Universalism

Universalism
by Matt Slick

If universalism is true (which means that God wants all people to be saved), then why did Jesus prevent people from believing and becoming saved? "And as soon as He was alone, His followers, along with the twelve, began asking Him about the parables. 11 And He was saying to them, “To you has been given the mystery of the kingdom of God; but those who are outside get everything in parables, 12 in order that while seeing, they may see and not perceive; and while hearing, they may hear and not understand lest they return and be forgiven," (Mark 4:10-12).
In some forms of universalism where a person dies and suffers and then is released and is "saved," the sinner must suffer for a period of time roportional to the sin he has committed as it relates to the Law of God. After he suffers the appropriate amount of time and then is delivered from that suffering, then how is this not a form of works' righteousness where he earns his salvation by compliance with the punishment due to the law?
If universalism is true and God is so loving that He will save everyone, then why is it that so many Universalists are full of condemnation, mockery, and hatred?
Why do Universalists so frequently try to turn the conversation to universalism and not Jesus? Why do they go into chat rooms and discussion forums and steer the conversation towards their ideology?
The danger of universalism is that it to can give someone a false sense of security about their eternal destiny. It can remove the need of accountability in this life. It can remove the fear of judgment. It does not require repentance now. A person who adopts universalism can easily conclude that if he is going to be saved no matter what he does in this life, so why be concerned about repentance or accepting Jesus as Lord and Savior? This potential error is extremely dangerous. So, if universalists are really caring for people, then shouldn't they avoid teaching universalism lest they inadvertently injure people from salvation? Or are the Universalists so sure of their position that they put their position on the same level as the deity of Christ and the Trinity and push them as doctrines that have to be believed by everyone?
Universalism (everyone is ultimately going to be saved) is either true or it is not true. There is no third option. If universalism is true, then no matter what Universalists teach, everyone will be saved. So, they should not worry about anything. But, if universalism is not true, then teaching people that they can be saved in the afterlife is extremely dangerous since it can hinder a person from trusting in Christ now--I've seen this happen many times. So, if Universalists are truly preaching love, then they should not risk hindering anyone from becoming Christian now by saying that all people will be saved no matter what they do here in this life.
Col. 1:20 says, "and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself, having made peace through the blood of His cross; through Him, I say, whether things on earth or things in heaven." Some unies say that "all things" includes all angels. We know that some angels sinned (2 Pet. 2:4). But, if "all things" includes angles, then that would mean all angels had sinned, otherwise, they wouldn't need reconciliation. Have all angels sinned? We know some did since eternal fire has been prepared for fallen angels (Matt. 25:41) and other fallen angels are kept in eternal bonds (Jude 6). But, Jesus returns with His angles (Matt. 16:27). Do they also need reconciliation? Also, is there a need to reconcile the elect/chosen angels (1 Tim. 5:21) in contrast to the non-elect angels (2 Pet. 2:4)? How then can "all things" include all angels?
If "all" means every individual as unies often assert, then what about these verses: 1) Matt. 20:31, "The crowd sternly told them to be quiet, but they cried out all the more, “Lord, Son of David, have mercy on us!” Does "all" mean every single person everywhere? 2) Matthew 21:10, "When He had entered Jerusalem, all the city was stirred, saying, “Who is this?" Does "all" mean every single person everywhere? 3) Acts 21:30, "Then all the city was provoked, and the people rushed together, and taking hold of Paul they dragged him out of the temple, and immediately the doors were shut." Does "all" mean every single person everywhere?
“Therefore I have sworn to the house of Eli that the iniquity of Eli’s house shall not be atoned for by sacrifice or offering forever," (1 Sam. 3:14). If the Universalists say that this is referring only to Old Testament sacrifices, Jesus was sacrificed as the Old Testament covenant (Lev. 17:11 and Heb. 9:14). Only the priest makes atonement (Lev. 4:20), and Jesus was a high priest after the order of Melchizedek (Heb. 6:20, 7:23-24). The sacrifice had to be without blemish (Deut. 17:1), and Jesus was without blemish (Heb. 9:14). The sacrifice was offered on the Passover (Exodus 12:11-13), and Jesus was crucified on the Passover (John 19:14-15). If the animal sacrifices are the only ones meant and not the sacrifice of Christ, then why would God threaten them with with not having a sacrifice that doesn't work in the first place? It makes more sense to threaten Eli by saying that the iniquities of his house will “not be atoned for by sacrifice or offering forever" and not just a short period of time that only relates to animal sacrifices.