Universalism (pronounced yu-ni-VER-sul-iz-um) is a doctrine that teaches all people will be

saved. Other names for this doctrine are universal restoration, universal reconciliation,
universal restitution, and universal salvation.

The main argument for universalism is that a good and loving God would not condemn
people to eternal torment in hell. Some universalists believe that after a certain cleansing
period, God will free the inhabitants of hell and reconcile them to himself. Others say that
after death, people will have another opportunity to choose God. For some who adhere to
universalism, the doctrine also implies that there are many ways to get into heaven.

In the past several years, universalism has seen a resurgence. Many adherents prefer different
names for it: inclusion, the greater faith, or the larger hope. Tentmaker.org calls it "The
Victorious Gospel of Jesus Christ."

Universalism applies passages like Acts 3:21 and Colossians 1:20 to mean that God intends
to restore all things to their original state of purity through Jesus Christ (Romans 5:18;
Hebrews 2:9), so that in the end everyone will be brought into a right relationship with God
(1 Corinthians 15:24–28).

But such a view runs counter to the teaching of the Bible that "all who call upon the name of
the Lord" will be united to Christ and eternally saved, not all people in general.

Jesus Christ taught that those who reject him as Savior will spend eternity in hell after they
die:

 Matthew 10:28
 Matthew 23:33
 Matthew 25:46
 Luke 16:23
 John 3:36

Universalism Ignores God's Justice

Universalism focuses exclusively on God's love and mercy and ignores his holiness, justice,
and wrath. It also assumes that God's love depends on what he does for humanity, rather than
being a self-existing attribute of God present from eternity, before man was created.

The Psalms speak repeatedly of God's justice. Without hell, what justice would there be for
murderers of millions, such as Hitler, Stalin, and Mao? Universalists say Christ’s sacrifice on
the cross met all the demands for God’s justice, but would it be justice for the wicked to
enjoy the same rewards as those who were martyred for Christ? The fact that often there is no
justice in this life requires that a just God impose it in the next.

James Fowler, president of Christ in You Ministries, notes, "Desiring to focus on the rosy
optimism of the universal perfection of man, sin is, for the most part, an irrelevancy... Sin is
minimized and trivialized in all universalistic teaching."
Universalism was taught by Origen (A.D. 185–254) but was declared heresy by the Council
of Constantinople in A.D. 543. It became popular again in the 19th century and is gaining
traction in many Christian circles today.

Fowler adds that one reason for the resurgence of universalism is the current attitude that we
should not be judgmental of any religion, idea, or person. By refusing to call anything right or
wrong, universalists not only cancel the need for Christ's redeeming sacrifice but also ignore
the consequences of unrepented sin.

As a doctrine, universalism does not describe one certain denomination or faith group. The
universalist camp includes members of varying doctrinal categories with differing and
sometimes contradictory beliefs.

Are Christian Bibles Wrong?

Much of universalism relies on the premise that Bible translations are wrong in their uses of
the terms Hell, Gehenna, everlasting, and other words that claim eternal punishment. Despite
the fact that recent translations such as the New International Version and English Standard
Version were the efforts of large teams of knowledgeable Bible scholars, universalists say the
Greek term "aion," which means "age," has been consistently mistranslated across the
centuries, leading to false doctrine about the length of hell.

Critics of universalism state that the identical Greek term "aionas ton aionon," which means
"ages of the ages," is used in the Bible to describe both the eternal worth of God and the
eternal fire of hell. Therefore, they say, either God’s worth, like the fire of hell, must be
limited in time, or the fire of hell must be neverending, like God’s worth. Critics say
universalists are picking and choosing when aionas ton aionon means "limited."

Universalists reply that to correct the "errors" in translation, they are in the process of
producing their own translation of the Bible. However, one of the pillars of Christianity is
that the Bible, as the Word of God, is inerrant. When the Bible must be rewritten to
accommodate a doctrine, it is the doctrine that is wrong, not the Bible.

One problem with universalism is that it imposes human judgment upon God, saying that
logically he cannot be perfect love while punishing sinners in hell. However, God himself
warns against attributing human standards to him:

"For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,” declares the Lord.
“As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my
thoughts than your thoughts." (Isaiah 55:8–9 NIV)
Three Biblical Arguments Against Universalism
Peter Grice

Below are three biblical arguments against universalism (and an extra one for further
reading!). While they offer more than simple proof texts, it would take a much longer article
to develop them more fully. Even so, I trust that you will find them useful and persuasive.
Let’s first look at some relevant context, and then dive into the arguments themselves.

Personal eschatology—the study of the final fate of human beings—should be embedded

within cosmic eschatology, the study of the final state of God’s created order. God is
redeeming the cosmos, and human beings within it (see Rom 8:18-25). Universalists and
conditionalists both agree that God will redeem the cosmos as a whole. But universalists also
claim that God will eventually redeem every human being that will have ever lived, while our
claim as conditionalists is that God’s work of “new creation” purposefully excludes some
human beings. Despite knowing enough about the immortal God and realizing that they
ultimately deserve death, they still reject him (Rom 1:18-23; 32). They disobey the gospel (1
Pet 4:17; 2 Thess 1:8; Rom 10:16), and so fail to respond obediently in repentance and faith
to the knowledge of God and his offer of salvation (Acts 6:7; Rom 1:5; 16:26). They love sin
rather than goodness, themselves rather than God, and are “disqualified regarding the faith”
(John 3:20; 2 Tim 3:2-8).

A related difference between the two views is that conditionalists see judgment day as a time
already fixed for their destruction, making their subsequent regret and change of heart
impossible (they no longer exist), whereas universalists typically see an open-ended
opportunity for unsaved sinners to repent, long after judgment day. This is the common form
of universalism that I’m arguing against, although my arguments may still work against
other, minority forms. Typically, universalists (especially evangelicals) hold that people are
judged by being cast into a hell of some description, perhaps to undergo chastisements, or at
least to reflect on their predicament, during which time they may still be saved, as indeed all
are due to eventually coming to repentance. Despite the difference in penultimate history
between the universalist and conditionalist camps, both scenarios ultimately envision a state
of comprehensive reconciliation of the cosmos and of redeemed humanity; God’s completed
work of creation, untainted by any evil and triumphant over it.

Argument from the defeat of God’s last remaining enemy

in 1 Corinthians 15:26
This argument states that after all of God’s enemies are defeated with the defeat of the
last enemy, death, leading to God becoming “all in all” over a redeemed creation, no
enemies can still exist as such—including human “enemies of the cross” (Phil 3:18)—
nor can there be any post-defeat defeat of death in their case anyway. Universalism is
ruled out because the Bible links the timing and mode of this defeat of death to the
immortalizing resurrection of believers.

According to 1 Corinthians 15:42-55, the believer’s resurrection, when “the perishable puts
on the imperishable, and the mortal puts on immortality,” is the moment when death itself is
defeated, that is, “swallowed up in victory.”1 This conquest is grounded in the vision of new
creation, when there “will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order
of things has passed away” (Rev 21:4 cf. Isa 25:8).

But as 1 Corinthians 15:24-28 makes clear, “The last enemy to be destroyed is death” (v26),
leaving no more enemies in existence. We are told in this passage that Jesus is right now
reigning over “all things,” until he has finally “put all his enemies under his feet” (v25). Only
after “destroying every rule and every authority and every power” (v24) does the
consummation of salvation history occur, when Jesus submits himself and his rule to God the
Father, “that God may be all in all” (1 Cor 15:28 cf. 24). This is precipitated, we are told, by
the victory over death demonstrated in the immortalization of believers, which makes them fit
for eternal life in the new creation, signaling the destruction of the final enemy, death.

The fact that death is utterly defeated at this point means that it is not subsequently defeated
gradually, as unbelievers—who were already resurrected but not made immortal in a victory
over death—progressively confess Christ. On universalism, they still remain in mortal
corruption, just as they are now. Moreover, since all enemies are destroyed by the time Jesus
hands cosmic rule over “all things” to the Father, to have been among the “enemies of the
cross” (Phil 3:18) is to have already been destroyed.

Therefore, the mode and timing of the defeat of God’s last remaining enemy in 1 Corinthians
15:26, and the commensurate absence of any enemy in a fully reconciled creation, rules out
universalism.

Argument from the rationale for the limited delay of

Judgment Day in 2 Peter 3:9
This argument states that since the rationale given in 2 Peter 3:9 is that God is being
patient by delaying the day of judgment, “not wishing that any should perish, but that
all should reach repentance,” this delay expires when judgment day occurs, along with
the related opportunity for repentance, thus ruling out universalism.2

In 2 Peter 3, the apostle encourages believers to pursue holiness while “waiting for and
hastening the coming of the day of God,” the dawning of “the day of eternity” (2 Pet 3:12,
18). This eternal age will fulfil God’s promises of “new heavens and a new earth in which
righteousness dwells,” given through the prophets and apostles (2 Pet 3:13 cf. 2-4).3 God is
patient rather than slow, and we are to “count the patience of our Lord as salvation” (v15).

The purpose of the delay, then, is so that more may repent and not perish. In theory, the delay
could have been indefinite, so that all may eventually repent (universalism) and none may
perish—but the logic of the passage indicates that in practice God’s will is more particular
and conditional. Paul taught that God “has fixed a day on which he will judge the world”
(Acts 17:31). Jesus taught that the day of the Lord would take many by surprise, and would
come like a thief in the night (Matt 24:36-44). This is reiterated in Revelation 16:15, and 1
Thessalonians 5:2-4, where like a thief in the night the day of the Lord will overtake those
who are in darkness, and “sudden destruction will come upon them . . . they will not escape.”
It is also reiterated right here, immediately after Peter explains the delay: “But the day of the
Lord will come like a thief . . . ” (2 Pet 3:10).
Therefore, the rationale for a limited postponement of “the day of judgment and destruction
of the ungodly” (2 Pet 3:7), as given in 2 Peter 3:9, rules out the opportunity for repentance
beyond that same event, and hence rules out universalism as well.

Postscript: Although this is not part of my argument here, we should note how chapters two
and three speak of this destruction: false prophets and teachers lead many astray, “bringing
upon themselves swift destruction . . . their condemnation from long ago is not idle, and their
destruction is not asleep” (2 Pet 2:1-3). They, “like irrational animals, creatures of instinct,
born to be caught and destroyed, blaspheming about matters of which they are ignorant, will
also be destroyed in their destruction, suffering wrong as the wage for their wrongdoing” (2
Pet 2:12, 13). But the true teaching is found in the Scriptures, “which the ignorant and
unstable twist to their own destruction” (2 Pet 3:16). These are the false teachers who scoff
about the return of the Lord, and who will be unready and overtaken by “the day of judgment
and destruction of the ungodly” (2 Pet 3:7). According to the flow of the passage, they are
designated for destruction/perishing in order that the new creation era may commence and be
characterized by righteousness (2 Pet 3:13 cf. Matt 13:43). Or, in the language of Hebrews
12:27, “in order that the things that cannot be shaken may remain.” This explanation from the
broader context includes the conditionalist argument that 2 Peter 2:5-7 says point blank that
just as God destroyed the ancient world of the ungodly but saved the righteous Noah, God
also destroyed the land of Sodom and Gomorrah (by the agency of “eternal fire,” cf. Jude 7)
but rescued righteous Lot, and this extinction is “an example of what is going to happen to
the ungodly” in the end (see also Luke 17:26-33)—but the godly will again be rescued and
remain, this time forever.

Argument from the “removal” of what cannot “remain” in

Hebrews 12:27
This argument states that a crisis of judgment between the present age and the coming
age results, according to Hebrews 12:27, in the “removal” of everything that does not
belong to the eternal “kingdom that cannot be shaken,” “in order that” everything that
does belong “may remain.” Among human beings, only believers belong to the
unshakable kingdom; hence, all others are excluded from the age to come, and
universalism is ruled out.

Hebrews 12:27 falls within the passage of Hebrews 12:18-29, which draws to a climax an
extended discussion that had been building at least since Hebrews 9. We are told there that
Jesus appeared “at the end of the ages” to purify and sanctify his people, securing for them an
“eternal redemption” for “the promised eternal inheritance” (vv. 26, 12, 15). The earthly
tabernacle was a copy and shadow of the true tabernacle in heaven (Heb 8:5 cf. v2; Heb 9:23-
24), and Jesus has offered himself as a living sacrifice to gain access to the holy places “in
heaven itself” (9:24). But the way is not yet opened to us on earth “as long as the first section
is still standing (which is symbolic for the present age)” (9:8). The implication of the present
age being a barrier in the cosmic temple, is that the age to come involves full access to God,
in a sense uniting the heavens and the earth. The temple access motif is still in play
throughout chapter 10, which speaks of “those who draw near” to God, such that without a
sacrifice for sins, there is “a fearful expectation of judgment, and a fury of fire that will
consume the adversaries” (Heb 10:1, 27). It concludes that in approaching God, “we are not
of those who shrink back and are destroyed, but of those who have faith and preserve their
souls” (Heb 10:39). Hebrews 11:1—12:17 is an excursus about that faith and its pursuit of the
blessed inheritance.

In this context, Hebrews 12:18-29 describes a cosmic “shaking” event that we recognize as
the day of judgment. It is patterned after the terrifying Sinai theophany, “a blazing fire and
darkness and gloom and a tempest,” when “the LORD had descended on it in fire . . . and the
whole mountain trembled greatly” (Heb 12:18; Exod 19:18). The concluding statement from
verse 29, “for our God is a consuming fire,” wraps up the references to this awesome historic
moment, when the manifest “glory of the LORD was like a consuming fire on top of the
mountain” (Exod 24:17). At that time God’s thunderous voice shook the earth, but now
there’s been this warning from heaven: “Yet once more I will shake not only the earth but
also the heavens” (Heb 12:25-26). There is every suggestion, therefore, that God will shake
the heavens and earth in the same way as before, by manifesting his glorious presence and its
consuming fire. The passage explains why believers need not be afraid at that time. They
belong to an unshakeable kingdom, the heavenly kingdom, so will pass through the judgment
crisis unscathed. What does not belong will suffer “removal . . . in order that the things that
cannot be shaken may remain. Therefore let us be grateful for receiving a kingdom that
cannot be shaken . . . ” (Heb 12:27-28).

The purpose and timing of this removal, therefore, rules out the subsequent existence of those
who do not belong to the eternal kingdom, thus also ruling out universalism.

Bonus: Argument from theophanic infliction of “eternal

destruction” in 2 Thessalonians 1:9
There is another argument against universalism that could be simply expressed, but which
deserves a more thorough treatment. Indeed, I have already written about it, and would love
for you to consider reading this article through, as it presents an important argument for
conditionalism, that is simultaneously an argument against other views. Briefly, there is
every indication in the context of 2 Thessalonians 1:9 that we are meant to think of “eternal
destruction” (which everybody agrees relates to final punishment) as something to occur in
the same mode as old testament theophanies (appearances of God). On the day of judgment,
Jesus will punish “those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be
saved,” by appearing dramatically “in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance” that issues “from
the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might,” exactly as he will do that day to
the figure of the lawless one, whom he “will kill with the breath of his mouth and bring to
nothing by the appearance of his coming”—an unmistakable reference to theophanic
destruction (2 Thess 1:7-9; 2:8-10). We should allow this passage to set its own scene, and
not force into it any preconceived notions about eternal destruction supposedly taking place
in a separate location we’ve called “hell.” This article, as well as its second part, argue
forcefully against that view.

Conclusion
There are some interesting philosophical arguments in favor of universalism, and some
biblical passages that do speak of a future time when God will be “all in all,” as creation is no
longer infected by any evil. But universalism has a core tenet that may be directly challenged,
namely, its assertion that there will be an indefinite opportunity to repent and be saved
beyond the day of judgment, into the everlasting age of a new heavens and earth.4 1
Corinthians 15:26, 2 Peter 3:9, and Hebrews 12:27 (as well as 2 Thessalonians 1:9) give good
reason to seriously doubt that scenario, if not to reject it outright. Together, they present a
picture of a climax to redemptive history in which—through means of those climactic events
of resurrection and judgment—nothing and nobody persists beyond that point, should they be
judged not to belong to the new creation

Universalism is the belief that everyone will be saved. There are many people today who hold to
universal salvation and believe that all people eventually end up in heaven. Perhaps it is the thought
of men and women living a life of eternal torment in hell that causes some to reject the teaching of
Scripture on this issue. For some it is an over-emphasis on the love and compassion of God—and the
neglect of the righteousness and justice of God—that leads them to believe God will have mercy on
every living soul. But the Scriptures do teach that some people will spend eternity in hell.

First of all, the Bible is clear that unredeemed men will dwell forever in hell. Jesus’ own words
confirm that the time spent in heaven for the redeemed will last as long as that of the unredeemed
in hell. Matthew 25:46 says, “Then they [the unsaved] will go away to eternal punishment, but the
righteous to eternal life.” According to this verse, the punishment of the unsaved is just as eternal as
the life of the righteous. Some believe that those in hell will eventually cease to exist, but the Lord
Himself confirms that it will last forever. Matthew 25:41 and Mark 9:44 describe hell as “eternal fire”
and “unquenchable fire.”

How does one avoid this unquenchable fire? Many people believe that all roads—all religions and
beliefs—lead to heaven, or they consider that God is so full of love and mercy that He will allow all
people into heaven. God is certainly full of love and mercy; it was these qualities that led Him to send
His Son, Jesus Christ, to earth to die on the cross for us. Jesus Christ is the exclusive door that leads
to an eternity in heaven. Acts 4:12 says, “Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name
under heaven given to men by which we must be saved.” “There is one God and one mediator
between God and men, the man Christ Jesus” (1 Timothy 2:5). In John 14:6, Jesus says, “I am the way
and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” John 3:16, “For God so
loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but
have eternal life.” If we choose to reject God’s Son, we do not meet the requirements for salvation
(John 3:16, 18, 36).

With verses such as these, it becomes clear that universalism and universal salvation are unbiblical
beliefs. Universalism directly contradicts what Scripture teaches. While many people accuse
Christians of being intolerant and “exclusive,” it is important to remember that these are the words
of Christ Himself. Christians did not develop these ideas on their own; Christians are simply stating
what the Lord has already said. People choose to reject the message because they do not want to
face up to their sin and admit that they need the Lord to save them. To say that those who reject
God’s provision of salvation through His Son will be saved is to belittle the holiness and justice of God
and negate the need of Jesus’ sacrifice on our behalf.
Purgatorial universalism was the belief of some of the early church fathers, especially Greek-speaking
ones such as Clement of Alexandria,[11] Origen,[12] and Gregory of Nyssa.[13] It asserts that the unsaved
will undergo hell, but that hell is remedial (neither everlasting nor purely retributive) according to
key scriptures and that after purification or conversion all will enter heaven.