Universalism: A Few Thoughts

Rob Bell's new book, which I have not read, has created a firestorm of criticism about universalism.  In a nutshell, universalism is the belief that everyone, sooner or later, ends up in heaven: in eternity, there is no hell.

Bell's proposition is that a loving God could not send people he created to eternal death.  This is a nice, warm and fuzzy idea that Bell apparently thinks will help people who are turned off on Christianity based on the idea of hell.  If Bell is correct and there is no eternal hell, then we are all in good shape.  But if he is wrong... Well, then this is a very dangerous idea.

Why dangerous?
Universalism is dangerous because people are not forced to consider the afterlife.  If everyone ends up in heaven, why bother with religion?  Any Religion?  The fear element is eliminated.  I suspect this is Bell's point.  People shouldn't be scared straight, seems to be his beef.  The problem is that ignoring a danger does not make it less dangerous.  Instead, it is more dangerous.

Universalism is a dangerous idea because it removes the incentive to follow the rules.  In a Christian context, there ceases to be much need to stick to God's rules.  In a societal context, why bother to follow the rules if eternal life is promised regardless?  Why bother to clean up my obvious sins (drug use, promiscuity, fighting, pornography etc) if God is going to ignore them anyway?

The Problems with Universalism
The problems I see with universalism vary between Biblical concepts, (what I hope is) logic with a dash of common sense and observation of how our world works.

Genesis 3
First, in Genesis 3, Adam and Eve sin by disobeying God.  In Genesis 3:22, God drives the couple from the garden, commenting that Adam and Eve must not eat from the Tree of Life and live forever.  A cherubim guards the Tree of Life with a flashing sword.

So, God goes to all this trouble, pronouncing a curse on humanity and enlisting a cherubim to guard the Tree of Life, just so that eventually he can say, "Just kidding, Welcome to Eternal Life!"?

The Commandments
Fast forward a few hundred years.  God has brought Abraham's now large family out of Egypt by showing his power to Pharaoh and his hard heart.  The Israelites, led by Moses, encamp at the foot of the mountain. Moses goes onto the mountain to talk with God and eventually returns with the Ten Commandments.  We still joke that these are the "Commandments" not "Suggestions."  But what is their purpose if God has no intention of making us accountable for them?

I posit that we are accountable to God (and each other) for these Commandments.

Human experience should clue us in then that commandments mean something.  If someone more powerful than you tells you to do something, you better do it or there will be consequences.  The same thing happens if they tell you NOT to do something, as there are then consequences for doing it anyway.  This has held true throughout human history.  The Roman Emperors were likely to have you killed for ignoring their decrees.  Parents demand obedience from their kids throughout time.  Bosses rule over employees.

But apparently, God, the Creator, has no bite to his commands.  They are merely optional under universalism.

Moral Codes
If you look at people groups and their social rules, remarkable similarities appear.  We, as a creature, seem to have some universal ideas of good and bad imbedded in our souls.  We may apply them to different people like our families and friends versus "others." But they exist.  We also have ideas of the afterlife which span across cultures.  How does this come about unless there is someone or something setting that agenda?

These cultures seem to have ideas that some people are out of heaven and others are in.  How do we get that idea, if there isn't some overriding narrative and narrator?

Prophets
I've recently been reading the prophets.  By and large, those prophets seem to be rather judgmental fellows.  They are constantly promising doom and destruction on Israel, Judah and the surrounding countries for failing to follow God's laws.

History tells us that God was not kidding around about his judgment.  He sent his Promised People into death, slavery and destruction on multiple occasions to prove that he was serious about those rules.

But, apparently God really didn't mean it if universalism is true, because everyone, even the truly evil, will end up in heaven.  The miracles of fulfilled prophecy are just coincidences that we should gloss over.


Christ
When a man shows up on the scene who fulfills God's law down to the last letter, he's killed by the rest of us.  Under universalism, this death has little meaning, because everyone ends up in heaven anyway.

Now, some universalists will say that Jesus is the way God saves everyone.  If God is the one who designed this process, then why bother with Christ?  Can't he just erase the sin?  Can't he just nullify the verdict that we are guilty?  Why does a blood sacrifice need to be made?

One of the problems with universalism that I see is that God is powerless. He sets up a system, then cannot enforce consequences for disobedience.

Universalism guts John 3:16: because belief in Christ is not essential to eternal life.

Free Will
I don't understand how free will can operate under universalism.  How is there a meaningful choice?  If I can order whatever I want at a restaurant, but always get served fried chicken, I really had no choice in what I was ordering. Under Universalism,  whatever you pick, you go to heaven.

Revelation
The book of Revelation can be interpreted in different ways.  Those ways can be contradictory or confusing.  However, it mentions some severe punishments for those who are not in God's camp.  Under universalism, these punishments must be an illusion or untrue.

Suffering
One problem universalists have that leads them to believe God saves everyone is how a loving God can send people into eternal suffering.  But that seems to ignore God's perspective.  Must God be the one who suffers the indignity of having his rules broken over and over again with no redress?  At what point does God's love require that his holiness be defended?  If his obedient servants are assaulted, beaten and killed, does he have to grant mercy to their tormentors?  Does he have to save his enemy?


While I see the allure of universalism, it simply does not make sense in the context of the Bible, reality as we know it and it violates the character of God more than it affirms it.

As I am not an authority, here are some links to what others are saying about hell, Rob Bell and universalism:

The Resurgence by Mark Driscoll
Book Review of the book stirring the controversy by Kevin De Young
Blog post by Albert Mohler