Follower of Christ. Appreciator of historical theology, patristics, puritans, and western civilization. Christian universalist. Conservative. Biblically based.
I often hear people say “Jesus thought you were to die for” or “He thought you were worth saving”
People probably mean well when they say this, but I feel the need to clarify: He didn’t die for us because we were worthy, He died for us despite our unworthiness!
I didn’t leave Calvinism because it seemed harsh, cruel, or unfair.
I left Calvinism because it contradicted the explicit teaching of Scripture.
…and along the way realized that Calvinist theology indeed slanders the good character of God.
“Through Christ God was pleased to reconcile all things to himself, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross.”
– Paul the Apostle (Col. 1:20)
Christian universalism is no watered-down message of soft sentimentalism.
Rather, it is the declaration of total divine victory.
Christ will not settle for partial triumph. He will have it all.
“Would God have so carefully brought man into being in order to let him be destroyed after he was born, and undergo complete annihilation? Surely such a plan would be foolish, and to attribute such a purpose to God would be utterly unworthy.”
– Gregory of Nyssa (Pasch. 7)
1. Christians must love their enemies.
2. Loving means willing their good.
3. Eternal damnation is not their good.
4. To be content with their eternal damnation is to fail to love them.
5. Therefore ECT is incompatible with the mandate to love one’s enemies.
It’s wild how many people assume everlasting conscious torment is an essential doctrine when it was…
-not mentioned in any of the earliest creeds of the church
-rejected by many of the greatest fathers of the early church
-not unambiguously taught in the New or Old Testament
“Revenge is not an aim with God; rather, his aim is the setting aright of those who are subject to judgment. For it is not in punishing that he takes pleasure, but in bringing benefit.”
– Isaac of Nineveh (Headings, 3.94)
If anyone deserves to be called a saint, Origen does.
- Contributed foundationally to pastoral theology, biblical study, and defense of the orthodox faith.
- Died as a martyr in the peace of the church.
- Revered by many of the greatest subsequent fathers of the church.
“The mystery of the incarnation is the salvation of the whole creation, according to that which is written: ‘That he should taste death for every man’ [Heb. 2:9]; and ‘All creation shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption’ [Rom. 8:22].”
– Ambrose (On Faith, 5.8.105)
It is often assumed that universalism was a minority view in the early church held by only a few.
But this is false, according to primary sources in both the east and the west.
They report that “the mass of men,” “very many,” even “the majority” were universalists.
@ShaiLinne
True, but could it be possible that one of these has more overlap with the Biblical worldview than the other?
By definition of God’s immutability, conservatism is demonstrably closer to His principles than the ever-evolving left and its shifting moral standards.
Fair?
“The solidarity of mankind is such that, by virtue of the Word’s indwelling in a single human body, the corruption which goes with death has lost its power over all.”
– Athanasius (On the Incarnation, 9.2)
Few know this, but Christian universalism in its traditional form is a very conservative theological viewpoint, and is nothing like the watered-down universalism of modern pluralistic liberalism.
“The eschatological discrimination between heaven and hell is the crucifixion of history, while the final universal restoration of all things is the Easter of creation.”
– David Bentley Hart
In John 12:32 Jesus said, “And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.”
I typed this verse into an AI image generator as a prompt, and here’s what it came up with:
When you think about it, it’s absurd to imagine that something so cosmically significant as the incarnation of God as man—the union of Divine and human nature—could result in a mere partial/local redemption.
The Gospel has nothing less than a universal result.
Universal beatific vision is biblically implied in Revelation 5:13.
“I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea, and all that is in them, saying, ‘To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb be blessing and honor and glory!’”
It’s remarkable how few people know about the prevalence of patristic universalism.
Clement of Alexandria and Isaac the Syrian are just two of many universalist early church fathers.
@DustinBenge
Absolutely disgusting to see Christ’s name so terribly misrepresented and tarnished by the evil cowards in this photo.
“For the LORD will not hold him guiltless who takes his name in vain.” Exodus 20:7
“God is not one who requites evil, but he sets evil aright. The former is characteristic of evil people, while the latter is characteristic of a father.”
– Isaac of Nineveh
@TDisputations
“He indeed saves all… so ‘that every knee should bow to Him, of things in heaven, and things on earth, and things under the earth,’ that is, angels, men, and souls that before His advent have departed from this temporal life.”
– Clement of Alexandria (Com. 1 John 2.2), c. 190.
@EOrthodoxy
“In any and every case evil must be removed out of existence, so that, as we said above, the absolutely non-existent should cease to be at all. …Evil will be reduced to complete annihilation, owing to no receptacle being left for it.”
- Gregory of Nyssa (from ‘On the Soul…’)
Notice the snuck premise that “all men” and “believers” will forever be non-coextensive categories.
Paul taught that all will be saved because all will believe (Phil. 2:10-11, cf. Rom. 10:9, 1 Cor: 12:3).
Christian universalists agree that belief is necessary for salvation.
To be clear, I’m not saying Thomas should be entirely ignored or dismissed. Just tired of people quoting him as if his opinion settles a matter. His words have no inherent weight.
Brilliant man, but lacked moral intelligence in some key ways, & was enslaved to dogmatic premises.
@RobinParry
Currently reading your chapter in Varieties of Christian Universalism and it’s great. Especially this quote:
“An eschatology in which hell—alienation from God—is a permanent feature seems to me to be an eschatology in which something other than the gospel is calling the shots.”
For those interested in a more thorough explanation of why non-universalist readings of this text (1 Tim. 4:10) are inevitably inadequate, see the following:
In addition to being found nowhere in Scripture, this line of reasoning is about as logically vacuous as the argument from some atheists that because God is ostensibly an infinite being it must require infinite evidence to conclude he exists. Non-sequitur.
@waldenpod
1) Punishments should be more severe with increasing harm to the good.
2) Sinning against God is a harm against an infinite good.
3) Therefore, punishment for sinning against God should be infinitely severe.
“The Divine Being is not angry in the way that some think; but often restrains, and always exhorts humanity, and shows what ought to be done. And this is a good device, to terrify lest we sin. For the fear of the Lord drives away sins.”
– Clement of Alexandria (Paed. 1.8)
Not to mention Philippians 2:11 in light of 1 Corinthians 12:3.
“Every tongue will confess that Jesus is Lord.”
“No one can say Jesus is Lord except in the Holy Sprit.”
For those who may not know, this is Clement of Alexandria, Macrina the Younger, Gregory of Nyssa, and Isaac of Nineveh—four of the many brilliant universalists in the early church.
Christian universalists have historically upheld:
- the authority of Scripture
- the doctrine of the Trinity
- the exclusivity of Christ
- the necessity of repentance
- the reality of hell/judgement
- the sanctity of life & marriage
and so on.
@RxOnly_
Or in more theological terms: the doctrines of eternal conscious torment and conditional immortality appear to compromise the benevolence of God.
In 1 Peter 4:6, Peter says “even the dead were evangelized” (καὶ νεκροῖς εὐηγγελίσθη).
But the NIV inserts “those who are now dead” to suggest that there’s no postmortem opportunity, despite the fact that the word “now” is found nowhere in the Greek.
1. McC accuses universalists of committing “the genetic fallacy—that is, attempting to dismiss [eternal hell] by giving an unfavorable account of its origins.”
Yet McC’s book does this throughout, implying that universalism is problematic due to supposedly heterodox origins.
Promiscuity is sin.
Abortion is sin.
Racism is sin.
Homosexuality is sin.
Hatred is sin.
Gluttony is sin.
Profanity is sin.
None of this should be denied or compromised to make sinners feel better.
The good news is, Jesus saves sinners.
Repent and believe the gospel.
@EOrthodoxy
“Here [in 1 Corinthians 15:28] it appears to me that Scripture teaches the complete annihilation of evil. For if God will be “in all” existing things, evil plainly will not then be amongst them.”
- Gregory of Nyssa (from ‘On the Soul and Resurrection’)
“What’s the point of being a Christian and evangelizing if everyone can and will be saved eventually in the next life?”
Because Jesus is worth following in and of himself. He is not merely a ‘get out of hell free’ card. Why remain in bondage to sin when you can be free now?
In Titus 2:11, Paul says the grace of God brings “salvation to all” (σωτήριος πᾶσιν).
But the NIV feels the need to insert the word “offers,” to suggest that God doesn’t actually save all, despite the fact that it’s nowhere in the original Greek.
In 1 Corinthians 3:15, Paul says those whose works are burned up will be saved “through fire” (διὰ πυρός).
But the NIV has to insert the word “escaping” to suggest that the fire is avoided rather than being salvific, despite the fact that it’s nowhere in the Greek.
Not to mention, this would not allow for any distinctions between greater or lesser sins (since they’re all against an infinite good).
Plus, it is incorrect to say that sin “harms” God. He is impassible.
@VentureCoMining
Yeah there are many who’ve observed the futility of this argument from Mt. 25:46.
I’ll just point out that those who’ve tried this (like Augustine and Aquinas) have usually been Latin speakers, whereas native Greek speakers like Clement, Origen, and Gregory saw no problem.
@KevinDr_ver
Barnabas most likely
- early attestation from Tertullian, etc
- similarities with Epistle of Barnabas
- Greek-speaking Levite (Acts 4:36)
- indirect apostolic witness (Heb 2:3)
- very close proximity to Paul
- “Son of comfort” (Acts 4:36) writing a “word of comfort” (Heb 13:22)
Universalism is not some sentimental wish or a presumptive rejection of traditional Christianity.
Rather it is the assurance that Christ the king will victoriously reclaim all that is rightfully his, not allowing the forces of evil to get the last word over any of his creatures.
Clement of Alexandria (c. 190) comments on this text as follows:
“God, then, who is ineffable in respect of his substance, is light, and in him is no darkness at all—that is, no passion, no keeping up of evil respecting any one. He destroys no one but gives salvation to all.”
@_matthewpearson
She’s right, the gospel isn’t centered on America. Yet the gospel has implications for how we should live in this nation and how it should be governed.
In 2 Thes 1:9 Paul says some will experience “destruction age-during from the face of the Lord” (ὄλεθρον αἰώνιον ἀπὸ προσώπου τοῦ κυρίου).
But the NIV tampers with this by inserting the words “shut out” and “everlasting” to suggest ECT, even though this isn’t in the Greek.
“The mass of men [οἱ πολλοί τῶν ἀνθρώπων] say that there is to be an end of punishment to those who are punished.”
– Basil/Ps. Basil (Regula, De Ascetics)
More examples could be cited, and many other translations are guilty of similar errors.
But it’s important to clarify that distortions like these are not necessarily willfully malicious or deceptive. They simply showcase the doctrinal bias that affects translational decisions.
3. McC accuses Ilaria Ramelli (patristics scholar) of exhibiting an “ambition to vindicate” universalism, and of crafting a “revisionist theological history.”
Yet McC repeatedly reveals his own ambition to discredit universalism, and his narrative is blatantly revisionist.
“…salvation belongs to the Lord alone and none of us deserve it. Unfortunately many will burn…”
Believe it or not, as a universalist I agree with every word here.
None of it refutes universal salvation unless you bring numerous unspoken assumptions to the subject.
No. It’s God glorifying knowing that salvation belongs to the Lord alone and none of us deserve it. Unfortunately many will burn , and that’s just the way it is. He’s God and you aren’t… who are you to criticize what he chooses , does or prepares for those who love him/don’t
“I know that the majority [plerosque] understand by the story of Nineveh and its king the ultimate forgiveness of the evil one and all rational creatures.”
– Jerome (In Ionam, 3.6-9)
Much more could be said about McC’s futile, though seemingly well-meant, project.
There’s his lack of proper expertise (even admitting he’s a “nonspecialist” in patristics), his shallow arguments, misrepresentations, speculations, red herrings, etc.
But you get the idea.
4. McC claims that universalists’ arguments against endless hell are usually based on “aesthetic criteria, if not personal predispositions.”
Yet McC elsewhere tries to counter various universalists by saying that their view somehow makes salvation “uninteresting” to his mind.
In terms of better versions, I would recommend Young’s Literal Translation and the Hart New Testament.
There’s no such thing as a perfect translation, but these more successfully avoid many of the common errors and pitfalls such as we see above.
“As as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. For as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous.”
– Paul the Apostle
@WWUTTguy
From this tweet it seems you may misunderstand what Christian universalism is. I disagree with Zach on a lot (I’m a conservative Christian), but agree biblically that God ultimately saves all.
Out of curiosity, have you read any Christian universalist sources?
@xTheGoodNews
Barnabas most likely:
- early attestation from Tertullian, etc
- similarities with Epistle of Barnabas
- Greek-speaking Levite (Acts 4:36)
- indirect apostolic witness (Heb 2:3)
- very close proximity to Paul
- “Son of comfort” (Acts 4:36) writing a “word of comfort” (Heb 13:22)