You are on page 1of 39

A Journey into the Issue of Salvation

Wayne Logan McDaniel

 Wayne McDaniel, 2002


wmcdaniel@sunflower.com

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval
system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,
photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the
author.
Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION 3

PART I: THE FOOTHILLS 5

SALVATION 6

MY HOPE: A GREAT HARVEST 7

ADDENDUM TO SALVATION 10

PART II: THE HIMALAYAS 11

THE ULTIMATE VICTORY OF GOD 12

HISTORY OF THE DOCTRINE OF UNIVERSAL RESTORATION 14

THE PROBLEM OF HELL 15

A BRIEF HISTORY OF HELL 16

THE NATURE OF JUDGEMENT 18

TRUE JUSTICE 21

IMPLIED CONSENT 22

PROBLEM SCRIPTURES 23

FREE WILL 28

PSYCHOLOGICAL AND EMOTIONAL BARRIERS 31

CONCLUSION 34

AFTER THOUGHTS 37

BIBLIOGRAPHY 38

2
Introduction

Over the past five years, I have embarked on a journey which has had a profound
effect upon my life. My theology has changed, my worldview has changed, my
understanding and view of God has changed and most important of all, my love for
God and people has increased.

I grew up attending a Presbyterian Church and was “born again” at a summer youth
camp around age 12. In high school, I became involved with a group of Catholic
Charismatics and, after several months of researching the topic from a theological
perspective, was “Baptized in the Spirit.” I then attended Oral Roberts University and
have, all my adult life (I am now 46) attended theologically conservative churches.

Given my background, prior to embarking upon this journey, I could well be described
as a Conservative, somewhat Fundamental Christian with Calvinistic tendencies.
Accordingly, I believed that if one did not accept Jesus Christ as their personal Savior,
they were destined to spend eternity suffering torment in hell. I recognized that there
were millions who had never heard the Gospel and for them I hoped that there might be
some leeway, but ultimately everyone would be judged. The way to eternal life was
narrow and few would find it. I cannot say that I was entirely comfortable with this view,
but this is what I believed the Bible taught and I accepted the Bible as the inspired
Word of God.

My dogmas, however, were challenged at a most unlikely place. While at the Promise
Keepers National Convention in Washington, DC in 1997, I was handed a booklet by a
“Pseudo-Christian Cult.” Out of curiosity, I read their publication. What struck me was
they had an entirely different view of salvation based upon the redemptive act of Jesus.
(Incidentally, I do not agree with their view—either then or now.) Since they
documented every point with scripture, I began to wonder about my own beliefs. I
wondered if I believed what I believed because it is what the Bible taught or because it
is what I was told the Bible taught. In other words, I wondered whether or not biases
had influenced my beliefs regarding salvation and judgment.

Therefore, I began a research project. I decided to read the entire New Testament and
parts of the Old as much as possible without bias. I made notes of every verse and
passage which seemed to relate to salvation and judgment. I decided to consult no
commentaries or books until I had completed this phase of the research, as I did not
want my reading to be tarnished by someone else’s bias. Once I completed this phase,
I began to read commentaries and books related to the subject.

The very first thing which struck me early on in my reading was that God is entirely just
and there will be no one in hell who does not deserve to be there and that the justice of
the act will be readily apparent to all. This greatly increased my faith in God, because
there was always this nagging sense in the back of my mind that something was not
quite just in the way God planned all this (i.e., with millions of people who would be
suffering in hell due to their ignorance) and it impeded my ability to fully trust Him.

As time went on and I read more my beliefs were again and again challenged—not by
liberals and skeptics, but by scriptures and sincere, godly Christians.

3
I felt almost driven by a passion to know and understand the truth in this matter. At
various points, I virtually gave up, concluding that it was impossible to know. Then I
would read something which would spark my interest again. The issue became
connected to the meaning of life, pain and suffering. I became acutely aware of
inconsistencies in logic and belief. However, the attempt to resolve these
inconsistencies was not easy. I had to remain true to the scriptures—I could not accept
a theological concept as truth no matter how much it appealed to me, if it was not
consistent with Biblical teaching. Furthermore, I had a great deal of emotional and
psychological baggage bound to my belief system which makes it difficult to change.
There were many times in which I would study a passage in which understanding would
allude me and I would have to set it aside and ask God to show me. In every case, at
some point, it would be explained to me so it made sense.

Every time I completed some aspect of my journey or realized some breakthrough in


thought, I wrote a short article. What follows, in chronological order, are my writings on
the subject. I have chosen to present it in this way because you can follow the change
in my own thinking. There are two parts. Part I, The Foothills, summarizes my initial
research and conclusions into Salvation. Part II, The Himalayas, represents the full
theology of salvation as I have come to understand it. It was written during the first six
months of 2002. Part II gave me a systematic theology upon which to pin my hopes
from Part I.

I write this now as though my Journey into the issue of salvation were complete. From
a broad sense, I think it is. There are still many aspects of this mystery which I do not
understand. But, what initiated the Journey was a sense of disharmony in my belief
system. I have finally arrived at a belief system which is Biblically sound, internally
consistent, logical and which brings much to light in terms of the meaning of life. The
disharmony, illogically and disconnectedness which characterized my former belief (and
which is endemic, though largely unrecognized, within Conservative Christian theology)
is gone. Therefore, unless an inconsistency is brought to my attention, I believe this
Journey is over. Now comes the fun part—living in the abundant life and grace of our
Lord.

I want to thank my wife, Jude, who loves God as much as anyone I know. She has
been very patient with me through this process. She had more at risk than I. For to
me, while this has been a challenging Journey, it has been very freeing. But to Jude, it
represented the unknown; the possibility of her husband falling into apostasy and
winding up with a mate whose beliefs are so at odds with hers that the relationship and
even marriage are threatened. But, I hope that time will show that her husband, as he
has come to appreciate the love and grace of Jesus Christ, his Lord and Savior, more
fully, has become a more loving man, reflecting better the perfect love of God.

Wayne McDaniel, June, 2002

4
Part I

The Foothills

5
Salvation

Due to various requests and my own need to crystallize thought, I am preparing this
brief summary of my current understanding regarding the scriptural teachings of
Salvation.

Salvation is totally by God’s grace (Eph. 2:8,9). Not one of us deserves salvation, but it
is the gift of God. Salvation only comes through Jesus Christ, there is no other way to
approach God (John 14:6). It is by his death and resurrection that we are saved. It is
received by faith in God.

However, faith is not just believing. Satan and his demons believe and tremble (James
2:19). Faith is not just claiming by your words that Jesus is Lord (Matt. 7:21); nor is it
evidenced by miraculous works done in the name of Jesus (Matt. 7:22-23). Rather, the
faith that saves is faith that is evidenced by the good works we do. Faith is completed
by our actions (James 2:14-26). By their fruit and love, Jesus said, his followers will be
known.

Jesus said the greatest commandment was to love God, and the second to love our
neighbor. The second is a direct reflection of the first. God has shown us what is
required: to act justly, to love mercy and to walk humbly with God (Micah 6:8). It is
both the attitude of the heart and the actions of our lives that God is concerned with.
We will be judged by our works (Rev. 20:12f) and our words (Matt.12:36,37), as they
are the empirical evidence of our faith.

God has given each person light by which to see and understand (John 1:4, Romans
1:19,29: 2:14-16). No one is without excuse for not following God, regardless of
whether or not they have clearly heard the Gospel. Likewise, no one will be held
responsible for what they did not know or have the opportunity to come to know. Each
will only be responsible for their actions and faith based upon their knowledge (parable
of the talents, Matt. 25:14-30). God is just. No one will go to hell who does not belong
there.

This understanding of faith puts everyone on a level playing field. It has both broad
and narrow application. It is narrow in that it should put the fear of God in some
Christians whose lives show little evidence of the faith they claim. It is broad in that it
allows for the salvation of innocent children and those who have not heard or
understood the Gospel, but have lived to honor God to the best of their knowledge.
The redemption of Jesus is not limited to those who have heard and believed, but
applies to all those who truly live in faith.

Wayne McDaniel
May, 1998 with minor subsequent revisions.

6
My Hope: A Great Harvest

In my initial paper on Salvation, I addressed the question of what constitutes saving


faith, built upon a consistent and comprehensive scriptural understanding. In this
paper, I will expound upon the issue by addressing the question of “How many will be
saved?” This is a more difficult issue. One can be fairly confident of their personal
salvation if they have the type of faith described in the Salvation paper. But, what if
they don’t? Or, what if they are marginal? Are they automatically condemned for
eternity?

When asked the question point blank (Lord, will only a few be saved? Luke 13:23),
Jesus skirts the question. First, he turns it back upon the inquirer by exhorting him to
make sure he is saved. Then he proceeds to tell the illustration of the narrow door,
stating few will find the path to life, followed by the illustration of the feast in which
many are saved and those who thought they were are excluded. Therefore, the
question remains. It is not possible to build an airtight definitive answer from the
knowledge we have been given in scripture. However, I think it is possible to draw
some tentative conclusions from the light we have.

But first, why did Jesus decline to answer the question? God could have easily cleared
up this issue with a straightforward reply. Other than turning the questioners focus
back to personal responsibility, did God have another motive for evading the question?
We don’t know and I can only speculate, which I will do in this paragraph. If only a few
are saved, there is no reason to skirt the issue—make sure you are on the narrow path!
But, if vast multitudes—or, for the sake of argument, if everyone is saved, then God
has plenty of reasons for keeping that a secret or mystery. If you knew you would be
saved regardless of how you lived, then there is less motivation to live a holy and
righteous life. Eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow you will die and go to heaven. Yet,
we know that God desires a different kind of life—a life of love and kindness and
devotion. Therefore, perhaps the reason for the evasive answer is because many will
be saved and God did not want to give us an excuse for complacency and self-
indulgence! So much for speculation.

All are sinners and deserving of damnation. All of us like sheep have gone astray.
Each one of us has gone his own way. Not one of us truly seeks God. Even when we
think we are, our motives are not pure, we are still self-centered. We desire to
experience the presence of God for our own benefit. Therefore, not one of us can
claim to have any perfect righteousness within ourselves. Salvation is a gift from God.

The Gospel is the good news that Jesus died to redeem mankind. He came into the
world not to condemn the world, but to save the world (John 3:17). Just as in Adam all
men die, so also in Christ all shall be made alive (I Cor. 15:22). God desires all men to
be saved (I Tim. 2:4) and is the Savior of all men (Tim. 4:10). These and other
scriptures affirm that God’s grace is expansive. Some (Origen and William Barclay, for
example) have come to the conclusion that all mankind will ultimately be saved. This is
an enticing thought, but it is difficult to interpret the many words and parables of Jesus
regarding damnation as not meaning that some will perish. Therefore, I do not concur
with that interpretation. At issue is the question, “How expansive is the grace of God?”

It does appear to me to be entirely scriptural to believe that all people are initially
covered by grace, from the point of conception. Even those who hold the restrictive

7
view that one can only be saved by personal knowledge of and faith in Jesus Christ
usually cede to this point (which is an inconsistency in their position). To believe
otherwise would condemn children to hell because they died before they had an
opportunity to hear and believe. This goes against most Christian’s (and non-
Christian’s) sense of Justice. Therefore, the doctrine of “age of accountability” was
developed, which basically states that one is covered by grace until they reach the age
where they can be held accountable for their wrongdoing. Whatever this age is and
exactly when one crosses the line, no one can tell, though it is generally considered to
be somewhere around age 10 to 12.

There are problems with this concept. If one accepts the idea that once one passes the
age of accountability, has not accepted Jesus and then dies they go to hell, then
Christians ought to be staunch supporters of abortion and should do nothing to
eliminate starvation and disease amongst children in impoverished areas. After all,
they are better off dying and going to heaven than living and probably going to hell.
Why would God desire children to live if to do so would condemn most of them? My
viewpoint is that the grace of God extends beyond the supposed “age of
accountability.”

Take for example, the child who grows up and is a happy go lucky kind of fellow, never
hears the gospel, never even really thinks about the meaning of life, never really
intentionally does harm to another person, but dies in a car accident when 17? Is he
condemned for his ignorance? What about the child who grows up in a severely
dysfunctional home? In his quest for love and acceptance, he falls into the wrong
crowd, never hears about the love of God and dies of a gun shot wound. Is he
condemned for his birth into unfortunate circumstances? Is one condemned because
he, like all of us, do not really seek God?

Many Christians extend the grace of God to the mentally incompetent. Again, when
does one become competent enough? What about the person who was mentally
competent, but due to disease or accident loses their mental abilities?

What about people to whom the West “evangelized” by bringing the gospel along with
imperialism? What about those people who rejected the Gospel because of the
hypocritical medium in which it was delivered? Are they condemned to hell because of
Christian’s sins? What about people who reject Jesus because of the preaching of a
false gospel, legalism or other distortion of the Christian message? These issues,
when considered, reveal that they do not make sense and make a mockery of God’s
Justice. The salvation of many becomes dependent upon the ability of a few to
overcome their frailty.

Jesus is the image of God. While on the earth, he accepted people of all nations,
religions and backgrounds when they came to him. He was less concerned with their
theology than he was their faith. When I look at the vast differences of opinion within
the “Christian” faith and related sects, I see significant differences in doctrine. Of
course they are not all true, for truth cannot contradict itself. But, does God reject one
because they have a false theology, but faith in the true God? Of course not! God is
greater than our theological constructs and overlooks a great deal of ignorance on our
part.

8
Consider compassionate ministry. Why should Mother Theresa give love and care to
those who are dying and not ask them to accept Jesus as their Savior? Was she not
doing the work of God? (See the parable of the sheep and the goats.) Did the mercy
and love of God stop at their death? Or were their hearts encouraged and opened so
they could, perhaps, accept the grace of God offered to them after they died?

The grace of God is far reaching and, I believe goes beyond our ignorance. Some of
the parables of Jesus (wedding feast, for example) indicate that everyone, good and
bad, are invited to the feast and the only ones rejected are those who refuse to come
and wear the garments God provides. These and other scriptures indicate that God
never gives up on a person—he seeks and calls after the lost lamb his entire life. God
desires everyone to be saved. I believe it is impossible to know whether or not one will
be saved by their lack of acceptance or by their rejection of Jesus.

To believe in a broad application of grace does not negate the reality of judgment. It is
clear that there is a judgment and some will be saved and some will be condemned. It
is also apparent that there are degrees of punishment (Matt. 10:15, Luke 12:47-48) and
both Christians and non-Christians will suffer loss for wrong doing (I Cor. 13:11-47, II
Cor. 5:10-11). Likewise, there appears to be rewards for doing what is right (Matt. 6:20,
Matt 16:27). Therefore, the all or nothing concept of salvation or condemnation is
incomplete (Matt. 5:19). God wants us to act in kindness and in love--but all of us will
face judgment, and some condemnation.

What kind of victory did Christ win if only a few are saved? Can God really say he won
and the devil lost? I hope and believe that many people will be saved, Christians and
non-Christians, based upon the principles of “faith” and “grace.” I am not alone
amongst thinking Christians in this matter, as Justin Martyr, John Wesley, C. S. Lewis,
and John Stott all shared similar beliefs.

But, what about missions? If one can be saved apart from personal knowledge of
Jesus Christ, why have missions? To bring the Good News of God’s redemption and
freedom from bondage here on earth; to bring healing and peace and the power of the
Spirit of Life. And, to bring salvation to those who are on the road to hell.

In conclusion, all people start out life under the Grace of God. At what point in time one
walks out from under that Grace, no one can know. Nor can we know at what point one
walks back under the Grace of God, apart from a sincere faith in Jesus Christ.
However, I believe that His Grace is very expansive and goes beyond our own
ignorance. While the scriptures do not definitively state it (nor do they deny it), I have
hope that a great number, probably the majority and possibly all but a few stubborn and
reprobate souls will ultimately be saved. I have found this understanding of salvation to
be very freeing. I no longer have to “defend” God’s justice in condemnation of the
ignorant. There is no less passion for the spreading the Gospel, as I desire all to know
the wonder of God’s love in this life. I also have a renewed appreciation of just how
wide and deep the love of God is. His Grace overwhelms me. God is a God of love
who loved the world so much that he gave His only Son, not to judge the world, but to
save the world.

Wayne McDaniel, January, 2000

9
Addendum to Salvation

As time has passed since my original penning of the previous two articles, little has
happened to change my viewpoint. However, as I from time to time pondered the same
question, God has gently pointed out to me that it is not for me to know. Indeed, he
has reminded me of my own ignorance and sin and how easy it is to be wrong. He is
God and I am but a fallible human being. Rather than focus on this unanswerable
question, God has said, focus upon spreading the freeing message of the Gospel. For
how can they believe, except they hear?

Also, I have been reminded of the evil within the heart of man. While in my article, I
emphasized the breadth of God’s grace, we also need to be reminded of the intentional
evil within mankind. Man deliberately inflicts pain and suffering upon his fellow man.
We need not look to personalities such as Hitler or Stalin, look within our own families.
Is divorce, child abuse, lying, and stealing any less an indication of the condition of our
heart? How often do we hurt those we love by our words? How often, in a fit of anger,
do we think evil thoughts, even if we do not carry them out? Do we ever repay
kindness for evil?

While God’s Grace is a wonderful present, God will not override man’s free will. Many
a person has deliberately turned their back on God. All have intentionally hurt those
made in the image of God. Will God “force” his grace upon unrepentant persons? Of
course not! This would be a violation of God’s nature and an intrusion into the free will
of mankind. God will not require anyone to live in His presence who does not desire to.

Therefore, what shall we say? One plants. Another waters, but God gives the growth.
We do not know who will be saved and what the result of the sharing of the Gospel will
be with any individual. That is not our responsibility. Our responsibility is to share the
Good News that God has given us and leave the rest up to God.

Wayne McDaniel
October, 2000

10
Part II

The Himalayas

11
The Ultimate Victory of God

The Bible has a message that somehow Christianity has diluted of its full meaning. In
the end, God will be fully victorious. He will be all in all. He will restore all things to
himself.

“He has made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which
he purposed in Christ, to be put into effect when the times will have reached their
fullness—to bring all things in heaven and on earth together under one head, even
Christ.” (Eph. 1:9-10).

“He is the image of the invisible God…all things were created by him and for him….in
him all things hold together….in everything he might have supremacy. For God was
pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him to reconcile all things on earth or things in
heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.” (Col. 1:15-20).

“…at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on hearth and under
the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the
Father.” (Phil. 2:10-11)

“God was reconciling the world to Himself in Christ, not counting men’s sins against
them.” (II Cor. 5:19)

“Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he
has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all
his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death…..so that God
may be all in all.” (I Cor. 15:24-28)

These scriptures clearly teach that God’s purpose in Christ was to reconcile the world
to himself. Death will be destroyed and in the end God will be all in all. God’s objective
was not to save a tiny remnant, but the whole of creation. (See also Romans 8:21. “…
creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious
freedom of the children of God.”) Reconciliation of the entire world is the primary
purpose of Jesus’ life on earth, for “God did not send his Son into the world to condemn
the world, but to save the world through him.” (John 3:17).

This message is further confirmed by the many scriptures which proclaim the universal
salvation brought to humankind through Christ:

“Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also
the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men.”
(Rom. 5:18)

“For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.” (I Cor. 15:22)

”He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the
whole world.” (I John 2:2)

“…God, our Savior,…wants all men to be saved….gave himself as a ransom for all
men.” (I Tim. 2:3-4)

12
“…the living God, who is the Savior of all men, and especially of those who believe.” (I
Tim. 4:10)

Whereas the Jews held an exclusionary view that they alone were God’s Chosen
People, the Gospel blasted away that view. The “mystery” Paul speaks of so often was
that God has come to rescue all men, not just the Jews. As Jesus said, “But I, when I
am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself.” (John 12:32)

The traditional view has always explained away these and other verses, limiting their
application to “some” men (the elect) on the basis of judgment resulting in the
damnation of the many. Yet, how can some be tormented forever in hell and God be all
in all? How can hell exist when all opposition is destroyed? How can God reconcile all
things and yet not all things be reconciled? If the act of one man (Adam) brought death
to all and the Bible says that the act of one man (Jesus) also brought life to all, how can
we say that all means all when it applies to death, but means some when it applies to
life? The traditional view is wrought with inconsistencies.

As Christians, we tend to deny the simple truth of these statements, not because they
are incorrect, but because they do not fit our doctrine. Therefore, we re-interpret them,
stripping them of their power, to adjust them to the view we have been taught. Our
doctrine of salvation and judgment, unfortunately, as it became Romanized after
Constantine in the Fourth Century, was greatly influenced by the prevailing pagan
teaching on hell and damnation. Accordingly, we view these scriptures through colored
glass and miss the beauty and promise of their true meaning, which is peace and
goodwill towards all men (Luke 2:14). The doctrine which teaches the universality of
God’s Grace and Reconciliation is called the “Doctrine of Universal Restoration.”

13
History of the Doctrine of Universal Restoration

It is valuable to observe that the Doctrine of Universal Restoration was widely held in
the early church. Proponents included Clement of Alexandria (140 - c. 220), Origen
(185 - 254) John Chrysostom (347 - 407), Gregory of Nyssa (c. 330 - c. 395) and many
others. Out of six theological schools which existed during Origen’s life, four taught this
doctrine exclusively; one taught the dualistic view of eternal heaven and hell; and one
taught annihilation of the wicked. It was not until well after Augustine (354 - 430) the
traditional view became the official view of the church. Augustine, who did not accept
Restorationism, admitted that “very many” Christians believe it. Also, Jerome (337 -
420) stated that most Christians believe it. 1 Church historian Gieseler, church historian
and non-Restorationist, commenting upon early church history says, “the belief in the
inalienable capability of improvement in all rational beings, and the limited duration of
future punishment, was so general, even in the West…”

It was only after pagan influences had well infiltrated the church and at the insistence of
a half-heathen emperor, Justinian, that the church declared Universal Restoration
heretical in the year 553 AD. It was said that Justinian was "neither beloved in his life,
nor regretted at his death." The age of Justinian is said to be one of the vilest of the
Christian centuries. Therefore, to argue against this doctrine on the basis of the
historic Christian tradition is to be ignorant of early Christian history. 2

Even amongst early Christians who did not believe in Universal Salvation, there was a
widespread belief that one’s fate was not sealed at death. Rather, it was believed that
Christ descended into Hades, preached the Gospel, and released the captives (See I
Peter 3 and 4).3 Understanding the early Christians belief that there was hope after
death, also sheds light on that otherwise mysterious verse regarding Christians being
baptized for the dead (I Cor. 15:29).

It is my belief that the doctrine does not find its origin in the Second Century, but in the
scriptures themselves and was a core teaching of the Apostle Paul. This is, of course,
where Protestantism should rally. The Protestant position has always been “sola
scriptoria” when it comes to doctrine. It is on these grounds that I build my case for
Universal Restoration.

1
At one point in time, Jerome was a Universalist. Commenting on Galatians 2:2, he said, “No
rational creature before God will perish forever. However, later in life he took sides against the
doctrine.
2
J.W. Hanson, D.D., Universalism the Prevailing Doctrine of the Christian Church During its First
Five Hundred Years (Boston and Chicago: Universalist Publishing House, 1899). It has been
reproduced in electronic form and may be found at www.tentmaker.org. All of the above
historical information may be found in this publication.
3
John Sanders, editor, What About Those Who Have Never Heard? (Downers Grove, Illinois:
InterVarsity Press, 1995) pages 86-87.

14
The Problem of Hell

In recent years, there has been a growing voice amongst Evangelicals to redefine the
doctrine of Hell, not for the purpose of “tickling of the ears,” but to rid the doctrine of
mistaken ancient and middle age concepts. While the more fundamentalists resist any
change in interpretation, many honest Evangelicals admit that it is hard to imagine why
God would allow masses of people to suffer endlessly in hell. Accordingly, theologians
are addressing the issue in one of three directions.

The first is a redefinition of the nature of hell. Hell is defined as a place where people
do not know God, remain in a state of rebellion against him, but are largely unaware of
how terrible their torment. They have become used to hell and what those in heaven
would consider torment, those in hell consider normal.4 This, it seems to me, is a
watering down of the basic teachings of the Bible in regards to judgment, described as
torment.

The second route, which has gained a considerable following within the Anglican
church and which has been adopted by John Stott, is annihilation, or conditional
mortality. Rather than force sinners to be tormented forever and ever with no way out,
sinners are annihilated—they cease to exist. This teaching is based upon a number of
scriptures referring to the unrepentant “perishing.” In my opinion, this is a more
scriptural view than the first.

The third approach is universal restoration. Of the three, this is resisted most by
Conservative Evangelicals because of its radically different understanding of the extent
and applicability of Christ’s sacrifice. It is equated with liberalism and frequently
rejected outright without consideration of the evidence. However, as I am attempting to
show within this paper, I believe this is the most scriptural view.

4
Lee Strobel, The Case for Faith (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 2000). Chapter
6, interview with J. P. Moreland, PhD.

15
A Brief History of Hell

The Old Testament is surprisingly quiet in regards to the after-life. It uses the term
“Sheol” to denote the abode of the dead. However, this term is neutral regarding
punishment or rewards. Sheol was thought of as sort of a nether-world of ghosts and
spirits. In fact, the Old Testament says nothing of everlasting torment of the evil.
However, at the time of Christ, it was widely taught by the Pharisees and was part of
popular Judaism. If it was not taught in the Law and the Prophets, then how did the
doctrine develop within the religion in existence amongst the Jews?

There are several apocryphal books written during the four hundred years prior to
Christ. Many of these books, such as the Book of Enoch, depict the unending
punishment of the wicked. At the time of Christ, the Cannon had not yet been officially
established so some of these books carried substantial weight in theological thinking.
But, we have to ask, where did the apocryphal writers come up with this idea?

As far as we can tell, it was the Egyptians who originally developed the concept of
everlasting torment in hell for the evil about 2000 BC. This later was adopted by the
Babylonians and by the Greeks. As admitted by Plato, Aristotle, Seneca and others,
hell was used by those in power to maintain some degree of control over the masses. 5
Hence, the ruler was often declared to be a god. If you do not obey this god, then you
will suffer eternally in hell.

Therefore, the doctrine of everlasting punishment in hell did not originally derive itself
from the Jewish scriptures, but from pagan sources. That alone should be enough to
cause a Christian to at least pause and consider their beliefs in regards to hell. The
fact that it was taught by pagans does not negate the possibility of it being true. After
all, Paul teaches that certain things regarding God are evident to all, Jews and Gentiles
alike (Romans 1:20). However, such a foundational teaching of traditional Christianity
ought to have its basis in Scripture and not pagan fables. Of course, there is the New
Testament.

In the New Testament, there are three words sometimes translated hell in the New
Testament. The first is the Greek word hades. Hades is the place of the dead and is
similar to Shoel. In context, within the New Testament, it is frequently associated with
punishment and, hence translated hell. Gehenna is the second word translated hell.
Gehenna literally was the name of a well known garbage dump outside Jerusalem, the
Valley of Hinnom. The fires in Gehenna continuously burned and worms inhabited the
garbage. So, when translated hell, it is assumed that Gehenna is used as a metaphor
for hell. Neither of these words necessarily refers to hell as we currently understand
the term. They could refer to the place of the dead (prior to judgment), the grave, a
place of punishment, a place of torment or a garbage dump.

The third word translated hell is tartarus. The Greeks used this word to signify a place
of everlasting torment like the current popular notion of hell. It is used in only one place
(II Peter 2:4) by Peter, quoting the well known non-canonical Book of Enoch. Enoch
teaches that God sent angels who sinned to hell and Peter uses this example along
with several others to emphasize the point that God will bring judgment. His use of a
5
Thomas B. Thayer, The Origin and History of the Doctrine of Endless Punishment (Boston:
Universalist Publishing House, 1855). Available online at www.tentmaker.org

16
well known illustration to make a point does not necessarily endorse the teachings of
Enoch.

My purpose in the above brief exposition of Greek terms is to demonstrate that the
word hell actually appears only once in the New Testament. The more frequent
occurrence of the word in modern translations is due to contextual interpretation. This
is important to the extent that church culture and paganism has influenced our
perception of what hell is, as well as the theological perspective of the translators. The
Bible clearly teaches judgment and punishment. The experience of that judgment or
punishment is what we call hell. However, the Biblical concept of hell is very different
than the popular Christian concept.

17
The Nature of Judgment

Biblical commentators are divided as to whether hell (as the experience of God’s
judgment) is a place or state of mind. For our purpose, it does not matter. In either
case, the Bible teaches that it is an existence of horrible torment. It uses graphic terms,
such as “unquenchable fire,” “utter darkness,” and “where the worm does not die” to
described the awfulness of the condition. At issue here is not whether hell is real or
not, but rather its duration and purpose. My premise is that pagans taught unending
punishment and torment while the Bible teaches that it is limited in duration and with
the express purpose of correction.

The Bible says that “man is destined to die once. And after that to face judgment.”
(Hebrews 9:27) It says that we will all appear before the judgment seat of Christ (II
Cor. 5:10) So, judgment is not just of the wicked, but all. To judge means to render a
verdict, which may be favorable or unfavorable. No place in the Bible does it state that
man has irrevocably sealed his fate after death. To the contrary, it offers hope.

Jesus tells a parable in Luke 12:42-48 which is useful in understanding judgment. It is


about a manager who puts his servants in charge of his possessions while he goes
away. When he returns and finds the servants misbehaving, he says, “He will cut him
to pieces and assign him a place with the unbelievers. That servant who knows his
master’s will and does not get ready or does not do what his master wants will be
beaten with many blows. But the one who does not know and does things deserving
punishment will be beaten with few blows.” This passage tells us a lot about the nature
of judgment.

This is judgment against God’s servants who do evil. Jesus uses the same type of
terminology he uses in describing the end of the wicked man—he will be cut into
pieces. This is not a literal description, but symbolizes the harsh results of the servant’s
disobedience. The servant is then assigned to a place with unbelievers. In other
words, the evil servant’s judgment is of the same nature as the unbeliever’s judgment.
Jesus then describes the nature of this judgment further by stating that the severity of
the punishment will depend upon the nature of the offense. The punishment may be
with few or many blows. The blows are numbered and do not last indefinitely. Rather,
there is an end to them. The duration will depend upon how many blows are needed.
This is the lot of the evil believer and the unbeliever. There is severe punishment, but
not unending punishment.

Jesus also states that the punishment of Sodom will be less than that of cities which
reject him (Luke 10:12). Not everyone who is condemned receives the same level of
punishment.

Jesus told a parable in which the verdict was favorable for some but unfavorable for
others in the parable of the sheep and the goats. The sheep are offered “eternal life”,
but the rejected are said to “go away to eternal punishment.” (Matt. 25:46) While this
passage, appears to support unending punishment of the wicked, Greek scholar
William Barclay explains it in this way:

18
“The Greek word for punishment is kolasis, which was not originally an ethical word at
all. It originally meant the pruning of trees to make them grow better. I think it is true to
say that in all Greek secular literature kolasis is never used of anything but remedial
punishment. The word for eternal is aionios. It means more than everlasting, for Plato
—who may have invented the word—plainly says that a thing may be everlasting and
still not be aionios. The simplest way to out it is that aionios cannot be used properly of
anyone but God; it is the word uniquely, as Plato says it, of God. Eternal punishment is
then literally that kind of remedial punishment which it befits God to give and which only
God can give.”6 In other words, “eternal punishment” means God’s extreme pruning.

Eternal refers as much to the quality as to the quantity. We sometimes use eternal in
the same way as well. For example, we may speak of the eternal beauty of diamonds.
This does not mean the diamond or its beauty lasts forever, but that its beauty is of an
exquisite quality. Or, we may refer to a boring speech as going on forever. It is evident
that we do not mean the phrase to be taken literally. A misunderstanding of the term
eternal has resulted in a misunderstanding of the duration of hell and judgment. It is
eternal in its quality, but not unending.

In fact, had Jesus wanted to propagate the Pharisetical teaching of unending


punishment, he would have used the language the Pharisees used, which were
completely different Greek words used specifically for that teaching.7

Why is it that on earth God’s anger lasts but for a moment and his favor lasts a lifetime
(Psalm 30:5), but after death we are taught that Gods favor lasts but for a moment and
his anger forever (towards unbelievers)? Surely this is an inconsistency and a
misunderstanding.

Fire in the Bible is understood as a cleansing agent. God is a consuming fire (Hebrews
12:29). In speaking of the day of judgment, Malachi says, “But who can endure the day
of his coming? Who can stand when he appears? For he will be like a refiner’s fire or
a launderer’s soap. He will sit as a refiner and purifier of silver.” (Malachi 3:2-3). God’s
judgment is like a fire. Its purpose is to purify. His judgment is like soap, to make
clean. The purpose of God’s judgment is not to destroy the person, but to destroy or
consume the evil within the person. When fire is used in describing hell or judgment, it
is used as a symbol of the painful, but purifying process of cleansing.

There is no condemnation for those who are in Christ (Rom. 8:1), but there is judgment,
especially against those who were in Christ, but no longer are. Paul speaks of it in I
Cor. 3:10-15. Referring to how one builds his life, Paul says, “…his work will be shown
for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the
fire will test the quality of each man’s work. If what he has built survives, he will receive
his reward. If it is burned up, he will suffer loss; he himself will be saved, but only as
one escaping through the flames.” God’s judgment, like a fire, removes that which is
not holy.

6
William Barclay, A Spiritual Autobiography (Grand Rapids: William B Eerdmans Publishing
Company, 1977.) page 65-67
7
J. W. Hanson, D.D., Universalism, The Prevailing Doctrine of the Christian Church During Its
First Five Hundred Years (Boston and Chicago: Universalist Publishing House, 1899) Chapter
III, Origin of Endless Punishment. The author lists several words used by Jews in their own
writings from Jesus’ time. Hanson’s publication was put into electronic format by Glade Swope in
1999 and is available online at www.tentmaker.org

19
I Timothy 3:6 is a difficult verse regarding judgment. Speaking of Overseers, Paul says,
“He must not be a recent convert, or he may become conceited and fall under the same
judgment as the devil.” What is that judgment? Surely, the judgment against a
Christian’s conceit is not everlasting separation from God! At the most, it is temporary
separation as God deals with that sin in the person’s life. In more than one place, Paul
speaks of handing people over to Satan that they might be taught not to blaspheme (I
Tim. 1:20, I Cor. 5:5). The interesting aspect of I Timothy 3:6 is that Paul refers to the
Christian’s judgment as being the same as the devil’s. If this judgment is not for the
ultimate purpose of restoration, then there is little hope for any of us.

In conclusion, God’s judgment is not for the purpose of applying unending torment to
evil and unbelieving souls. Rather, it is to apply eternal pressure until the soul is willing
to repent and accept the forgiveness of God and be reconciled to his Creator. This
may take a very long time for some. God’s judgment and punishment is the perfect
expression of his mercy and grace upon the unrepentant sinner. Proud and evil
persons do not easily give up their sin, but God is like the Good Shepherd who will
chase them down until he finds them. He is Love and Hope which never fails. In the
end, it is his judgment which will bring forth his righteousness in all of creation and
restore all things, whether in heaven or earth to himself.

20
True Justice

The traditionalist explanation for everlasting punishment is that sin against a holy God
requires unending separation as justice on the basis that even the smallest sin is
infinite in consequence compared to the eternal holiness of God. Therefore, eternal
separation is just. However, that argument is flawed on the basis of an understanding
of justice.

True justice does not demand punishment, but restitution or restoration. This is best
illustrated by human examples. If someone steals your vehicle, justice is served only
by restoration of that which was lost. Locking the thief up does not achieve justice. If
someone defames your name, justice is served only by that person proclaiming the
truth about you. If your child rebels and hurts you, justice is not served by catching and
punishing the child, but by reconciliation. If someone harms you in any way, justice is
served by restoration.

The human response is punishment without restoration. Thomas Talbot explains this
well in his book, The Inescapable Love of God.8 When restoration is not possible, in
cases such as rape or murder, we punish. We punish because the offender has taken
advantage of the victim and is therefore perceived to have gained some advantage.
Therefore, since we do not have the ability to raise the dead or undo a heinous action,
we remove some of the rights of the offender as an attempt to remove that perceived
advantage.

God, however, is able to restore the lost. He is able to heal the wounded. He is able to
raise the dead. Therefore, in God’s system of justice he can achieve full and true
justice: restitution, restoration and reconciliation.

True justice for the sinner against a holy God is repentance on the part of the sinner
and reconciliation with God. Until that has occurred, justice is not complete. No
amount of punishment can remove the loss that God feels9 by that wayward child. Until
that loss is obliterated, justice cannot be realized. Therefore, unending punishment in
hell is not just. It becomes just when the person suffering in hell finally repents and
comes home to be reconciled to his Creator.

8
Thomas Talbot, The Inescapable Love of God (Universal Publishers, 1999)
9
It may be argued that God has lost nothing when a sin is committed on the basis that God is
self sufficient. However, I believe that argument is weak in light of scriptures in which God is
portrayed as mourning over his lost ones. Jesus said of Jerusalem, “…how often I have longed
to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks.” (Matt. 23:37.) For God to feel no
loss is to portray God as stoic, without emotion. Since God created man to have fellowship with
God, God feels the loss of fellowship and hurts far more than any human.

21
Implied Consent

If you have ever purchased a new car, you may have become aware of how many of
the same type of cars are on the road. It is as if your eyes are suddenly opened to see
what was there all the time. In a similar way, once one has accepted the possibility of
universal salvation, many scriptures take on new and fresh meaning. They do not
overtly proclaim the message of full reconciliation, but their meaning seems to come
alive in light of universal interpretation.

“For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them
all.” (Romans 11:32). Just as everyone of us have sinned and fallen short of God’s
glory, so God will have mercy on everyone of us. This verse follows a passage in which
Paul outright declares that “all Israel will be saved.” (Romans 11:26) Paul follows up
this verse with a beautiful doxology praising God for the depth of his wisdom. Gods
wisdom is higher than ours. We want evil people to suffer forever. God wants to
extend mercy to them.

“Love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get
anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High,
because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked. Be merciful, just as your Father is
merciful.” (Luke 6:35-36) God does not ask us to do anything he does not do himself.
He asks us to do good to the evil because he himself does good to them.

“I pray that you, being rooted and established in love, may have power, together with all
the saints, to grasp how wide and long and high and deep is the love of Christ, and to
know this love that surpasses knowledge—that you may be filled to the measure of all
the fullness of God.” (Ephesians 3:17-19). God’s love goes far beyond what we can
even comprehend. It is not exclusive.

“I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the
present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all
creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our
Lord.” (Romans 8:38-39) There is nothing, not even hell that can separate one from
the love of Christ.

“Suppose one of you has a hundred sheep and loses one of them. Does he not leave
the ninety-nine in the open country and go after the lost sheep until he finds it?” (Luke
15:4) God is not content to just allow a lost sinner to remain lost. Rather, the love of
God compels him to seek him until he is found, regardless of how many eons that may
take.

“Love is patient,…it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs…it always


protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails…these
three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.” (I Cor. 13:4-15)
Love never fails. Hope always remains. God is love. How can these words be true if
the love of God fails to bring even the worst of sinners into his fold? Can people resist
God’s love forever? Love never fails.

22
Problem Scriptures

Just as there are scriptures that are problems for the traditional view (as noted earlier in
this paper), there are scriptures that are difficult for the Restorationist view. I am going
to address the most difficult of these.

Lazarus and the Rich Man. When I first began to research Universal Restoration, this
was one of the primary problem scriptures. The parable very clearly states that there is
no crossing over from one side to the other after death. I read this parable several
times, prayed over it and finally set it aside and told God that if there was any truth to
Universal Salvation, he would have to explain this passage to me. Several weeks
later, I learned of two alternative explanations. Below is the account, in context, as
recorded in Luke 16 beginning in verse 13 with Jesus talking:

“You cannot serve both God and Money.”


The Pharisees, who loved money, heard all this and were sneering at Jesus.
He said to them, “You are the ones who justify yourself in the eyes of men, but
God knows your hearts. What is highly valued among men is detestable in
God’s sight.
“The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John. Since that time, the
good news of the kingdom of God is being preached, and everyone is forcing
his way into it. It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the least
stroke of a pen to drop out of the Law.
“Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits
adultery, and the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
“There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in
luxury every day. At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with
sores and longing to eat what fell from the rich man’s table. Even the dogs
came and licked his sores.
“The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to
Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried. In hell, where he was
in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side.
So he called to him, ‘Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip
the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this
fire.’
“But Abraham replied, ‘Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your
good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here
and you are in agony. And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm
has been fixed, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can
anyone cross over from there to us.’
“He answered, ‘Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my father’s house,
for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to
this place of torment.’
“Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to
them.’
“’No, father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them,
they will repent.’
“He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not
be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’”

23
I included the parable in context because the context is crucial to the correct
understanding of this parable. Jesus had been talking to the Pharisees and attacking
them for their greed and exclusivity. He states that one cannot serve God and money.
He states that up until this time the Law and the Prophets were proclaimed (of whom
the Pharisees considered themselves the sacred guardians), but people were entering
the Kingdom of God in hordes apart from the Law and the Prophets. In other words, a
new way has come. Then, he drives home the point with this parable. It is also
interesting to note that this parable was apparently not original with Jesus. It was
recorded in the Babylonian Talmud and would have been very familiar to the
Pharisees.10 Therefore, he was not teaching a new doctrine, but rather was repeating a
story in a poignant way to his adversaries.

Parables are symbolic. They are not to be read literally (think about the parable of the
Sower and the Seed. It is not about farming). Furthermore, not everything in a parable
necessarily has meaning. Rather, certain aspects may be just to add color. It may also
be inconsistent to take one aspect of a parable symbolically and another literally.

This parable cannot be about the fate of one after death. Because, if it is, then it runs
contrary to the gospel. There is not indication of faith on the part of Lazarus, nor is
there indication of lack of faith on the part of the Rich Man. In fact, if anything, the Rich
Man shows compassion by thinking of his brothers who are still alive. One is not saved
by being poor, nor is one condemned by being rich. In context, this is a parable
directed towards the Pharisees.

The Rich Man represents the Pharisees. He is richly robed, wearing clothes like the
Pharisees. Lazarus is Latin for Eleazar. Eleazar was the nephew of Abraham, the one
who would have inherited Abraham’s estate had he not had a son. Eleazar represents
the Gentiles. This is further illustrated by the fact that he was outside the gate and
could only receive crumbs from the Rich Man’s table. The Gentiles were not allowed
inside the gate of the Temple. They could never partake of the fullness of God’s
blessings. The dogs licking his wounds, emphasize the point even more, as Jews
referred to the Gentiles as dogs.

The Rich Man goes to hell, where the Pharisees taught that Gentiles would go and
Lazarus goes to Abraham’s bosom (heaven), where the Pharisees, as Abraham’s
children, assumed they would go. So, in the parable, the place of the Jews is taken by
the Gentiles. Those who were supposed to be in Abraham’s bosum are displaced by
those who were previously excluded. Jesus was teaching that the self-righteous
Pharisees were going to have their role as God’s Own People taken from them and
given to those who were once not a nation. That which was exalted will be humbled
and that which was humbled will be exalted.

As for the part about not crossing from one side to the other, this was what the
Pharisees taught regarding hell. So, this was added to bring home the point that the
Pharisees were going to find themselves excluded.

10
J. F. Witherell, The Five Pillars In the Temple of Partialism Shaken and Removed (Concord:
Balm of Gilead, 1843). Chapter, “Rich Man and Lazarus.” Available online at
www.tentmaker.org. I was unable to verify independently the accuracy of this statement.

24
Therefore, this parable is not at all about the after-life, but about Kingdom of God here
on earth. However, if you cannot accept that this parable is symbolic and not literal,
then I will offer an alternative explanation.

When Jesus told this story, he had not yet conquered death and risen from the dead.
Therefore, those who died prior to his victory, were in torment. There was no relief nor
possibility of moving from hell to heaven. Yet, Jesus said he came to free the captives
(Luke 4:18). Jesus has the keys to death and Hades (Rev. 1:18). Keys may be used
to lock or unlocked. Since Jesus came to free, he has unlocked the gates of hell. He
further said that the gates of hell will not overcome the church (Matt. 16:18). Gates are
defensive, therefore he meant that his body (the church) will overcome the gates that
keep the captives imprisoned. Indeed, Peter tells us that after death Christ preached to
the spirits in prison (I Peter 3:19), who are dead that they might live in the spirit (I Peter
4:6).

Therefore, if one wishes to take the parable literally, it does not provide a problem. At
the time of the telling, the facts of the story were accurate. However, that was going to
change soon, with Jesus’ redemptive death and triumph over it. Those imprisoned in
hell can now be released and cross the chasm to heaven.

The Unforgivable Sin. In Matthew 12:31-32, Jesus said:

And so I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the
blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. Anyone who speaks a word
against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the
Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.”

This passage is a problem for all Christians. The blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is not
defined, so its meaning falls into the realm of speculation. Looking at the passage in
context in Matthew’s Gospel, it follows a discourse in which the Pharisees are accusing
Jesus of casting out demons by demonic power himself. Therefore, it would appear
that blasphemy of the Holy Spirit may be akin to ascribing the power of God to Satan.

An interesting aspect of this passage is that Jesus implies that every other sin may be
forgiven in the next age as well as in this one, including words spoken against Jesus.
But, this one sin cannot be forgiven.

There are two reasonable explanations for this passage. One, Jesus could be
speaking hyperbolically. He did not mean that the sin could not be forgiven, but wanted
to emphasize how difficult it is to come to forgiveness of that particular sin. This would
be similar to saying that it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than
for a rich man to be saved (Matthew 19:24). No camel can go through the eye of a
needle, but this is hyperbolic speech indicating how difficult it is. Similarly, Jesus said
that one must hate his family if he is to follow him (Luke 14:26). No one takes this
literally. We understand that Jesus is talking in comparison. Likewise, perhaps Jesus
is using parabolic speech to communicate the seriousness of the sin of blasphemy
against the Holy Spirit.

Another possible explanation is that the sin cannot be forgiven, but one must suffer the
consequences, whatever they are. This would be similar to Jesus’ statement in
Matthew 6:15 that unless you forgive, you will not be forgiven. One will not be forgiven

25
their own sins as long as they refuse to forgive others. It would also be similar to the
lists that Paul makes of who will not inherit the Kingdom of God (adulterers,
unbelievers, etc.). But, Paul states that some of us were guilty of those sins. As long
as we engage in those sinful ways, we cannot inherit the Kingdom. But, once we
repent, we can. Likewise, perhaps the meaning is that one cannot be forgiven the sin
of blasphemy of the Holy Spirit as long as one persists in that sin. But, once one
repents, then they can be forgiven.

Lake of Fire. Revelation records the following verses regarding the lake of fire:

If anyone worships the beast and his image and receives his mark on his
forehead or on the hand, he, too, will drink of the wine of God’s fury, which has
been poured full strength into the cup of his wrath. He will be tormented with
burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and of the Lamb. And the
smoke of their torment rises for ever and ever. There is no rest day or night for
those who worship the beast and his image, or for anyone who receives the
mark of his name. (Rev. 14:9-11)

The two of them [the beast and the false prophet] were thrown alive into the
fiery lake of burning sulfur. (Rev. 19:20)

And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur,
where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented
day and night for ever and ever. (Rev. 20:10)

Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. Earth and sky
fled from his presence, and there was no place for them. And I saw the dead,
great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another
book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to
what they had done as recorded in the books. The sea gave up the dead that
were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each
person was judged according to what he had done. Then death and Hades
were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. If
anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the
lake of fire. (Rev. 20:11-15)

But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral,
those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—their place will be in
the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death. (Rev. 21: 8)

He who overcomes will not be hurt at all by the second death. (Rev. 2:11)

Blessed and holy are those who have part in the first resurrection. The second
death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and
will reign with him for a thousand years. (Rev. 20:6)

First, it is very dangerous to build any doctrine from the book of Revelation. Revelation
is a very symbolic book and scholars have debated its meaning for centuries.
Symbolism, by its very nature refers to something other than the literal. No one, for
example, believes that Jesus has a literal sword coming out of his mouth, as he is
described in Revelation 1. Rather, the sword represents the Word of God, as the Book

26
of Revelation itself explains. Therefore, one has to understand that whatever is
described is symbolic of something else.

In Revelation 6:9, souls of martyrs are depicted as being under the altar. This is
obviously symbolic and not a literal alter. If it were, it would be as if the souls were
imprisoned. Likewise, the Lake of Fire should not be understood as a literal lake of fire.
Rather, it would be better understood as the “Consuming Fire” of God, as mentioned in
Hebrews 12:29. It is the Fire of Judgment. In fact, Revelation 14:10 states that fact
clearly as “God’s fury...cup of his wrath.” The lake of fire is described as a fire of
burning sulfur. The Greek word translated “sulfur” (or “brimstone” in some translations)
is theion. This word also means “divine.” Sulfur was sacred to the Greeks and was
used to purify or consecrate oneself before the gods. The verb derived from theion is
theioo, which means to make holy or divine. Therefore, the lake of fire means a lake of
divine purification.11 It is best understood as the Judgment of God, that refiner’s fire,
which purifies man of his evil. The phrase, “forever and ever” emphasizes the eternal
nature (God nature) of the judgment.

The torment occurs in the presence of the Lamb. The very presence of the Lamb
creates torment to the wicked. It is not that the Lamb is tormenting them (how can a
Lamb torment?), but rather the unrighteous are tormented by being in the presence of
the righteous! It is the deep conviction of God’s holy presence that is tormenting. The
torment will continue until the sinner repents.

It is also important to note that death and Hades are thrown into the fire. The second
death is not like the first death. The second death is the death of death itself.
Revelation 21:4 says there will be no more death. The second death is designed to
eradicate everything which opposes God so that in the end, God is all in all and there is
no more evil.

Finally, we see that in the very end, (Rev. 22:13), God is the Alpha and the Omega, He
is not only the First, but also the Last. He wins. But, his victory is not at the expense of
his enemies, but at the restoration of His enemies.

Forever Shut Out from the Presence of God. II Thessalonians 1:6-9 says:

God is just: He will pay back trouble to those who trouble you and give relief to
you who are troubled, and to us as well. This will happen when the Lord Jesus
is revealed from heaven in blazing fire with his powerful angels. He will punish
those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus.
They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the
presence of the Lord and from the majesty of his power.”

The issue here is the phrase, “punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from
the presence of the Lord.”

We have already discussed punishment as corrective in nature. We have already


addressed the issue of “everlasting” as referring to the eternal quality of God and, in
this case of his punishment. “Destruction” refers to the eradication of the flesh, of that

11
J. Preston Eby, The Savior of the World Series (online at www.tentmaker.org). Chapter titled,
“The Lake of Fire.” Eby quotes Charles Pridgeon as authority on the Greek.

27
aspect of humankind which opposes God. Therefore, “punished with everlasting
destruction” means the punishment which comes from the divine destruction of sin.

The more difficult part of this verse is the phrase “shut out from the presence of the
Lord. It seems to state that one will be forever separated from the presence of God.
However, the problem seems to be more of translation than of substance. The problem
is the Greek word which is translated “shut out from.” In actuality, the Greek contains
only the word from. From can mean, depending upon the context, either “away from”
or “coming from.” The translators chose (I believe based upon personal theological
perspectives) to translate it “away from” or “shut out from.” However, it could just have
easily been translated “coming from.” The King James Version translates verses 8 and
9 most directly without adding theological bias:

In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not
the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who will be punished with everlasting
destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power.

In fact, this translation makes much more sense. It is clear from the context that their
punishment comes from God’s flaming fire, not away from it.12

Therefore, this passage is in complete accordance with the Universal Restoration


perspective. God will punish those who oppose him with the eternal fire coming from
his presence. The end is to destroy sin, not the sinner.

In conclusion, these are the most difficult passages which are frequently used in
arguments against Universal Restoration. There are others, though far less potent and
which are answered in much the same way.

12
For a thorough discussion of this verse and the Greek translation, see Thomas Talbott, The
Inescapable Love of God (Universal Publishers, 1999), 92-98.

28
Free Will

One of the criticisms sometimes levied against Universal Salvation is that it requires a
belief in predestination and eliminates free will. I am going to agree and disagree on
different levels. To start with. Lets look at what Paul said about God’s pre-ordained
plan in Ephesians 1:4-12:

He chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in
his sight. In love he predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus
Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will—to the praise of his glorious
grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves. In him we have
redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the
riches of God's grace that he lavished on us with all wisdom and understanding.
And he made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good
pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, to be put into effect when the times have
reached their fulfillment—to bring all things in heaven and on earth together
under one head, even Christ.

In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of
him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, in order
that we, who were the first to hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory.

God, in his infinite wisdom, knew before he created the world that his created beings
would rebel against him because of their free will. He did not ordain or predestine their
rebellion, but he knew it would happen. But, he also created a plan whereby he would
be able to draw back all of creation to him. They were allowed to rebel so that in the
end they could serve him not because they had to, but because they wanted to—out of
love, not obligation.

Herein lies the essence of free will—that we freely love God. What about the person
who does not want to love God—who hates him? As described in Romans 1, God will
give the person over to his own depravity. Yet, the hound of heaven—God’s love, as
manifested by fire of his judgment, will pursue the one that hates him to the very end.

What is it that compels us to come to Christ in the first place? Is it not, for most of us,
his love? What is it that causes us to remain with Christ? Is it not his love? When you
take the most fierce God-hater, the most vile sinner, and analyze him psychologically, I
believe you will find this person to be dysfunctional and lacking in loving relationships.
Many who formerly opposed God were like this, yet when God revealed himself to
them, they repented. It may not have been immediate, but as God worked in their life,
they came to recognize the error of their ways—for it is the kindness of God which
brings repentance (Romans 2:4). A person hates God not because they really want to
—deep down inside each person is a desire to love and be loved—but because they
are deceived (II Thes. 2:9-12) and the Good News has not yet been able to penetrate
the veil which blocks their view (II Cor. 3:14-16). I can state that deep inside every
person wants to love God, because, as the popular analogy goes, God has created a
God-shaped vacuum inside each person. Everyone wants that vacuum filled, they just
do not know that it can only be filled by God.

My contention is that once one clearly sees the choice, they will choose God. Maybe
not right away. It may take a lot of pain and suffering before they realize that they need

29
him. But, when the veil is removed, they will chose him not out of compulsion, but
because he is the only one who offers a way out of their misery—and he offers the
love they so desperately need and have run away from.

If—and I do not believe this will happen—but if anyone after all “eternity” should remain
in rebellion, embracing hell and refusing the grace freely offered by God, then I believe
the only course remaining is annihilation. This is because in the end, the Bible teaches
that all things will be brought together in God, with the elimination of death, hades,
suffering, sin and pain. Hell cannot exist forever. Therefore, if anyone was to hold out
against God, then he will be utterly destroyed. I believe it is a more scriptural view to
say that hell will exist as long as rebellion exists and once all of God’s enemies have
been won over (defeated), then hell will cease to exist.

Hence, God has ordained (predestined) that all men will come to him in their own time
and by their own free choice.

30
Psychological and Emotional Barriers
To Acceptance of Universal Restoration

There are two primary obstacles to the Conservative Christian to accepting the doctrine
of Universal Restoration: theological and emotional/psychological. I have already
addressed many of the theological. In this chapter, I will address the psychological and
emotional aspects, because in some ways this is the most difficult.

Theologically, a strong case can be made for Universal Restoration from the scriptures.
However, even when presented with the evidence, it is very difficult for someone who
as been taught something different to accept it. It requires a re-definition of the nature
of God, judgment and the meaning of life. Accordingly, these are not easily
accomplished in a short period of time. In my case, it took five years of research,
prayer, reading, thinking and discussion. This article is in large part a biography of my
spiritual struggle. In many cases, I could build or understand a concept intellectually,
but emotionally it was difficult to accept.

Below are several of the questions which arose in my own mind and which will be
common to most Conservative Christians with the answers as I have derived them.

It is too good to be true and therefore cannot be true. We have heard this all our
life. The doctrine of Universal Restoration is such a wonderful concept that there is a
tendency to reject it simply because it is too good. In Paul’s time, Christians were
accused of promoting a “too good doctrine.” In Romans, Paul implies that Christians
encouraged “sin that grace may abound.” The doctrine of unending punishment in hell
for non-believers is so deeply ingrained in our Christian psyche that anything else
surely cannot possibly be true. As it is, according to the traditional viewpoint, the
Gospel is “Good News” only for believers. For non-believers it is definitely not a
gospel. Yet, we have heard time and time again that “God is Good.” Therefore, it is
truly short sighted to reject a doctrine simply because it is “too good.” Who better to
author a doctrine of really Good News, other than Christ himself!

If I accept this, I am creating a God in the image I want him to be and not as he is.
This is a very serious concern, far more than the first. It is possible for anyone to
hypothecate a view and then find scriptures (usually out of context) to support that
view. That problem is compounded by the fact that a student is also relying upon the
works of others to interpret Greek and Hebrew and for giving an accounting of history.
Every author has a number of biases and those viewpoints may influence or distort
his/her message, perhaps in ways which cannot be discerned by the reader.
Therefore, in my own quest, I felt the need to read and re-read passages of scripture
and many authors of differing points of view.

The image of God that many conservative Christians have is that God is love, but he is
also righteous and holy. This is, undoubtedly true. However, the image many also
have is that the righteousness and holiness of God requires eternal damnation of a
great many people. If one begins to dismantle the second part of this view, it raises the
question of “who God is.” This is an issue I struggled with for a long time.

Again, if the preponderance of evidence indicates that God is different or behaves


differently than I previously conceived, then the case is not that I am creating a God in

31
my own image, but that I am learning to see Him more clearly. Previously, the image I
had of God was as man created him.

Fear of losing my salvation by straying from the “narrow path” and accepting a
“different gospel.” This may not be a concern to those who believe “once saved,
always saved.” But, I did not subscribe to this doctrine, so it was a concern to me.
However, this concern was resolved relatively easily. If, in my research, I became
convinced that the Bible teaches something different from what I believed, then my
prior belief system is actually the one which is inaccurate and to the side of the “narrow
path.” So, how can I lose my salvation by believing a truer gospel?

How can so many Bible Scholars and church leaders over the centuries be wrong
about something so basic as salvation? It is not so much a fact of being wrong, as
being incomplete. St. Augustine formed the basic framework for the western church’s
theology in the fifth century. His view on this matter became the accepted view and
became so entrenched in church theology that any other view became virtually
inconceivable. Furthermore, a cursory reading in translated versions of the Bible
appears to support the doctrine of everlasting punishment. However, as already
pointed out, this view was very prominent in the early church. After Christianity became
the official religion of the state, paganism and worldly influences encroached upon the
church. Greek (the original language of the New Testament) was replaced by Latin,
whose words translated did not fully capture the meaning of the Greek in some
instances pertaining to judgment. Pagan teaching regarding everlasting torment in hell
was absorbed into the church. English and other modern languages do not always
have words which properly transfer the meaning of the Greek and translators are
influenced by their own theological biases.

If Universal Restoration is true, then why has God allowed such a false and
destructive heresy of eternal damnation to persist so long? This is perhaps best
answered by Paul in Romans 11:32, “God has bound all men over to disobedience, so
that he might have mercy on them all.” Israel, having been given the law, failed in her
application of it and her failure to uphold the law opened the door for God to offer
Grace. The church, too, has failed to live the life of Grace and so God has shown that
all have disobeyed—that salvation is through the church no more than it is through
Israel. In the end, our disobedience in purveying a distorted Gospel will result in an
even greater display of God’s mercy (see Romans 9-11, substituting the Church for
Israel as a parable to this explanation). God is content to be maligned so that he can
show his kindness all the more through forgiving sinners, such as us. It is not the work
of man (or the church) which saves sinners, but God and God alone.

If one can be saved, regardless of their doctrine, then what difference does what
one believes make, especially if they live a good and decent life? This is a
troubling question, especially because as Conservative Christians it was drilled into our
heads that one must believe or be damned. Now, it is being proposed that one may not
believe and not be damned. So, what difference does it make? What advantage is
there to believing? I think the answer is found in judgment. For those in Christ, there is
no condemnation, no experience of hell. For those without Christ, the judgment may
be severe. Therefore, there is every advantage to faith in Christ.

This doctrine appears to be akin to liberalism and liberalism waters down the
Gospel to the extent that it is ineffective. If I accept this doctrine, am I starting

32
down a slippery liberal slope towards other errors? If liberal churches are right in
this aspect of doctrine, then why is there so little passion for Christ? Is it possible
to hold this view and be a passionate and effective follower of Christ? I have
lumped these together because they are all related. These are issues that I have
struggled with and can only answer from personal experience. Liberalism and
Universal Restoration are not the same. Liberalism rejects the authority of the
scriptures. Liberalism may be inclined towards pluralism (there is more than one way to
God). However, Univerisalism as presented in this paper accepts the scriptures as
revealed word of God and, in fact relies entirely upon the Scriptures as the basis for
this view. Restorationism becomes liberalism only if Christ is no longer the only way
and the focal point of life. If passion is lost, it is lost due to loss of the focal point. It
becomes liberalism if the Grace of God is used as an excuse for sin. However, the
issue is far removed from liberalism vs. conservatism. Truth is neither liberal nor
conservative. Truth is that which is true, regardless of its philosophical underpinnings.
There have been many very godly people who have embraced the doctrine of
Universal Restoration. Therefore, the acceptance of this doctrine in no way inhibits a
dynamic relationship with Christ. From my own experience, I can say that when I
adopted the wider hope (as discussed in Part I), my perspective of God grew and my
love of God increased, as I saw that he was not unfair in any way. The doctrine of
Universal Restoration has served primarily to give me a systematic theological basis for
the wider hope. As I have reflected upon the expanse of God’s love, my own love for
him and passion has increased. O that everyone would come to know the God who
does not condemn but justifies, accepts and purifies.

33
Conclusion

Is the case clearly cut in favor of Universal Restoration? Of course not. If it were, there
would be no controversy. However, when all factors are considered, I believe the
weight of evidence falls on the side of Universal Restoration. There are problem
scriptures on both sides of the issue. Just as the Restorationist must explain the
verses about eternal damnation, the traditionalist must explain the many scriptures
clearly stating that all will be saved and that all will be reconciled. I find the Calvinist
explanation that “all” means “all the elect” to be very inadequate and, in fact, a
manipulation of scripture to support a view which I believe is contrary to the Biblical
Gospel.

In the traditional view, the nature of God is compromised. John tells us that God is
Love. Paul tells us that Love never fails. Yet, if one sinner holds out against the love of
God, then that sinner has defeated God and God’s love has failed.

God plainly states that it is his will that all men be saved (I Timothy 2:4). Why is it that it
is so easy for Christians to believe that God’s will is accomplished in other areas, but
not this one? Does not Isaiah say that God’s word will accomplish all that which he
desires? (Isaiah 55:11) If all are not saved according to God’s desire, then God must
not have the ability. At this point, the Armenian would answer that God has the ability
but will not over throw the free will of man. However, if man is not given the option to
accept God’s grace and forgiveness after death, then God has overruled man’s will.
God has usurped free will! Could it not also be true that God has all of eternity to seek
and to save the lost and when that last sinner finally repents, there will be the biggest
party in heaven of ever?

Traditionalists tell us that sinners must go to hell and suffer there eternally because the
holiness of God will not allow a sinner in his presence. Tell that to Jesus, who not only
ate and drank with sinners, but forgave them their sins. He welcomed sinners into his
presence. For God so loved the world that he embraced it in all its decadence by
becoming a man and taking its sin on himself. The holiness of God does not reject
sinners. Rather, the holiness of God cleanses sinners.

I think it is unfortunate that Christianity has lost the meaning of the full and complete
victory of Christ. Into the Roman world of despair, Christ brought hope. Hope for all.
This is the Good News. As it has been twisted over the centuries, the Good News has
become Bad News for millions of people. Many sensitive Christians have wrestled with
the apparent lostness of the world without hope.

Hannah Whitall Smith, evangelist and author of the popular book, “The Christian’s
Secret of a Happy Life” expressed this sense of despair for the unsaved. She said:

In every human face I saw, there seemed to be unveiled before me the story
of the misery and anguish caused by the entrance of sin into the world. I knew
that God must see this with far clearer eyes than mine, and therefore I felt sure
that the sufferings of this sight to Him must be infinitely beyond what it was to
me, almost unbearable as that seemed. And I began to understand how it was
that the least He could do would be to embrace with untold gladness anything
that would help to deliver the being He had created for such awful misery.

34
It was a never to be forgotten insight into the world's anguish because of sin.
How long it lasted I cannot remember, but, while it lasted, it almost crushed me.
And as it always came afresh at the sight of a strange face, I found myself
obliged to wear a thick veil whenever I went into the streets, in order that I might
spare myself the awful realization.

However, one day that veil was removed:

One day I was riding on a tram-car along Market Street, Philadelphia, when I
saw two men come in and seat themselves opposite to me. I saw them dimly
through a veil, but congratulated myself that it was only dimly, as I was thus
spared the wave of anguish that had so often swept over me at the full sight of
a strange face. The conductor came for his fare, and I was obliged to raise my
veil in order to count it out. As I raised it I got a sight of the faces of those two
men, and with an overwhelming flood of anguish, I seemed to catch a fresh and
clearer revelation of the depth of the misery that had been caused to human
beings by sin. It was more than I could bear. I clenched my hands and cried out
in my soul, "O, God, how canst thou bear it? Thou mightest have prevented it,
but didst not. Thou mightest even now change it, but Thou dost not. I do not see
how Thou canst go on living, and endure it." I upbraided God. And I felt I was
justified in doing so. Then suddenly God seemed to answer me. An inward voice
said, in tones of infinite love and tenderness, "He shall see of the travail of His
soul and be satisfied." "Satisfied!" I cried in my heart, "Christ is to be satisfied!
He will be able to look at the world's misery, and then at the travail through
which He has passed because of it, and will be satisfied with the result; If I were
Christ, nothing could satisfy me but that every human being should in the end
be saved, and therefore I am sure that nothing less will satisfy Him." And with
this a veil seemed to be withdrawn from before the plans of the universe, and I
saw that it was true, as the Bible says, that "as in Adam all die -even so in Christ
should all be made alive." As was the first, even so was the second. The "all" in
one case could not in fairness mean less than the "all" in the other. I saw
therefore that the remedy must necessarily be equal to the disease, the
salvation must be as universal as the fall. 13

The Good News is truly Good News for all people of all times.

I realize that many Conservative Christians will disagree with me on my interpretation of


Scripture. I do not from this paper alone expect to persuade anyone. From the time I
first started to investigate the theology of salvation until I fully accepted the doctrine of
Universal Restoration, nearly five years elapsed. Proverbs 18:17 says, “The first to
present his case seems right, til another comes forward and questions him.” We have
been taught only one side of the issue. In my research, I read books presenting all
sides of the issue. In fact, I read more opposed to the doctrine than I did in favor of the
doctrine. I hope that I have presented some information which will encourage
Christians to read the Bible for themselves and ask the Holy Spirit for enlightenment.

13
Hannah Whitall Smith, The Unselfishness of God and How I Discovered It. Chapter XXII, “The
Third Epoch of My Religious Life.” This chapter has been removed in recent reprintings of this
book by the publisher. The original chapter can be read at www.tentmaker.org.

35
“I keep asking that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the glorious Father, may give you
the Spirit of wisdom and revelation, so that you may know him better. I pray also that
the eyes of your heart may be enlightened in order that you may know the hope to
which he has called you, the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints, and his
incomparably great power for us who believe.” Ephesians 1:17-19.

36
After Thoughts

If God is infinitely patient with people,


then what excuse do I have for impatience?

If God’s loving kindness never comes to an end,


then what reason do I have for any lack thereof?

If God never ceases to seek out the lost,


then why should I ever give up?

If God sees his redemptive Christ in every human being,


then should I not also look for God’s gift in each person?

If God became our servant,


then how much more should I serve my brother?

If God is so kind to my enemies,


then how should I treat them?

If God so loves the world,


then I am overwhelmed with wonder.

May I so love him back.

Romans 11:13-36
I Corinthians 13

37
Bibliography

Four Views on Hell, edited by William Crockett, Zondervan Publishing House,


1992. In this book, four men defend four different views of hell: the literal, the
metaphorical, purgatorial and conditional immortality (annihilationism). This book is
good to get a sense of different perspectives on hell. Universalism is not discussed.

In the End God, John A. T. Robinsion, Harper & Row, 1968. This is a rather dry
theological book. However, in the last three chapters, he presents a very good and
concise argument in favor of Universal Restoration.

The Inescapable Love of God, by Thomas Talbott, Universal Publishers, 1999.


This book makes a systematic presentation on the Universal Restoration perspective. I
highly recommend it for those who want to learn more about the Biblical basis for
Restorationism.

The True Image: The Origin and Destiny of Man in Christ, by Philip Edgecombe
Hughes, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1989. This book is a
comprehensive exposition of the gospel from the perspective that we were created in
the image of God. It has chapters that deal with the issues of the immortality of the
soul, the intermediate state, and conditional immortality. Hughes is an Anglican scholar,
and believes in annihilationism. The book is superb from beginning to end and is useful
not just for studying life after death, but also the purpose and meaning of life. This
book should be in every Christian’s library, regardless of their eschatological
perspective.

What About Those Who Have Never Heard?, edited by John Sanders, InterVarsity
Press, 1995. This book presents three different views on the destiny of the
unevangelized: the traditional restrictivist position, the inclusiveness position and the
divine perseverance position. It is useful for expanding ones horizons to other
understandings and problems with various viewpoints.

What Does the Bible Really Say About Hell?, by Randolph J. Klassen, Pandora
Press, 2001. Klassen writes a very readable book on the subject. He set out on his
research looking at each occasion in the Bible in which the Greek or Hebrew word is
translated “hell.” His approach is more of an exploratory as opposed to dogmatic.
Surprisingly, he does not get bogged down in a lot of details, which makes the book
easy to read. He concludes that while the Bible does teach judgment, it does not teach
everlasting torment. An excellent book especially for one beginning their research.

Whatever Happened to Hell, by John Blanchard, Crossway Books, 1995. This book
is a full-fledged defense of the traditional view of hell, and tries to answer all the
arguments of all other views, including Universalism. If a traditionalist wants to know
what they really believe and the implications thereof, this book pulls no punches. In
fact, contrary to the author’s objective, this book sealed for me the decision that I could
not accept the traditional view as God’s plan. I was depressed for two days after
reading it.

38
www.tentmaker.org. This website has many articles, testimonies and online copies of
publications pertaining to Universal Restoration, many of which are out of print. I highly
recommend many of the resources on this site for further research.
Other Papers by Wayne McDaniel

Genesis One. An “objective” look at what Genesis One really means. I used to
believe in a literal seven day creation. But, after I really examined the passage in detail
for myself, I became convinced that this is not the way to read Genesis One.

In Pursuit of Truth: What I Believe and Why. This is more or less a testimony of why
I am a Christian, presenting both objective and subjective reasons.

Embrace the Pain. A short paper on a God-centered perspective on pain and


difficulties. My perspective has a long term historical foundation, but is contrary to the
popular Christian view.

Any of the above papers are available upon request free of charge.

About the Author

Wayne McDaniel, born in 1955, lives in Lawrence, Kansas in a beautiful log home. He
is married with two children. Wayne and his wife Jude are independent financial
planners. They attend a Wesleyan Church and are active in the Alpha ministry. His
interest in spiritual and religious issues comes solely out of his love for Truth.

39

You might also like