withallyourmind.net

In my last two posts, I gave evidence opposing the claim of universalists that universalism was the predominant view in early church history. I also examined a number of scriptures which clearly undercut universalist teaching. Today, I will look at the scriptures which are often used in support of universalism.

Scripture such as Psalm 110:1, 1 Corinthian 15:24-25 and Philippians 2:10-11, which speak of Christ’s enemies eventually submitting to him, in no way support universalism. Psalm 110:1 clearly identifies these who submit as Christ’s enemies. That “every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord” does not entail the salvation of those who confess and bow. James 2:19 tells us that the devils believe, but they are not saved. One must not only believe and confess the fact that Jesus Christ is Lord, but one must entrust their lives to Him as Lord. These passages speak more of a subjugation of Christ’s enemies than a submission and restoration of His followers.

How about Acts 3:21 which refers to the “restoration of all things?” Nowhere in this passage is the ultimate salvation of all human beings taught. Norman Geisler argues that, in context, this restoration of all things is the restoration of all things to Israel, not the salvation of all people. The verse explicitly qualifies the “all things” to those things spoken of by the holy prophets.

Universalists use Romans 5:18-19 which speaks of Christ bringing life for all men to infer the guarantee of salvation for all. This, once again, goes far beyond what the scripture itself actually states. Geisler argues that the atonement is…

… unlimited in its extent (Christ died for all), but limited in its application, since not all believe.

Even if one could interpret this, or any, passage to imply universal salvation, if there is an available alternative interpretation, the passage should be interpreted in light of the clear teaching of other scriptures (which oppose universalism).

Colossians 1:20, which states that God was pleased to reconcile all things unto himself, is likewise used to support the apokastastasis doctrine. Whatever this reconciliation of all things means, it obviously does not contradict the unmistakable teaching of Scripture that some souls will be eternally punished. Archer takes this verse to mean that all things are brought into harmony with God’s sovereignty, which is a plausible understanding of this passage.

Next post, I offer a few more thoughts and some concluding remarks.