eternal dominion (1 Ti. 6:16), and that Christ is not the source of eternal salvation (Heb. 5:9). Additionally, in context, Jesus is contrasting the fate of nonbelievers with the fate of believers. He uses the exact same adjective to describe the two nouns (punishment and life). If one was different from the other, a different word would have been used.
CU proponents declare that all will be saved based on a flawed exegesis of 2 Peter 3:9 which says, “The Lord is not slow about his promise, as some think of slowness, but is patient with you, not wanting any to perish, but all to come to repentance.” Yes, God’s desire is for all to come to repentance. That is why his attribute of patience is mentioned here to show that he is patiently waiting for unbelievers to repent before the time of judgment arrives. Craig Keener notes that the common Jewish perspective on the judgment was that “God delayed judgment to allow opportunity for the wicked to repent”[17] This is seen very clearly in Ezekiel 18:23, 32, and 33:11, and in other Jewish non-canonical texts like 4 Ezra 7:74. God desires everyone to come to repentance, of this there is no doubt. Peter goes on to mention in v.10 that the day of the Lord’s return will come without warning and, in v.11, that people should lead holy lives so they are prepared when he returns so that, in v.14, we will be found without spot or blemish. 2 Peter 3:9 is not a declaration that all will be saved. It is one piece of a longer contextual passage where the Apostle is reminding believers to live a holy lifestyle (something he also did in 1 Pet. 1:14-19) in preparation for the coming day of the Lord.
CU proponents believe that 1 Corinthians 10:11-15 declares the works of all people (righteous and unrighteous) will be judged with fire in that it says (v.15 is key to this argument), “For no one can lay any foundation other than the one that has been laid; that foundation is Jesus Christ. Now if anyone builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw— the work of each builder will become visible, for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each has done. If what has been built on the foundation survives, the builder will receive a reward. If the work is burned up, the builder will suffer loss; the builder will be saved, but only as through fire.” Once again, this is poor exegesis because it ignores the immediately following verse 16 where Paul identifies his audience as being believers. Verse 9 also identifies the recipients as “God’s building.” Paul wrote this letter to believers in Corinth and stipulated that the work of the righteous would be tested in fire. More specifically, Paul identifies himself as the builder in v. 10 and infers that Apollos is also a builder in the same verse. So, when he talks about the builder receiving a reward, he is speaking specifically about himself and Apollos, and when he talks about the work being burned up, he is also speaking of himself and Apollos. We can further extrapolate that the builder is every righteous person who is planting the seeds of the gospel or watering those seeds. In other words, all righteous people who are continuing in the great commission. The entire chapter of 1 Corinthians 3 must be read in order to determine the correct interpretation.
Acts 3:21 which says, “who must remain in heaven until the time of universal restoration that God announced long ago through his holy prophets” is a favorite verse of CU proponents because it mentions “universal restoration.” This is the only place in the Bible where apokatastaseōs is used and this verse is often pointed to as evidence of everyone being restored. As with previous passages, a proper exegesis will show this to be an incorrect context. This passage is most likely referring to the restoration of Israel, which was a common focus of Old Testament prophets.[18] One just needs to continue reading Acts 3, v. 22-23 to see Luke declare destruction for those who do not listen to the Messiah (the prophet referred to by Moses), or go back to v. 19 where people are encouraged to repent, or go back to Acts 1:6 to see the pivotal question about the kingdom of Israel being restored. If Luke had universalism in mind, he would not have included calls to repentance and warnings about destruction. So, in context, it does not support all people being purged in hell and then released at a later time.
CU also proposes that the unrighteous will not spend eternity in hell because the goodness of God will overcome all evil, as Romans 12:21 says, “Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.” Once again we find proof-texting at work to apply a verse to a theological position without considering its context. In context, Paul is encouraging believers to live in harmony. He encourages believers to hate evil, love one another, be hopeful and patient, be hospitable, not to repay evil with evil, to live in peace (v. 9-18), and similar admonitions then caps it all off with the final point of overcoming evil with good. This is not a discussion about God releasing people from hell because of his goodness.
One final scripture to review is 1 Peter 4:6 which reads, “For this is the reason the gospel was proclaimed even to the dead, so that, though they had been judged in the flesh as everyone is judged, they might live in the spirit as God does.” This is an interesting verse that has been interpreted in a few different ways. Some interpret this to mean that Jesus preached to the inhabitants of Sheol sometime in between his death and resurrection and, it is often combined with 1 Peter 3:19 to bolster the meaning. One challenge in regard to 3:19 is that πνεῦμα (pneuma), translated here as “spirits” (pneumasin), is mostly used in the New Testament to refer to the Holy Spirit or unclean spirits. It is only used to refer to human spirits approximately 5% of the time. Additionally, 3:20 informs that these spirits were disobedient during the time of Noah, so this is not a reference to all unrighteous spirits. 2 Peter 2:4 and Jude 1:6 further specifically mention imprisoned angels who sinned at some point. If Jesus descended into Sheol to preach to the past dead, why would it only be those from the time of Noah? Continuing on to 3:22 Christ is shown as having “authorities and powers made subject to him.” In light of the fuller context, Jesus likely went to the place a group of fallen angels were imprisoned and proclaimed triumph over them. Returning to 1 Peter 4:6, it is highly unlikely Peter is speaking about the fallen angels from 3:19, and in the context of the blaspheming of believers in v.4 and the judgment of God in v.5, Peter is likely referring to Christians who were judged and executed during their physical existence on earth and now reside with God in the spirit. He uses them as an example to point out the importance of spreading the gospel while people are still alive.
The Bible is clear, the unrighteous will not inherit eternal life and will not spend eternity with God. It seems that many have adopted this viewpoint because they believe the love of God is so great that he would never unleash his vengeance upon them. CU fails to recognize that choosing to follow Jesus and accepting God’s gift of salvation before death is the only way to inherit eternal life. Jesus taught very plainly on the topic of hell, as did the apostles. Matthew 10:28, 25:41, 25:46, John 3:16-18, 2 Thessalonians 1:9, and Jude 1:7 all speak of unescapable punishment for the wicked. God does not want anyone to go to hell, but he is a righteous judge, and he alone has the authority to mete out punishment for the wicked. We cannot allow human emotions to drive theological positions. Rather, we should work hard at spreading the gospel so that all people will come to know Jesus as their savior and put their lives into his hands. This is a topic about eternal judgment, but following Jesus is actually much more than just escaping punishment. It is the only way to have the best human experience as well as the best experience in the afterlife. We need him and we should strive to tell others about him.
[1] See Dan. 12:1-2, Matt. 28:31-34, 41, 46, 2 Thes. 1:5-9, Jude 1:7, Rev. 14:9-11, and Rev. 20:14-15 for the most commonly used Scriptures.
[2] See Matt. 10:28 and John 3:16, specifically the words perish and destroy.
[3] Origen, De Principiis, Book I, Chapter VI, 1-3, https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/04121.htm
[4] Gregory of Nyssa, On the Soul and the Resurrection, https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/2915.htm
[5] Clement of Alexandria, The Stromata, Book VI, Chapter 6, https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/02106.htm
[6] Clement of Alexandria, The Stromata, Book VII, Chapter 2, https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/02107.htm
[7] Clement of Alexandria, The Barocc. ms., https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0211.htm
[8] Origen, De Principiis, Book I, Chapter VI, 1-3, https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/04121.htm
[9] Origen, De Principiis, Book III, Chapter V, Section 7, https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/04123.htm
[10] Ramelli, Ilaria L. E. “Origen, Bardaian, and the Origin of Universal Salvation.” The Harvard Theological Review 102, no. 2 (2009): 135–68.
[11] Jan Bremmer, “The Apocalypse of Peter: Greek or Jewish?” in The Apocalypse of Peter (ed. Bremmer and Czachesz), 1-14.
[12] Gregory of Nyssa, On the Soul and the Resurrection, https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/2915.htm
[13] Grafton, A., & Williams, M. H. (2006). Christianity and the transformation of the book : Origen, Eusebius, and the Library of Caesarea (First Harvard University Press paperback edition). The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 77-78.
[14] Grafton, A., & Williams, M. H. (2006). Christianity and the transformation of the book : Origen, Eusebius, and the Library of Caesarea (First Harvard University Press paperback edition). The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 78.
[15] Gerhard Kittel, Gerhard Friedrich, and Geoffrey William Bromiley, eds., Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, vol. 1 (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1964), 198.
[16] (See Ex. 3:15, 31:17, Jon. 2:7)
[17] Craig S. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament, Second Edition. (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic: An Imprint of InterVarsity Press, 2014), 704.
[18] See Is. 40:9-11, Jer. 32:42-44, Ezek. 37:21-28 as examples.