The Bible is quite explicit that we are all born with an inherent tendency to sin. How ridiculous, then, to believe the lie that we are condemned to eternal death purely because we do what comes entirely naturally to us. The wages of sin is death, but that is spiritual death – a state we're all in, and from which we can and will be rescued by Christ's atoning sacrifice on the cross. But none of us will ever be abandoned to everlasting physical death, annihilation or torment.

I was brought up as an evangelical Christian, and always believed the Bible taught the doctrine of hell as everlasting punishment and separation from God. It doesn't, simple as that. Those who oppose Univeralism are, like the Pharisees, simply blinding themselves to the truth – often, and this is so very sad, because they feel that it's not right that they, being "Christians" who "deserve" the reward of Heaven (thanks to their own cleverness in choosing to believe), should have to end up sharing it with the unbelieving masses. In their theology, the rest of the world can go hang. Hmmm.

Petite-bunni's statement that "to say that ALL will go to Heaven regardless of what they have done, all that they have said AGAINST Christ and Christians is only to belittle what Jesus did for us" betrays her complete misunderstanding of the gospel of grace. The whole point of the thing, the very crux of what Christianity ought to be about, is that God loves EVERBODY unconditionally – ie His redeeming love for us is in no way contingent on any response we may or may not make to it. Surely that's the underlying truth behind all those verses in the Bible that emphasise how we should love and forgive those who wrong us – just as God does.

Of course, "bad" people will be healed of their badness – either in this life or the life to come, just as those of us who accept Christ in those lifetime have begun to be healed.

And why are the anti UR brigade so hung up on the idea that salvation is salvation from death or hell. There's nothing in the Bible that truly supports that interpretation. Jesus came to save us from our sins.

You're most welcome Tom. Thanks for your comments.

To the other commentators: one thing I find in every single blog or comments section of news articles that I read is the back and forth bickering that goes on. I want, as an aspiring psychologist, to introduce you to the idea of belief perseverance. This is where a person, regardless of the evidence presented to him, will interpret what is being said in light of what he already believes. There was a study done where people received the results of research on the efficacy of capital punishment in deterring crime. One set of data supported it, the other did not. These two sets of data were both shown to people who were for the death penalty and those who were against it. The result showed that people who started with the belief that capital punishment deterred crime found the evidence in favor to be overwhelming while they harshly criticized the evidence against it. The same was true of those originally against it except the other way around. When the study was done again, this time with the strong urging to be unbiased and objective, the results were exactly the same. This study shows that once we've made up our minds about something, we're unlikely to change what we think. Even reading evidence against our position tends to reinforce our original belief. So how do we challenge ourselves to be more objective and fair? Simple: explain the opposite position. Try and imagine how the other side could be right and seek evidence to support it. This strategy tends to reduce our belief perseverance and make us realize that the other side has intelligent reasons for believing what they believe and are not just being deceived by their wicked, unbelieving heart. Besides, if that were true, how do we know that YOU are not the one deceived by YOUR own wicked heart? I think the question makes the point. We need to listen to other people, try to get an accurate understanding of what they believe (instead of the straw man arguments often proposed – especially on this particular debate of Universalism), and try to imagine how it could be that they might be right. For me, this has created humility and an appreciaton for diversity in the body of Christ and has helped me stop accusing other people of "seeing what they want to see" when in fact I may be the one who is doing it myself.

Blessings,
Tom

I've read a few articles of UR on this blogger's site, and they're enough for me. I'm sorry to say this, but it sounds just like the "Calvinist propaganda" that you try to fight against, the only difference is that you're on the whole other end of the spectrum.

petite-bunni, to repeat what I said to Ben, read the articles on the subject (the link is at the top right of every page on this site) to understand why we believe what we do.