In the past I tried to base my universalism solely on Matthew 25 because it speaks of correction. I reasoned that it cannot be everlasting because no one can be corrected forever. But the above passage shows that we can refuse to listen and reject God’s correction. It’s not hard to imagine eternal correction going as people continually refuse correction. Matthew 25 alone doesn’t prove universalism. Thank God there are other texts of scripture that speak of the salvation of all.
Well, no, eternal correction doesn’t in itself guarantee repentance. God’s competency guarantees that. 
(Also testimony elsewhere indicating total victory leading sinners back to loyalty. Including in Jeremiah where you got that quote from, btw. And that quote isn’t talking about never-ending correction, just punitive correction, increasing up to the point of death.)
However, even if there was a never-ending stalemate, that would still technically be universalism compared to Arminianism (where God chooses or is forced to give up on some sinners) or Calvinism (where God never even tries at all for some sinners). When I first came to believe Christian universalism is true, that’s what I expected the scriptures would testify to.
And yes, Matt 25 (???) alone doesn’t prove universalism. It’s pretty unusual for people to argue from Matt 25 to universal salvation anyway. (I do, but the only other person I found doing it before me was Allin whom I recently read, and he isn’t nearly as detailed.) But no one should be relying on only one portion of scripture for soteriology anyway, whether for or against universalism (or anni or ECT).
I’ve never met a pure sheep, or a pure goat, but I’ve met lots of shoats and gheeps. The separation of good and evil in Matt25 is personal and universal. Evil is identified, condemned, removed, and destroyed. The good, once liberated, will be astounded to discover it is indeed good (and always has been). The evil, as usual, will deny everything.
“Who shall deliver me from this bloody goat? Thanks be to God, through Jesus Christ our Lord.” Rom 7
I may be going to annihilationism. The text I use to use to support universalism can be seen differently. I can now see that we can resist not only God’s grace but His correction also.
These will go away into long lasting correction but the righteous into long lasting life.
The text doesn’t tell us how long these are. But what I’m thinking is that God’s punitive correction (which is different for everybody who receives it) is continually resisted as the wicked refuse to repent in the Lake Of Fire. God then destroys the wicked both body and soul by turning them to ashes. This is the second death.
if by turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to ashes he condemned them to extinction, making them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly; - 2 Peter 2:6
The wicked will be turned to ashes and condemned to extinction and be no more.
And you shall tread down the wicked, for they will be ashes under the soles of your feet, on the day when I act, says the LORD of hosts. - Mal. 4:3
Evil will be destroyed and defeated and there will be no more pain or suffering. Every knee will bow as God rules and reigns over all.
I wonder about this position, too, Michael. I wonder if there is a bridge of ideas between universalism and annihilationism. Universalism, I suspect, does not necessarily enforce the principal of love if people genuinely reject Jesus as King of Kings, Lord of Lords. Some people may reject correction based on ideological or authoritative reasonings. I am only speculating, as I don’t know. But I do not think that annihilationism, as an ideal, requires any failure, or lack of love, on God’s part. I am still undecided on this idea.
Steve
Who are “the wicked”? I’ve never met anyone who is pure evil. Even the men who nailed Jesus down weren’t pure evil. However, I’ve met lots of people made in in God’s image, yet burdened and bound by sin.
I think God will destroy the wicked by utterly destroying their wickedness. Then the real person, the icon of God who has been locked up inside a body of death, will be set free.
The “wicked” is poetic language, just as goats, fire and hate is poetic language. Humans have taken this poetic language and… fueled by their own inner hatred, have used God to validate their own unloving discord. This is unfortunate, but it is part of life.
Steve
Here we see dead bodies in the New Heaven and New Earth:
Isaiah 66
“For as the new heavens and the new earth
that I make
shall remain before me, says the Lord,
so shall your offspring and your name remain.
23 From new moon to new moon,
and from Sabbath to Sabbath,
all flesh shall come to worship before me,
declares the Lord.
24 “And they shall go out and look on the dead bodies of the men who have rebelled against me. For their worm shall not die, their fire shall not be quenched, and they shall be an abhorrence to all flesh.”
Isaiah 66 is speaking about the first coming of Christ. The mention of the new heavens and new earth are not giving the time frame of the context. The dead bodies (where spoken of literally) appears to be talking about the destruction of Jerusalem in AD70.
There is no break in the passage.
For as the new heavens and the new earth
that I make
shall remain before me, says the Lord,
so shall your offspring and your name remain.
Just as the heavens and earth remain so shall the offspring. In the New Heavens and Earth all flesh will worship God
From new moon to new moon,
and from Sabbath to Sabbath,
all flesh shall come to worship before me,
declares the Lord.
24 “And they shall go out and look on the dead bodies of the men who have rebelled against me. For their worm shall not die, their fire shall not be quenched, and they shall be an abhorrence to all flesh.”
“Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city. 15 Outside are the dogs, those who practice magic arts, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and everyone who loves and practices falsehood. - Rev. 22:14-15
Isaiah 66
“For as the new heavens and the new earth
that I make
shall remain before me, says the Lord,
so shall your offspring and your name remain.
23 From new moon to new moon,
and from Sabbath to Sabbath,
all flesh shall come to worship before me,
declares the Lord.
And they shall go out and look on the dead bodies of the men who have rebelled against me. For their worm shall not die, their fire shall not be quenched, and they shall be an abhorrence to all flesh.”
You need to read the entire chapter in sinc. You have read that one verse out of context with the rest of the chapter.
“As the new heavens and the new earth that I make will endure before me,” declares the Lord, “so will your name and descendants endure. 23 From one New Moon to another and from one Sabbath to another, **all mankind will come **and bow down before me,” says the Lord. 24 “And they will go out and look on the dead bodies of those who rebelled against me; the worms that eat them will not die, the fire that burns them will not be quenched, and they will be loathsome to all mankind.”
All mankind will come in worship.
All mankind have rebelled.
All mankind will look with loathing at the dead bodies of the rebellious (ie. their old lives, their bodies of death).
For me, this is the whole point of Adam’s apple etc. Our experience with personal evil will immunize against it forever.
“All mankind will come to bow down before Me," says the LORD.”
All mankind, as opposed to just the Israelites. This statement demonstrates the scope of ministry, not literally that every single human would bow their knee. How could “all mankind” prostrate themselves to God in the new earth and simultaneously we look upon dead bodies. The obvious anomaly here is a flag to understand this verse as metaphorical within the scope of the subject - the Israelites! The entire chapter is talking about the birth of the New Jerusalem (post resurrection), which will be fully realized in the new earth age to come.
Isaiah 66:7-10
The entire chapter relates to a historical transfer of the Old Jerusalem to the New Jerusalem. It uses the New Heaven and New Earth simply as a guarantee, for all things are marching toward this inevitable conclusion. If you read the entire chapter in progression the confusion quickly becomes dispelled.
Steve
Thus Ezekiel dispenses with the idea that Sodom was destroyed forever and ever. Jesus makes a brief mention of Sodom too, when He states that it will be better for Sodom in the day of judgment than for those who have heard His witness and rejected it.
The prophets always speak in superlatives. I was listening to Isaiah today as I made pottery. It’s an amazing book, and it ebbs and flows like the tide. One moment God is condemning Judah and Israel and saying all the horrible things that will happen to them and the next (in the same chapter) He is describing how He will bring them back and comfort them and heal them. He condemns and destroys the nations and the next moment they’re attending a feast on His holy mountain. Because of this, the dead bodies, the abomination of them, doesn’t say to me they’ll be forever dead. The idea, in oriental society, of a person’s corpse being treated shamefully was horrifying, and I’m not sure that danger of being shamed isn’t the intent the prophet means to convey, beyond a literal interpretation. Those who behave shamefully will be horribly shamed and their shamefulness will be marveled at and will be a sight of disgust for everyone who passes by.
“My love is a red, red rose.” Do you feel the need to take that statement by the poet literally, and if you don’t take it literally, would you feel the need to accuse the poet of lying or of inaccuracy? His love is most likely NOT a red red rose at all, nor even a red red woman. She’s likely a very attractive lady (at least to him) who doesn’t even use red red lipstick. But he gets his point across. The orientals (and Judaism and Christianity are ORIENTAL, rather than western religions, make no mistake) write extravagant poetry. Isaiah may be poetry – I’m no expert – but what it most certainly is, is apocalyptic. You have to read it like poetry if it’s to make any sense at all. If you don’t, then Isaiah contradicts himself several times a chapter (usually) and his collection of prophecies makes no sense at all. He is speaking in images and we’re to understand him symbolically.
Ever since the age of rationalism we’ve felt the need to take everything literally and have also felt a great degree of contempt for people who speak in extravagant hyperbole. The orientals do not and did not share this idea with us, and the collection of literature we call the bible was, for the most part, written to an audience of orientals. Therefore, to take it as it seems to have been intended is no insult to God, nor even to a high, high view of scripture. It is honoring the genre in which the author was working. Isaiah usually wrote apocalyptically – not always – some of his writings are more historical, but it’s pretty easy to tell which is which. He was a great prophet and he revealed God to his people – those few who had ears to hear and eyes to see. He also revealed the future, but he did so apocalyptically. What do all his visions mean? We don’t know. Some we can speculate about, but it’s important to keep in mind that the Jews who watched his words so closely still missed their own Messiah. Things don’t always (ever?) look quite like we expect them to. It’s impossible to predict specific future conditions or to see anything more than the shape of future events – and even that is questionable as to whether we would understand what we were looking at. Prophesy is best deciphered in the rear view mirror. It is GOD Isaiah reveals. The future he only conceals even as he hints at it. (IMO, of course)
I think that the God we see in Isaiah is a God who is willing to do ANYTHING to save those He loves; first the Jews, and after that, the nations (gentiles).
“Punitive correction”. Isn’t that an oxymoron?
Doesn’t “punitive” refer to inflicting a penalty for breaking the rules? The word doesn’t imply correction.
Correction isn’t punitive; it’s restorative; it’s remedial.