Post Series
0—Introduction
1—On 1 Corinthians 15:22
2—On Romans 5:18-19
3—On Philippians 2:10-11
4—On Colossians 1:20
5— Conclusion

Since the early church, scholars and students alike have found a universal salvation embedded within the biblical text. While not the dominant, orthodox view, the idea of universal salvation has grown in popularity in recent years as our culture has become more inclusive through postmodern thought, by embracing multiple faiths through multiculturalism, and because we have collided with different people groups thanks to globalization. Early in the life of the Church, Origen, an Alexandrian theologian, offered the church a Christian universalism through apokatastasis, his idea of ultimate reconciliation. According to Origen, such texts as Colossians 1:20 and 1 Corinthians 15:28 imply that creation will be perfected and will rest in God without any hint of sin, evil, or temptation:

God will be ‘all,’ for there will no longer be any distinction between good and evil, seeing evil nowhere exists; for God is all things, and to Him no evil is near. So then, when the end has been restored to the beginning, and the termination of things compared with their commencement, that condition of things will be re-established in which rational nature was place, when it had no need to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. He who alone is the one good God becomes to him ‘all,’ and that not in the case of a few individuals, or of a considerable number, but He Himself is ‘all in all.’ And when death shall no longer anywhere exist, nor the sting of death, nor evil at all, then verily God will be ‘all in all.’ ((Origen, De Principiis 3.6))

For Origen and other Christian universalists, Romans 5:18-19, 1 Corinthians 15:22, Philippians 2:10-11. and Colossians 1:20 indeed argue that in the end God will not allow anything to fall outside the scope of His saving love in Christ. ((Douglas J. Moo, The Letters to the Colossians and to Philemon (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing, 2008), 135.))

Due in large part to our 21st century globalized multicultural existence, there has been a surge of interest—both academic and ecclesiastical—within evangelicalism in the past several years in regards to the prospects for universal salvation. Leading this charge are several well known, influential pastors. Brian McLaren, ((McLaren is a former pastor and known as the “grandfather” of the so called Emerging Church movement. He was named one of the “25 Most Influential Evangelicals In America,” Time Magazine, February 7, 2005.)) for instance, in The Secret Message of Jesus, wonders aloud if people of other faiths “get it” better than Christians do, leading him to suggest Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, and even former atheists will come from every corner of the earth “to enjoy the feast of the Kingdom in ways that those bearing the name Christian” will not. ((Brian McLaren, The Secret Message of Jesus (Nashville: W Publishing Group, 2006), 216-217.)) In a fictional book he wrote on last things, one of his characters wonders if in the end all are “in” God’s Kingdom unless they decide to opt out: “Maybe God’s plan is an opt-out plan, not an opt-in one. If you want to stay out of the party, you can. Nobody will force you to enjoy it. But it’s hard for me to imagine somebody being more stubbornly ornery than God is gracious.” ((Brian McLaren, The Last Word and the Word After That (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2005), 138.))

Other leaders make even more pointed, potent universal claims. Emergent leader Doug Pagitt ((Pagitt is the founding and teaching pastor, Solomon’s Porch, an emerging church community in Minneapolis, MN, and the author of several emerging church books.)) argues that Romans 5 means “the life of Jesus points to the reconciliation of the world with God and God’s agenda…Having made the point that all people are part of this story through Abraham, Paul now connects Jesus to Adam and broadens the implications for all creation.” ((Doug Pagitt, A Christianity Worth Believing (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2008), 207. emph. mine)) Likewise, in his book, Velvet Elvis, well-known megachurch pastor Rob Bell insists that “this forgiveness, this reconciliation, is true for everybody. Paul insisted when Jesus died on the cross, he was reconciling ‘all things, in heaven and on earth, to God.’ All things, everywhere.” ((Rob Bell, Velvet Elvis, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005), 146.)) Bell insists that all we are called to do is live into what is already true, rather than do something to make it true, presumably by following the traditional evangelical route of receiving Christ as Lord and Messiah.

Aside from these ecclesiastical leaders, academic ones have made strong arguments in favor of a Christian universalism, too. In his book, The Evangelical Universalist, pseudonymous author Gregory MacDonald ((In August 2009, Robin A. Parry, an acquisitions editor with Wipf and Stock and author of several biblical studies and theological books, came out as the author of The Evangelical Universalist.)) puts the theological impetus behind Christian universalism this way: 1) God, being omnipotent, could cause all people to freely accept Christ; 2) God, being omniscient, would know how to cause all people to freely accept Christ; 3) God, being omnibenevolent, would want to cause all people to freely accept Christ; 4) God will cause all people to freely accept Christ; 5) All people will eventually freely accept Christ. ((Gregory MacDonald, The Evangelical Universalist (Eugene, OR: Cascade Books, 2006), 19.)) MacDonald believes the Holy Scripture pivots around this God and believes several Pauline texts (Rom 5:18, 1 Cor 15:22, Col 1:20, and Phil 2:11) ((MacDonald, Evangelical Universalist, 35.)) are compatible with universalist positions, even explicitly teaching universal salvation.

Likewise, Thomas Talbot, one of the most prominent proponents for universal salvation, insists “God sent his Son into the world not for the purpose of saving us from the justice of God, but for the purpose of establishing that very justice, which is altogether merciful, in us,” a mercy and justice that truly means justification and life for all. ((Thomas Talbott, “A Pauline Interpretation of Divine Judgement,” in Universal Salvation? The Current Debate (ed. Robin A. Parry and Christopher H. Partridge; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing, 2003), 47, 48. Talbott is professor at Willamette University.)) Talbott explicitly asserts that there is “no way to escape the conclusion that St. Paul was an obvious universalist.” ((Talbott, “A Pauline Interpretation of Divine Judgement,” 48.)) Thomas Johnson similarly maintains that, “The Bible teaches the universal saving and sovereign grace of God, who, out of love for all people and all creation, has provided ultimate reconciliation and restoration for all.” ((Thomas Johnson, “A Wideness in God’s Mercy: Universalism in the Bible,” in Universal Salvation? The Current Debate (ed. Robin A. Parry and Christopher H. Partridge; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing, 2003), 86.))

These ecclesiastical and academic thinkers illustrate a trend within evangelical discourse to re-think the nature of salvation, the character of God, and outcome of final judgement. This “re-thinking” effort has led to a resurgence of what is known as Christian universalism. While this idea is not entirely innovative and new, it does come during a time of intense multiculturalism and sensitivities within the broader culture toward other faiths. Because the broader culture is hyper-sensitive to the belief and faith systems of “the other,” so too is the Church becoming as sensitive and accepting.

This renewed form of universalism is countered by others evangelicals, however, who insist that salvation comes through conscious faith in Christ, some are in Christ and others not, and judgement and its consequence are real. I. Howard Marshall represents this response: “The New Testament does not teach nor imply universal salvation. It teaches the reality of final judgement on the impenitent and sadly it states that some will be lost. That is why there is such an urgency to proclaim the gospel to all the world.” ((I. Howard Marshall, “The New Testament Does Not Teach Universal Salvation,” in Universal Salvation? The Current Debate (ed. Robin Parry and Christopher H. Partridge; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing, 2003), 74.))

In light of this resurgent interest in and arguments for a universal salvation, this examination will establish and assess the perspectives on the key Pauline passages: 1 Cor 15:22, Rom 5:18-19, Phil 2:10-11 and Col 1:20. Given the populist nature of these contemporary arguments, it is imperative that such an assessment be undertaken in order to help guide the Church in understanding the nature of salvation itself. Such an examination will help one understand the interpretive issues of these key universalism passages in order to determine whether there is a Pauline universal salvation. In the end, surveying the Christian universalism passages will show how Christian universalists make these passages say and do things that Paul never intended—resulting in bad exegesis and worse theology—because there simply is no Pauline universal salvation.