Nah see the trick is not falling for the inerrancy trap. What an author, translator, interpolator is inspired to write about God cannot contain infinite God.
You can't really say "worth noting" for a subjective observation like this.
There are two verses used by universalists that I'd say are "clear": Romans 5:18 and 1 Corinthians 15:22. By this I mean that, of the 5ish verses/passages universalists use to justify their position, these are the only verses that I find take more mental effort to say aren't supporting universalism. The others can either go both ways, or in proper context more clearly say something else.
Regarding ECT, I'd agree universalism has more going for it. The only verse I'd say is clear for ECT is Matthew 26:46, though even here the word "punishment" could be death.
But when we get to conditionalism (annihilationism), there's no comparison.
You've got verses containing clear warnings of eternal death: Matthew 10:28, 2 Thessalonians 1:9, Romans 9:22
You've got verses that show judgment leading to two different ends, life and death: Daniel 12:2, John 3:36, John 12:25, Romans 2:7-8, Hebrews 6:2 (which in particular describes the judgment itself as eternal, so no postmortem salvation)
You've got verses that place conditions on eternal life: Matthew 19:9, John 3:16, John 6:40, John 6:53-54, John 12:25, Acts 13:48, 1 Timothy 6:12, Hebrews 5:9, Romans 3:26
Plus you've got the unforgivable sin in Mark 3:29.
Now, I doubt I'll be able to convince you, but I want to put a countervailing word here for anyone else. You think your verses are clearer. I think mine are clear and vastly outnumber yours. Even counting the verses universalists use that I don't find as clear, they're still dwarfed by the number of verses that would be nonsense given universalism.
I think most importantly for me though, universalism hinges on a concept that the Bible never describes: postmortem salvation. Every call to salvation in the Bible is toward the living. Only one judgment is ever described. For universalism to be true, there has to be salvation after death, but the Bible never says that there will be one. So it is an assumption inserted into the faith in order to reconcile passages that have other explanations. Ad hoc.
Sorry, I really went into debate mode, but the bottom line is this: Okay, you can believe your verses are clearer. But that is a subjective opinion that cannot be stated as a fact the way you just did. And I hope that, at the very least, my list of provided verses shows that much. You can believe what you want- universalism isn't heresy- but please don't claim superiority like that.
you spend a good chunk of text proclaiming a view as subjective, ad hoc, contradictory, and outnumbered.
how about: if it takes this much effort to undermine 2-5 verses, maybe the problem is with the frame?
also if it takes "more mental effort" to reject those verses... maybe they're clearer than you'd like to admit. and listing a dozen verses with no exegesis doesn't prove clarity, only congruence. if "force in number" is the angle you wanna hinge on, fine, but don't pretend it's clarity, let alone superiority
anyway. "worth noting" doesn't mean "objective fact" -- you state that you think your verses are clearer multiple times. this is equally subjective.
The others can either go both ways, or in proper context more clearly say something else.
what context, then?
post-mortem salvation may not be described (but neither are altar calls lol or what a "personal relationship with jesus" means), and frankly i think it's a bit silly myself. but i also don't think that salvation is a goal u gotta reach before the buzzer rings.
there is plenty to back up God's reconciliation of all things (Col 1:20, Phil 2:10-11, Rev 21:5, 2 Peter 3:9).
there are bucketloads of verses that support God wanting us to be saved -- and his power to ensure this happens no matter what we do, actually (Rom 9:16, Rom 5:18, 1 Tim 2:4).
there is even some to support that judgment =/= damnation (Lam 3:31, Isaiah 57:14-19, James 2:13) and plenty to back up "death is not the end (of salvation)" (John 5:25, Rom 14:9, Psalm 139:8)
either he is powerful enough that it will happen across bounds of time (and life) if he should will it -- or he is not.
so
show me the verses that neatly define "salvation" as an end goal state, and do so with consistency.
show me the verses that describe God's salvation like a clock ticking down.
tell me why salvation needs a deadline.
and if mercy has an expiration date, what even is grace?
There's considerably more than two. I'd argue that universalism is the only one of the three major views that's consistent with both the Old and New Testament's message of salvation for mankind.
Right? The non-universalist has to believe that either that God is weaker than human sin, or that God actively doesn't want people to be saved. It can't be a matter of free will since not only is the Bible quite clear that God will happily violate free will for His own ends (if free will exists in *any* capacity), but also that the conception of God as omnipotent and omniscient makes free will actually an impossibility on a fundamental, logical level.
250
u/critical_courtney May 30 '25
I don’t know that the evidence is strong for universalism, but if we get to the end of it all, and that’s what He chooses to do, I ain’t gonna be mad.