Thanks, Cindy. And, yes, redhotmagma, I am very interested to hear about the ages if you have time to go into it.
Besides Ferwerda’s clear presentation of the basic idea of universalism (which I found very helpful), I took away the realization that we Christians really ought to know a LOT more about what the Jewish people of Jesus’s time thought. I am wondering why that hasn’t occurred to me before. 
Kelli Kae,
Many good questions! Amy’s told you my pilgrimage. You ask, Is Paul saying God cuts off Israel to show mercy to the Gentiles? This is how it sounds to me: He seems to argue that God is working out his purpose even in history’s ugly turns, and that even the negative stuff (like “cutting off” or ‘hardening’) is consistent with achieving his purpose of having mercy upon all (11:32). You say, he seems to argue God will save “not all of Israel.” But since he concludes in 11:26 with the outcome, “so all Israel will be saved,” despite debate about who this means, my bias is that any interpretation that Paul doesn’t expect all of Israel to be saved bears the burden of explaining what it is that causes his concluding doxology.
Grace be with you,
Bob
Kelli:
I was a Christian Universalist just waiting to happen! A little over two years ago I was faced with the need to finally decide where I stood on salvation and damnation. I had never really accepted that a good God would condemn people to hell, but that was what I was being told by respected believers. Fortunately, with the power of the internet, I was quickly able to do my own research. One of my main sources was Tentmaker Ministries - - - what a fantastic resource! It did not take long for my eyes to be opened to the long list of scripture passages that tell of God’s redeeming love for everyone. I also came to understand that nothing in the original languages should ever have been translated as hell!
Last week my mother died. She was 90, and had lived a long life of service to everyone she knew. In another week I will be giving her eulogy at her funeral. She was not a believing christian, and specifically asked not to have a religious service. Some of my christian friends asked if she “had faith” or “believed in Christ”? I have had some interesting conversations, having to confess to being a heretic! I believe that Christ paid the penalty for everyone’s sin, not just for those who who are granted faith during their period of life on earth.
Thanks for reading this!
Carrots
Dear Carrots,
I am sorry to hear about your mother. Your confidence that she will be well and that “all shall be well” encourages me and adds to my own hope.
I am very interested to know how people respond to your “heresy”. I have ventured to tell a few people of my explorations into universalism. Some friends are quite worried about me and respond by sending books. = ) I wonder what they would think if they gave EU just a smidgen of a hearing. There are also friends who acknowledge that it is a subject on which we need to have an open conversation. Nothing we believe should be untouchable and out of bounds for discussion.
Has anyone read Francis Chan’s book on Hell? I feel that I should give the other side a hearing, though truthfully I have been giving them the full benefit of doubt on this subject for my entire Christian life.
Again, Carrots, I’m sorry for your great loss. I pray that you will be comforted as you grieve.
Kelli
Good morning Kelli and Happy New Year! I was raised in a church where one could say, “I don’t know sure I’m saved, but I’m pretty sure you’re not!” There was little if any sense of security in Christ. Salvation was understood completely as getting into heaven someday, avoiding hell. So for me to come to be confident in Jesus for the salvation of all, UR, was a huge change for me that took many years and many revelations and changes. The first change was coming to believe and experience the very present reality of the kingdom and power of God (baptism with the Holy Spirit). 2nd reality was that the scripture not only affirms that God loves everyone, but that God is in control (elects, chooses, etc.) and salvation is completely a work of God in our hearts raising us from being spiritually dead, liberation for slaves of unrighteousness. I came to accept that salvation was something beyond my understanding, that both God chooses us and we choose the Lord in salvation, an acceptance that many followers of Jesus are my brother, though they understand scripture radically different than I do.
Then about 4 years ago someone asked me what I thought of a pastor who had gone off the deep end and embraced UR. This launched me into a study of UR, particually passages like Rom.5.18 and Col.1.20. I assumed that a contextual study of these passages would affirm that all doesn’t mean all, but that all means some and is speaking either poetically or hyperbolically. The more I studied them though, the more they seemed to mean all. So I figured I’d better study the passages on Hell to reaffirm my traditional infernalist beliefs. I started the study of Hell assuming it was an undenyable rock solid castle only to find that as I examined it, it crumbled between my fingers like sand. The more I studied what scripture affirms concerning the punishment and judgment of sin, the more I came to disbelieve in Hell and have hope in Jesus for all, over a year of study.
And then one day while singing at church, the Lord spoke to me and said, “Stop Lying!” I understood that He wanted me to stop lying to myself and others saying that I was only “studying” UR, and admit to myself and others that I had come to “believe” UR. So I now openly share that I am a convinced Christian universalist.
Thanks for sharing that, Sherman.
Hi Kelli, concerning election, note that election is typically presented as being for the blessing/inclusion of others. Israel was chosen to bring Jesus into the world as a blessing to all. And now Israel was “hardend” so that the rest of the world could be blessed with the gospel busting through cultural lines. God works in the lives of people, even hardening the hearts of some, so that all can be blessed and delivered. For example, Pharoah’s heart was hardened so that the Israelites and Egyptians could be delivered from slavery. If Pharoah’s heart had not been hardened, it’s likely that the Israelites would still be in Egypt, prefering the relative “safety” and comfort of the status quo of being in slavery in Egypt to the uncertainty and constant challenges and responsibility of freedom! On the side of Egypt, slavery was racking up some serious sin-debt issues. Mistreating others under their power and authority was resulting in the destruction of their lives and culture. God works in and outside of history to bless/heal/save all, to expand the reign of His Kingdom to include all. He set this all up to reveal to all that love never gives up; it never fails!
Hi Kelli
You’ve got some great responses here. Briefly a couple of thoughts from me:
I was raised an orthodox Arminian evangelical. Left the church in my teens, was ‘converted’ later in my teens, again to orthodox Arminian evangelicalism. With which I proceeded to have an on-off relationship for the next 25 years. Never was I remotely comfortable with the idea of hell other than as the self-chosen eternal destiny of those who want a life without God in it. Sort of like that depicted in The Great Divorce by CS Lewis. But even that I accepted only with the greatest reluctance.
Then my best mate, an avowed life-long atheist but a very good man, died suddenly. This was the catalyst for me to begin exploring EU, which I had always dismissed - or been told to dismiss - as wishful thinking. I can’t remember now which came first, George MacDonald or Tom Talbott, but it was those two whose writings first opened my eyes to the ‘hidden treasure’ of scripture. And as soon as they did it was truly a road to Damascus moment. My whole view of God, Christianity, the Bible was changed forever. EU was the key that fitted perfectly into the lock of my heart and liberated me from fear and the oppression of ‘religion’. Within a few months I devoured every book, every Internet article on EU I could find. And everything I read confirmed what my heart had been trying to tell me all along.
For me, the truth of EU is as clear as an azure sky of deepest summer. It is incontrovertible! It MUST be true, because God IS love. And as others have said here, I find it impossible to believe that God is less loving, less merciful than my own dear Mum and Dad.
As for Piper and his miserable reformed theology, well I’ve put the boot into him and it quite enough on this forum. I’ll just say for now that his God may be ‘holy’ and ‘just’ but he is not the God reflected in the face of Jesus, and even if he were the only god on the market I wouldn’t believe in him, far less worship him.
Keep ploughing away at Talbott if you can. He’s my hero 
.
Peace and love to you
Johnny
i think i was always a hopeful universalist at heart. i didn’t know it was an “option”, though, til i read Parry’s TEU.
i had previously been amazed by such verses as “God does not will that any should perish”, and thought if God doesn’t get what He wants, something is wrong in the world.
i had at least started to wonder, theologically, if hell would be only barely populated…
and then i met some lovely Christadelphians who had pretty darn good reasoning against the doctrine of hell at all, one of their more convincing arguments IMO, so i went through a couple years of being an annihilationist…but when i found out that universal reconciliation was actually a viable option, i cautiously and then eagerly grabbed hold.
my view of God is much better as a result! He gets to be omnipotent/scient AND omnibenevolent as well…so all Scripture is satisfied.
Or put it to good use after burying it. 
(Calvs, including Piper, do have important emphases–I wouldn’t be a Christian universalist now if I didn’t agree with them on some points where Arminians, as I once was, tend to be weak. And the other way around, too. 
)
I just realized I’ve been busy elsewhere and never got around to contributing to this thread. Sorry. 
Kelli,
Back in late 99, early 2000, I was working on a project to see how far I could take C. S. Lewis’ methodologies (upgrading his Miracles: A Preliminary Study, in effect) in producing an in-depth straight-line metaphysical argument: I figured I could get to supernaturalistic theism, and some of the things he had written indicated I could get to binitarian theism, maybe, but I wanted to test that out. (In my first draft I didn’t actually arrive at trinitarian theism although I positively discussed it for acceptance. I figured out several years later how to arrive there along the grounds I had marked out.)
When I started, in late 99, I was entirely ignorant of Christian universalism, and dismissed “universalism” at all as meaning philosophical pluralism, the notion that all ideas are equally true. I did believe in post-mortem evangelism, thanks to studying Lewis, but didn’t think there was much in the scriptures on that topic (and what little I thought was there, I regarded as vaguely hopeful at best). I also noticed that Lewis himself thought St. Paul wrote as though universalism was true!–and I knew of a few places (which I recognize today as standard scriptural evidences) which would give that impression, although like Lewis I thought the rest of scripture, especially Jesus’ testimony, was quite ironclad against it. I also knew from The Great Divorce that Lewis’ own teacher, George MacDonald, had written as though he was a universalist, although Lewis presented/interpreted him as being a post-mortem salvation annihilationist (like Lewis!) who at best was a theoretically hopeful universalist. I hadn’t actually read MacD at that point, so I didn’t know that Lewis had quite reversed MacD’s real position: strongly assured Christian universalist who theoretically would accept annihilation as the most rational option otherwise (but who was sure anni wasn’t true).
By the time I finished the first draft of Section Two (built largely on an update of Lewis’ theistic Argument from Reason), I was already preplanning how to connect the results to the hints Lewis had left pointing to a connection between trinitarian (or at least binitarian) theism and the doctrine that God is love–which, keep in mind, was a main reason why I was working on the project at all. (The other reason was to expand Lewis’ arguments and reshuffle them around to a logically superior order of progression.) A side benefit of doing this was that it helped plug a hole Lewis had inadvertently left in his argument, regarding some technical matters I won’t bore you with here. (You can download a free copy of the 3rd edition of the text following the hyperlink in my signature, and be bored with it there. 
)
But an unexpected side-effect was that I came to see, as a corollary to bi/trinitarian theism and its uniquely strong connections to moral justification, that if orthodox trinitarian theism was true (or even binitarian theism, but even moreso if ortho-trin was true), then I should expect God to originally and persistently act toward saving all sinners from sin, and not to quit until when-if-ever He got it done, however long it took. Nor would or could He ever be outright defeated on this goal.
Around the time I finished the first draft of that book, I was astonished enough at the results that I thought I would use the results as an excuse to finally get around to reading MacDonald, particularly his theological work. You can imagine the results of that.
By late spring early summer of 2000, I was provisionally convinced Christian universalism must be true (although I don’t know if I already knew to call it that) if trinitarian theism was true (which I was even more convinced about of course), on the metaphysical side of things, but I didn’t think the scriptural testimony quite added up to that. What I did think (and still do) was that a technical loophole might resolve the problem: I hadn’t arrived at a conclusion that God certainly would succeed, although I had concluded we ought to bet on His omni-competence at least, only that He wouldn’t stop acting toward that goal. Theoretically any number of sinners might just always refuse to repent, leading to an eternally active stalemate: they don’t give up but God doesn’t give up on them either–it would still be God’s nature to keep on acting toward that goal even if from His omniscient standpoint He could see them never giving up.
In other words, technically Christian universalism would still be true (because soteriology ought to be classified according to what God does or doesn’t do, not primarily on what sinners do or don’t do), but practically some kind of Arminianism would also be true.
I thought this would resolve everything quite well: I didn’t have to deny some doctrine of coherent trinitarian theism; it explained why (I had found) ortho-trin added up to Christian universalism; it explained why the scriptures sometimes seemed to teach Christian universalism (because God revealed what He was doing on His side of things) and yet also seemed to teach that some people would after all never be saved from their sins (because God was revealing that result from sinners’ side of things). It also, incidentally, explained why Lewis reached his various conclusions.
Over the next several years I slowly studied the topic, taking my time before I said anything further in public (also generally working on other apologetic topics): I didn’t want to engage in irresponsible scriptural exegetics. By 2006 or 2007, I was publicly defending Christian universalism based on some scriptural arguments as well as from trinitarian metaphysics. (I know I was publicly identifying by then because I included the information in author promo material for my novel.)
That caught the attention of the Gene and James (and Bob, Gene’s father-in-law), creators of the forum, who were looking for guest authors to work here, and in fall 2008 they invited me to do so. I’ve been refining the scriptural arguments, from personal study and from help here provided by other forum members, ever since.
The end, except I hope not.
I’m curious about the connection between trinitarian theism and God acting persistently toward saving all sinners. Is this something your write about in your book? Is the argument laid out here somewhere on the forum?
You also wrote that scripture
Were these primarily verses that seemed to talk about hell and/or God’s wrath?
Thanks for responding, Jason.
Johnny,
It hurts to hear about your loss. I know you told me about this in a PM, but let me say again how sorry I am. My best friend is a rock for me. Losing her would be hardly bearable.
My favorite imaginative picture of heaven is C.S. Lewis’s vision in The Great Divorce. It is his vision that helped me to realize that God’s plan is more than just to erase our sin. We are finally going to be who He created us to be. I can’t wait to see Hannah in all her glory–solid and and shining and radiant with joy. I know you must look forward to the day when you will see your friend like that.
Kelli
Ya, it is a great thread. This is also a reminder of what we all do have in common. I think Hannah will be surprised how many people will want to hug her, and how loved she will be. The hug from her savior will be your forever moment kellikae.
For me, perhaps the most wonderful moment of my life was when I was reading ‘All in all’ in the bathtub. It was like God was putting me in the most relaxing setting, to just tenderly explain his grace to me.
The thought that there is an overall meaning and purpose to our lives, and that all will be saved and reconciled, brought me so much peace. I just wish I had lived the truth more faithfully and had shared it with more people.
Hi Kelli
Thank you for your post. I’ve had a bit of a discouraging day today, and reading your post gave me a real boost, a thrill of - well, joy. I think you’re absolutely right. I think Lewis was right. You will be reunited with Hannah as she is in your best and most loving memories, only gloriously more so. And I too with Gareth.
Love
Johnny
PS I think I may have seen it somewhere here before, but I’d really like to read again Jason’s view of how trinitarianism entails universalism
PPS Lovely post Puddy
Absolutely. Make some great compost.
I also believe in irresistible grace, divine election, unmerited favor, and God’s unbending sovereignty. I believe God has mercy on whom he has mercy, and that he hardened Pharaoh’s heart. (If he didn’t harden his heart, Israel would not have come into being. No Israel, no Christ. No Christ, no salvation for anyone, including Pharaoh.)
Where would I be without all of you? You guys (in the gender neutral sense ) are great!
Puddy, it is so good to hear from you. And I agree with Johnny that your post is lovely. Maybe we can work together on turning our regrets into future action. I wish I had had more grace and hope in my heart to offer Hannah. My boys still need that. My oldest son graduates from college on Sunday. He is a believer, but I hope to talk to him about universalism soon.
By the way, you are living faithfully when you share your thoughts here on the forum. I think that a big part of any Christian’s work is to encourage other believers.
AllanS–I just keep wondering if rotten eggs will really help my roses smell sweeter. My father in law, while kindly helping to clean my front beds, accidentally chopped off my one remaining rose. It is a rambler and does look like a bit weedy in the fall, unless you know what rose leaves look like. The only rose I’ve successfully grown in our shady garden is the Zephirine Drouhin. So, I will be planting one or two this spring. Maybe I’ll set some eggs out to rot for the occasion.
Johnny: A long distance hug to you. I hope you are feeling better today.
Blessings to all,
Kelli
Yes, in various levels of detail. The hyperlink to SttH in my signature below goes to a transcription of the 3rd edition of the book which I’ve posted publicly here on the forum (both in bite-sized chunks and in a full text), but that’s much more of a main course in tons of metaphysical topics–the closest I could point you toward might be chapter 37 onwards.
For a couple of threads here on the forum discussing the theory (pro and con), you can try
Two formal arguments: universalism with trinitarian theology – particularly the first entry
Explaining how the Trinity leads to Universalism to a 10yo (not my thread title choice – I immediately joked, regarding the request, that this would necessarily require explaining the Trinity to a 10 year old first!)
Trinitarian Theism leads to Universalism? (Or not?) – more commentary
Sorry, had to leave and do something else for a while.
But the answer is yes.
Hi Kelli,
Romans 9 does not exist in a vacuum. It’s wise never to forget that Paul’s epistles are regular letters to regular people. To merely grab a passage here or there is, at least usually, to miss the meaning almost entirely. Romans 9 is an integral part of a larger argument Paul is making about why so many Jewish people were not then believing the Gospel that had been brought to them first. He was not talking about their eternal destinies, as he makes abundantly clear soon after in Romans 11. He concludes that chapter with such obvious and profound joy because while their hearts are temporarily hardened, they will not be so when God’s purposes are finally fulfilled.
And make no mistake; election and salvation are two distinct things. Cindy is correct that the elect are to be a blessing to the rest of humanity. But it’s more profound than just that, I believe. As Paul explains so clearly in Ephesians 1, election is a part of God’s purpose, not the purpose itself. The purpose is the reconciliation of all things… most certainly including the non-elect… to God in Jesus Christ. In 2nd Corinthians 5, Paul adds that the elect are chosen to be ministers of that reconciliation, a ministry that will not end until it has accomplished God’s purpose.
Andy
P.S. To be brief, what ultimately persuaded me was how so much of the Bible literally shouts out the steadfast and determined purpose of God to rescue a broken world that was and is incapable of rescuing itself. There are a lot of good proof texts for the UR position, arguably even more than for traditional doctrines, but proof-texting is inconclusive, at best, imo. Rather, it is what many call the “meta-narrative” of the Bible from Genesis to Revelation that reveals a God who truly is love incarnate and is ultimately personified by Jesus Christ, who gave Himself a ransom for all.
My journey to Evangelical Universalism started when my 5 year old daughter challenged me with the classic
question, after our regular bed time bible reading. One of the blessings of children, is that I find it impossible to tell them I believe something I in my heart am not sure of. I started parroting the standard evangelical response and then stopped myself and said inwardly
This was in 2007. I thank God for the internet as it made so much information available for me to consider the various arguments about Hell and everlasting judgement.
But what persuaded me was the clear teaching of scripture.