Just how long is ‘eternal’? A study on the meanings of Αιων and Αιωνιος (part 2 of 5)

Part 1: https://thechristianuniversalist.blogspot.com/2022/07/just-how-long-is-eternal-study-on.html

    The Wisdom Literature (Job - Ecclesiastes)

There is only one instance of olam in Job that suits our purposes, and that is in Job 41:4, where a rhetorical question is asked of whether it is possible to take the Leviathan as an olam servant (LXX: δουλον αιωνιον). The implied answer to the question is “no,” however, it is important to note that “everlasting” is not a possible meaning of olam in this context. Rather, for the Leviathan to be an olam servant would simply mean that it is a servant for as long as it will live (cf. Exod. 21:6; Lev. 25:46; Deut. 15:17).

    The book of Psalms uses the word olam far more than any other book of the Old Testament. In this book, there are many instances of this word where it cannot refer to a time period without end. See the following categories of examples:

Preservation of life of the righteous: 12:7; 15:5; 21:4; 37:27; 55:22; 61:7; 112:6; 121:8 (even though the righteous, including David, did eventually die)

Individuals worshipping God: 5:11; 30:12; 52:9; 75:9; 86:12; 89:1; 115:18 (even though David repeatedly writes that once one dies, they can no longer worship God; Psa. 6:4-5; 30:8-10; 88:9-12; 115:17)

Blessing of the righteous: 28:9; 45:2 (even though the righteous, including David, did experience adversity and eventually died)

The throne of the king: 45:6 (clearly meaning only as long as the king’s reign)

The prosperity of the ungodly: 73:12 (even though they are immediately afterward said to be ruined and destroyed!!)

The earth: 78:69; 104:5 (even though this earth will be destroyed; Isa. 65:17; 2 Pet. 3:10; Rev. 21:1)

The Abrahamic covenant: 105:10

The keeping of the Mosaic Law: 119:44, 93, 98, 111-112, 142, 144, 152, 160 (even though the Law will pass away when the current heavens and earth pass away; Matt. 5:18 cf. Rev. 21:1)

Mount Zion: 125:1-2 (even though this earth, including Mount Zion, will be destroyed)

Clearly, the author of the book of Psalms did not see the word olam as representing a strictly everlasting period of time, but instead an indefinitely long period of time: from a single human lifespan to the length of existence of the earth.

    There are no notable occurrences of the word olam in the book of Proverbs that add to what has already been discussed.

    The author of Ecclesiastes writes that the earth itself shall abide “for olam” (LXX: εις τον αιωνα, “for the age”; 1:4), even though the earth will itself eventually be destroyed and replaced by a New Earth (2 Pet. 3:10; Rev. 21:1). He also says that neither the wise nor the fool will be remembered olam (LXX: εις αιωνα, “for an age”) after their deaths (2:16), that no one who has died will ever again be under the sun “for olam” (LXX: εις αιωνα, “for an age”; 9:6), and that the grave is the olam dwelling (LXX: οικον αιωνος; 12:5) of humanity — none of which can be describing an infinite time period without end in light of the doctrine of the resurrection, which was understood even before Ecclesiastes was written (1 Sam. 2:6; Job 19:25-27; Ps. 16:9-10; 17:15).

    Overall, the usage of the word olam (and its equivalents αιων and αιωνιος in the LXX) throughout the wisdom literature of the Old Testament parallels its usage in the Pentateuch and historical books which we have already covered. This word was understood to refer to an indefinitely long time period, from a single human lifespan, to the period between death and the resurrection, to the existence of the earth itself. However, this word was not used to describe a period of time that is strictly without end.

    The Major and Minor Prophets (Isaiah - Malachi)

The book of Isaiah contains some of the clearest examples of olam as an indefinitely long, although not everlasting, period of time. Isa. 24:5 states that certain people have broken the “olam covenant” (LXX: διαθηκην αιωνιον). Isa. 32:14-15 states that the city of Jerusalem shall remain abandoned and forsaken “even olam” (LXX: εως του αιωνος, “unto the age”), meaning “until the spirit is poured on us from on high.” Isa. 58:12 and 61:4 state that the “olam wastes” (LXX: ερημοι αιωνιοι) will be built again. Clearly, none of these examples of olam can refer to a period of time that is without end, since in all four cases, the period is explicitly said to have an end.

    Isa. 9:7 states that the throne of a coming king will be established “from now on and even olam” (LXX: απο του νυν και εις τον αιωνα χρονον, “from now and for the age-time”). Many scholars believe that this passage was originally written about Hezekiah (though it finds secondary fulfillment in Jesus), in which case olam can only refer to that king’s lifespan. Isa. 34:10 states that the smoke from Edom’s destruction will go up olam (LXX: εις τον αιωνα χρονον, “for the age-time”); since the smoke is no longer going up, this is clearly hyperbolic language referring to the extent of the destruction that will occur, and not to an everlasting period.

    The next major prophet, Jeremiah, writes that the fire of Yahweh’s anger will burn olam against Israel (17:4), even though God later said that His anger would cease (30:24) and that He would again show olam mercy and love to Israel (31:3; 33:11). This is a common theme throughout the book of Jeremiah: we are repeatedly told that Israel will be an olam (LXX: αιωνιος) desolation and reproach (18:16; 20:11; 23:40; 25:9), and yet the duration of their punishment is also explicitly stated to be only seventy years, even just a few verses later (25:11-12; 29:10). [1] It is also repeatedly promised that Babylon will be an olam (LXX: εις τον αιωνα, “for the age”; and αιωνιος) desolation (51:26, 39, 57, 62), even though it again flourished under Hellenic rule just two centuries later.

    According to Ezekiel 35:5, 9, because Edom had “olam enmity” (LXX: εχθραν αιωνιαν) against Israel, they would be made an “olam desolation” (LXX: ερημιαν αιωνιον); neither of these were without beginning, nor without end, for Edom did not always exist and is now again a populated country. Ezek. 36:2 says that the enemies of Israel had taken over the “olam high places” (LXX: ερημα αιωνια). Were these high places literally everlasting? Obviously not, but they had existed for a rather long time and would go on to exist as places of pagan worship for even longer; olam here is taken to mean an indefinitely long period. Ezek. 46:14 speaks of an offering to be made at the temple during the Messianic age as an “olam statute,” although there will no longer be a temple after the Messianic age (Rev. 21:22), and so in this case olam can refer to a period no longer than the 1000 years of that age (Rev. 20:4-6).

    One of the most interesting usages of olam in the Old Testament is found in the book of Jonah. According to Jon. 2:6, Jonah was dead inside of the whale “for olam.” The LXX has an alternate reading here which states that “αιωνιοι barriers” surrounded Jonah. In both of these cases, neither olam nor αιωνιος can refer to something that is truly everlasting, because Jonah was only dead inside of the whale for three days and nights (!!), according to Jon. 1:17. Apparently, both olam and αιωνιος can refer to a period as short as three days.

    According to Habakkuk 3:6, the “olam hills” (LXX: βουνοι αιωνιοι) will be destroyed by God. Clearly, in this context olam cannot refer to something that is without end, because the hills are explicitly said to have an end. Finally, the last example of olam referring to something temporal can be found in the characterization of Edom’s desolation as olam (LXX: εις τον αιωνα, “for the age”; and εως αιωνος, “unto an age”) in Obad. 1:10 and Mal. 1:4. Since the territory of Edom was eventually repopulated, this cannot refer to a time period that is without end.

    The Olam God

Now that we have looked at fully 172 of the instances of olam in the Old Testament, and their equivalent Greek phrases in the LXX (where it is mostly rendered as εως αιωνος, εις τον αιωνα, or αιωνιος), we can determine what these words meant to the writers of the Hebrew Bible and the translators of the LXX. Overall, they seem to have been used to describe indefinitely long periods of time, but not usually periods of time without end. It was used in reference to the length of a king’s reign, human lifespans, periods of multiple generations, the duration of the earth, and even (in one case) a period of three days.

    However, some argue that because the word olam is applied to God throughout the Old Testament, and God is everlasting, the word olam must mean “everlasting” in each and every instance. This word is used variously to describe God Himself (Gen. 21:33; Ps. 9:7; 93:2; 102:12; Isa. 40:28; Lam. 5:19; Dan. 4:34), God’s name (Exod. 3:15; 1 Chron. 17:24; Ps. 72:19; 135:13; Isa. 63:12, 16), God’s reign as king (Ps. 29:10; 92:8; 146:10; Jer. 10:10), God’s mercy (1 Chron. 16:34, 41; 2 Chron. 5:13; 7:3, 6; 20:21; Ps. 89:2, 28; 100:5; 106:1; 107:1; 118:1-4, 29; 136; 138:8; Isa. 54:8; Jer. 33:11), and various other attributes of God (Deut. 32:40; 33:27; Ps. 33:11; 104:31; 119:89; Isa. 26:4; 40:8; Hab. 3:6).

    The argument that, because God is described as olam, this word must always mean “everlasting,” is very obviously fallacious. We have shown that olam refers to an indefinitely long period, which does include (but is not, by any means, limited to) an everlasting period of time; the existence of God, being eternal, always stretches indefinitely into the future, and so can rightly be described as olam. Furthermore, if we took this word to always mean an everlasting period of time, this would create a contradiction in each of the one hundred and seventy-two examples of non-everlasting olam listed above.

    However, even though this is not necessary for our argument that olam always refers to an indefinitely long period of time, I believe that it can be shown that olam actually never refers to an everlasting period of time, even in the several dozen instances where it is applied to God Himself. This is because there are multiple instances where God is described as not only olam, but le’olam wa’ed - “for olam and further.” See the following examples:

Yahweh shall reign for olam and further. [LXX: τον αιωνα και επ αιωνα και ετι, “for age upon age and further”] (Exod. 15:18)

Blessed be Yahweh, God of Israel, from the olam to the olam. [LXX: απο του αιωνος και εως του αιωνος, “from the age and unto the age”] (1 Chron. 16:36)

“Blessed are You, Yahweh God of Israel, our Father, from the olam to the olam.” [LXX: απο του αιωνος και εως του αιωνος, “from the age and unto the age”] (1 Chron. 29:10)

“Bless Yahweh, your God, from the olam to the olam.” [LXX: απο του αιωνος και εως του αιωνος, “from the age and unto the age”] (Neh. 9:5)

Yahweh is King for olam and further. [LXX: εις τον αιωνα και εις τον αιωνα του αιωνος, “for the age and for the age of the age”] (Ps. 10:16)

Blessed be Yahweh, God of Israel, from the olam to the olam. [LXX: απο του αιωνος και εις τον αιωνα, “from the age and for the age”] (Ps. 41:13)

For this is God, our God, for olam and further. [LXX: εις τον αιωνα και εις τον αιωνα του αιωνος, “for the age and for the age of the age”] (Ps. 48:14)

Even from olam to olam, You are God. [LXX: απο του αιωνος εως του αιωνος, “from the age unto the age”] (Ps. 90:2)

But the mercy of Yahweh is from olam to olam. [LXX: απο του αιωνος και εως του αιωνος, “from the age and unto the age”] (Ps. 103:17)

Blessed be Yahweh, God of Israel, from the olam to the olam. [LXX: απο του αιωνος και εως του αιωνος, “from the age and unto the age”] (Ps. 106:48)

I will bless your name for olam and further... and I will praise your name for olam and further. [LXX: εις τον αιωνα και εις τον αιωνα του αιωνος, “for the age and for the age of the age”] (Ps. 145:1-2)

My mouth shall speak the praise of Yahweh, and all flesh shall bless His name for olam and further. [LXX: εις τον αιωνα και εις τον αιωνα του αιωνος, “for the age and for the age of the age”] (Ps. 145:21)

It should be obvious that if there are multiple olams, such that God can be “from olam to olam,” and if it is possible to say “for olam and further,” then the olam itself cannot refer to an everlasting period, even when used in reference to God. The LXX reflects this fact, as the phrases εις τον αιωνα and εως του αιωνος are not enough to fully encapsulate the period of God’s existence, and therefore cannot, by themselves, refer to an eternal or everlasting period.

    But then, how can God and His attributes be described as olam, if He exists for longer than the olam? Well, if we recognize that olam refers to the current period of time in one is living, and stretches indefinitely into the past and future, then God’s characterization as olam means that He operates and works in the current olam. He is not a distant and unapproachable God, but exists as our helper in the present time.

    The answer to the question, “Does God exist for the olam?” is, “Yes, He is our olam God.” But He does not exist only for the olam — He exists for olam and further, from the olam to the olam. This is the same as the fact that Yahweh is characterized as “Lord of all the earth” (Josh. 3:11, 13) does not contradict the fact that He is also uncontained by even the highest heavens (2 Chron. 2:6).

    Summary: the use of Olam and Αιων in the Old Testament

Having examined the usage of the word olam in the Hebrew Bible, and its Greek equivalents αιων and αιωνιος in the Septuagint, we can say with certainty that these words were not understood to refer to eternity, or to an everlasting period, by either the original writers of the Old Testament or the translators of the LXX. Even when these terms are applied to God, they appear to describe His interaction with humanity in the current time, rather than His everlasting and eternal nature (which is instead contained in the phrases “for olam and further,” “from the olam to the olam”).

    Because olam, αιων, and αιωνιος were used to describe indefinitely long periods of time in the Old Testament, and not everlasting periods of time (even when applied to God), it is inconsistent to think that they would have been used as such in the New Testament. The LXX is perhaps the literary work most closely related to the NT, and even that used the phrases εις τον αιωνα, εως του αιωνος, and αιωνιος to describe periods of indefinite length rather than everlasting periods. But does this bear itself out in the text of the NT? The next part of this study will examine the usage of these terms in the NT itself.

Part 3: https://thechristianuniversalist.blogspot.com/2022/07/just-how-long-is-eternal-study-on_17.html

______________________________

[1] It is very interesting that the LXX uses the adjective αιωνιος in the book of Jeremiah to describe a seventy-year punishment, and yet when the New Testament states that the punishment of unbelievers will be αιωνιος, virtually all translators take it to mean an everlasting punishment. This certainly says something about the preconceptions which translators bring to the text.

Just how long is ‘eternal’? A study on the meanings of Αιων and Αιωνιος (part 1 of 5)

    The strong evidence from scripture for universal salvation is pushed away and ignored by most Christians on the basis of passages that characterize the punishment of unbelievers as “eternal,” especially Matthew 25:46. These passages use the Greek adjective αιωνιος, and occasionally the noun αιων, to describe the punishment of unbelievers — words which are taken by the majority of Bible translators to mean “everlasting” in these contexts. However, the evidence for universalism cannot be ignored so easily. As I demonstrated in my recent post, “Two irrefutable arguments for universal salvation,” there are not only direct statements in scripture that all people will be saved, but this fact is also a logical necessity from God’s sovereignty and love for all people (both of which are clearly established themes throughout the Bible).

    So then, if scripture appears to clearly teach both eternal punishment (whether torment or annihilation) and that all people will eventually be saved, do we have an irreconcilable contradiction? Not in the slightest. As I will attempt to show in this series of posts, contrary to the traditional understanding of αιων (pronouned ai-ohn) and αιωνιος (pronounced ai-ohn-ee-os), these words do not indicate everlastingness, but instead describe things that pertain to a time period with a set beginning and end — an “age” or “eon.” The punishment of unbelievers, whether characterized by torment or annihilation, will not last for eternity, but instead for the ages, and will eventually come to an end.

    Olam and Αιων in the Septuagint

For those who are unaware, the Septuagint (LXX) was a Koine Greek translation of the original Hebrew text of the Old Testament, produced in the third and second centuries BC. In (second Temple) Jewish and early Christian communities, the LXX was by far the most commonly used version of the Hebrew Bible, and most of the Old Testament quotations found in the New Testament and other early Christian writings are taken directly from it. For this reason, the LXX is one of the most valuable tools for examining how Greek words were used by the ancient Jewish and Christian communities, and extrapolating this usage to the New Testament.

    According to the translators of the LXX, the direct Hebrew equivalent of the Greek words αιων and αιωνιος is olam (עוֹלָם). This word comes from another word, ne’elam (נֶעֱלַם), meaning “hidden” or “concealed,” and literally refers to a time which is so far off in the past and/or future that it is effectively concealed. However, it rarely — if ever — refers to a time period that is truly without beginning and/or without end.

    Adam Clarke, a 19th-century Methodist theologian and Bible scholar, wrote in his commentary on 2 Kings 5:27 that “the import of the word לעולם leolam... takes in the whole extent or duration of the thing to which it is applied.” According to Parkhurst’s lexicon, “Olam seems to be used much more for an indefinite than for an infinite time.” In agreement with this, the Encyclopedia Dictionary of the Bible (a Catholic Bible dictionary) states:

The Bible hardly speaks of eternity in the philosophical sense of infinite duration without beginning or end. The Hebrew word olam, which is used alone [Ps. 61:8; etc.] or with various prepositions [Gn. 3:22; etc.] in contexts where it is traditionally translated as ‘forever,’ means in itself no more than ‘for an indefinitely long period.’ Thus, ‘me olam’ does not mean ‘from eternity’ but ‘of old’ [Gn. 6:4, etc.]. In the N.T. aion is used as the equivalent of olam. (p. 693)

Now that we’ve examined the basic meaning of olam according to scholarly sources, let’s take a look at all of the major uses of this word in the Old Testament, and their Greek equivalents in the LXX.

    The Pentateuch (Genesis - Deuteronomy)

The first instance of olam is in Genesis 3:22, where it is said that God sent Adam and Eve out of the Garden of Eden lest they eat from the Tree of Life and “live olam” (LXX: εις τον αιωνα, “for the age”). Although one might be tempted to translate olam in this instance as “forever,” it is important to note that the life being referred to here is actually conditioned upon eating from the Tree of Life. Therefore, it is not strictly without end, but in line with the lexicon definitions of olam, refers to an indefinite (not necessarily unending) period of time.

    Some of the next examples of olam in the Hebrew Bible are used in reference to the Abrahamic covenant. For example, in Gen. 13:15, this covenant is said to be established with Abraham and his descendants “even olam” (LXX: εως του αιωνος, “unto the age”), and five separate times in Gen. 17 it is referred to as an “olam covenant” (LXX: διαθηκην αιωνιον); again in Gen. 48:4, Jacob recounts how God told him that the land of Israel would be his “olam possession” (LXX: κατασχεσιν αιωνιον). See also Exod. 32:13 and Josh. 14:9.

    However, the Abrahamic covenant and the Israelite possession of the land did not last eternally or perpetually, as they were removed from the land several times over, even throughout the Old Testament period. Neither will it remain forever, since the land of Israel itself will only last until the end of the Messianic age, when this earth passes away and is replaced by a New Earth (Isa. 65:17; Rev. 21:1). Therefore, this usage of olam can only mean a period of time indefinite from the perspective of Abraham (although with a determined endpoint), rather than an infinite period of time that is without end.

    The next usage of olam is in Gen. 49:26, where the hills are described as olam (see also Deut. 33:15 and Hab. 3:6). The LXX renders this instance of olam as μονιμων, meaning “permanent.” However, the hills themselves will not last for a period of time that is without end — in fact, the olam (LXX: αιωνιοι) hills are said to be destroyed by the presence of Yahweh in Habakkuk 3:6. Rather, the hills, from the perspective of Jacob, will last for an indefinitely long time period.

    Throughout the rest of the Pentateuch, olam is used as an adjective to describe the statutes and feasts of the Old Covenant. For example, the Feast of Unleavened Bread is referred to as an “olam statute” (LXX: νομιμον αιωνιος) in Exod. 12:14, 17, and 24. The Levirite priesthood is repeatedly said to be olam (LXX: αιωνιος) in many passages (Exod. 27:21; 28:43; 29:9, 28; 30:21; 40:15; Lev. 16:34; 24:3, 8, 9; Num. 18:23; 19:10, 21; 25:13), and certain statutes relating to the system of sacrifice and offering are described as olam (Lev. 3:17; 6:18, 22; 7:34, 36; 10:9, 15; 17:7; 23:14, 21, 41; Num. 10:8; 15:15; 18:8, 11, 19). However, all of these were overturned with the introduction of the New Covenant and the beginning of the priesthood of Christ (Heb. 7:11-28; 8:7-13; 10:1-18). Therefore, in these cases olam absolutely cannot be understood as referring to a time period without end, but to an indefinitely long time period.

    Instead of referring to a time period without end, as it is usually translated, olam is explicitly glossed by “to your generations” multiple times throughout the Pentateuch (Exod. 12:13, 17; 27:21, 30:21; 40:15; Lev. 3:17; 6:18; 7:36; 10:7; 17:7; 23:14, 21, 41; 24:3; Num. 10:8; 15:15; 18:23), clearly referring to a time period lasting multiple — but not infinite — generations. An idiomatic translation of this might be that it will “last as long as it will last.” In fact, in one place, olam is said to be “ten generations” and no more (Deut. 23:3), and just a few verses later said to be “all your days” (Deut. 23:6), referring to a human lifespan that is clearly not infinite.

    The fact that olam can mean as little as a single human lifespan is confirmed by Exod. 21:6, Lev. 25:46, and Deut. 15:17, where it is said that a person can become someone else’s servant olam (LXX: εις τον αιωνα, “for the age”). Obviously, this does not refer to an infinitely long period of time, but only however long that servant’s life will last. This period of time is indefinitely (but not infinitely) long from the perspective of the humans involved.

    In summary, the meaning of olam (and in the LXX, αιων and its adjectival form αιωνιος) throughout the Pentateuch is not a period of time that is without end, but an indefinitely long period of time. This can refer to as little as a single human lifespan, or as long as the existence of the Abrahamic covenant, which will last from the time of Abraham until the end of the Messianic age. However, the word olam (and therefore the words αιων and αιωνιος) does not inherently carry the meaning of “without end.”

    The Historical Books (Joshua - Nehemiah)

The use of olam in the book of Joshua is largely in line with what we have already seen. In Josh. 4:7, stone set up as a memorial is said to be a memorial “even olam” (LXX: εως του αιωνος, “unto the age”), although that stone no longer remains, at the time it was set up it was meant to be a perpetual reminder to last indefinitely. The city of Ai is said to become a heap “even olam” (LXX: εις τον αιωνα, “for the age”), meaning “to this day” (Josh. 8:28).

    At Joshua 24:2, we encounter a new usage of olam. This is a past-tense olam, in which it is said that Abraham’s ancestors, Terah and Nahor, lived in Mesopotamia “from olam.” This is never used to describe events in eternity past, but instead events that occurred long enough ago so as to be out of memory. As a modern parallel, someone today might hyperbolically say that “the Civil War happened forever ago,” even though this war did not actually occur in eternity past. For further examples of this usage of olam, see Gen. 6:4; Deut. 32:7; 1 Sam. 27:8; Job 22:15; Ps. 24:7-9; 77:5; 119:52; 143:3; Prov. 8:23; 22:28; 23:10; Ecc. 1:10; Isa. 42:14; 46:9; 51:9; 63:9-11; 64:4; Jer. 5:15; Ezek. 26:20; 36:2; Amos 9:11; Mic. 5:2; and Mic. 7:14.

    In 1 Samuel 1:22, Hannah says that she will dedicate her son, Samuel, to serve Yahweh in the house of Eli “even olam” (LXX: εως αιωνος, “unto an age”), meaning “as long as he lives” (1 Sam. 1:28). We are then told that, although Yahweh promised that He would not forsake Eli’s house olam (LXX: εως αιωνος, “unto an age”), He would now destroy Eli and his descendants (1 Sam. 2:30-31). God then promises that there would be no atonement for the sins of Eli’s house olam (1 Sam. 3:13-14), although Jesus later died as a ransom for all mankind (1 Tim. 2:5-6), clearly including Eli and his descendants! Did God repeatedly flip-flop on His promises? No, because olam does not describe an infinite, unending time period, but an indefinitely long period.

    1 Sam. 13:13 says that God would establish Saul’s kingdom “even olam” (LXX: εως αιωνος, “unto an age”), which refers to, at most, Saul’s own lifespan. 1 Chron. 28:4 states that David was chosen to be king olam (LXX: εις τον αιωνα, “for the age”), clearly referring to only David’s lifespan and no longer. 2 Sam. 7:13, 16, 25, 29, and 1 Chron. 17:12, 14, 22, 27; 22:10; and 28:7 state that Yahweh would establish David’s son’s kingdom “even olam” (LXX: εις τον αιωνα, “for the age”), a prophecy which was originally fulfilled in Solomon (1 Chron. 28:6-7), and thus only refers to the days of Solomon’s lifespan.

    God promises in 2 Sam. 12:10 that the sword will not turn from David’s house “even olam” (LXX: εως αιωνος, “unto an age”). In stark contrast, God later promises in 1 Kings 2:33 that David’s house will have peace “even olam” (LXX: εις τον αιωνα, “for the age”), and Solomon’s reign was one of unprecedented peace! And yet, this again was followed by an era of hostility. This only makes sense if olam refers to an indefinitely long, but not without end, period of time. A few verses later (1 Kings 2:45) it is said that Solomon’s throne will be established olam (LXX: εις τον αιωνα, “for the age”) obviously referring only to Solomon’s own lifetime — this promise is repeated in 1 Kings 9:5.

    1 Kings 8:13; 9:3; 2 Kings 21:7; 2 Chron. 6:2; 7:16; 30:8; and 33:4 state that the first Temple built by Solomon will be the home of Yahweh olamim (LXX: εις τον αιωνα, “for the age”), although it was later deserted by God and destroyed in 587 BC, even before Kings and Chronicles were written. 2 Kings 5:27 states that Gehazi and his descendants will be leprous “for olam” (LXX: εις τον αιωνα, “for the age”), meaning as long as Gehazi’s line remains in existence. [1]

    1 Chron. 15:2 and 23:13 describe the Levirite priesthood as olam (LXX: εως αιωνος, “unto an age”), reminiscent of the statements in the Pentateuch stating that the Aaronic priesthood would last for the age; however, per Heb. 7:11-28, the Levirite priesthood has since been abolished and replaced with the priesthood of Christ. 1 Chron. 16:15-17 characterizes the Abrahamic covenant as olam (LXX: εις αιωνα, “for an age”; and αιωνιον), yet as noted above, the covenant was nullified at certain points in Israel’s history when they were not in control of the land, and will be finally abolished when this heaven and earth are destroyed (Isa. 65:17; Rev. 21:1).

    Ezra 3:11 states that Yahweh’s mercy to Israel is “for olam” (LXX: εις τον αιωνα, “for the age”), although God is currently hardening Israel and is not showing mercy to the vast majority of Israel until the “fullness of the Gentiles” comes in (Rom. 11:7-10, 25). According to Nehemiah 13:1, it is written in the Torah that no Ammonite or Moabite may come into the assembly of God “even olam” (LXX: εως αιωνος, “unto an age”), even though what the Torah actually says is that no Ammonite or Moabite may come into the assembly of God unto the tenth generation (Deut. 23:3).

    All of these many, many instances of olam (and in the LXX, αιων and αιωνιος) corroborate our previous conclusion that this word was used to describe an indefinitely long time period, rather than a strictly everlasting time period as it is usually translated. Like in the Pentateuch, it was used to describe periods as short as a few years, to several generations, and even as long as the period from Abraham to the establishment of the New Heaven and Earth (when used in reference to the Abrahamic covenant).

Part 2: https://thechristianuniversalist.blogspot.com/2022/07/just-how-long-is-eternal-study-on_10.html

______________________________

[1] Adam Clarke remarks on 2 Kings 5:27 that “the denunciation took place in the posterity of Gehazi till it should become extinct, and under the influence of this disorder this must soon have taken place. The for ever implies as long as any of his posterity should remain. This is the import of the word לעולם leolam. It takes in the whole extent or duration of the thing to which it is applied. The for ever of Gehazi was till his posterity became extinct.”

All things in the heavens

     Within Christian universalism, there are two different schools of thought on how extensive the ultimate salvation and reconciliation will be. Some universalists believe that all human beings will be saved, but extend this salvation no further than all humanity, believing that neither the devil nor his angels will ever be reconciled. This is a sort of ‘soft universalism’, or as I often call it, anthropological universalism. Others believe that all rational and conscious beings will be saved, including the devil and his angels, which I call ‘full universalism’. So, which of these is more biblical? In this post, we will examine both sides of the argument and come to a conclusion based on the scriptural evidence.

    Who is the devil?

Before getting into the question of whether the devil will be reconciled to God - which is, indeed, a doozy of a question - we must first examine what the Bible actually says about the nature of the devil. The word “devil” literally means “slanderer”, whereas the word “satan” literally means “adversary” - the being called the devil and the Satan (for example, seen in Matt. 4 and Rev. 12) is the ultimate Adversary and Slanderer of the people of God.

    Most Christians see the devil as an angelic being who was once the greatest of God’s creations, and yet fell (almost immediately) into sin after grasping at equality with God. Now, they believe, he remains the greatest enemy of God and is always working contrary to His will. But is this what scripture actually says? There are two passages thought to teach that the devil originally was a great angelic being and then fell from grace: Ezekiel 28 and Isaiah 14. Let’s take a look at each of these passages.

And there is a word of Yahweh unto me, saying: “Son of man, lift up a lamentation for the king of Tyre, and thou hast said to him: Thus said the Lord Yahweh: Thou art sealing up a measurement, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty. In Eden, the garden of God, thou hast been, every precious stone thy covering, ruby, topaz, and diamond, beryl, onyx, and jasper, sapphire, emerald, and carbuncle, and gold, the workmanship of thy tabrets, and of thy pipes, in thee in the day of thy being produced, have been prepared. Thou [art] an anointed cherub who is covering, and I have set thee in the holy mount, God thou hast been, in the midst of stones of fire thou hast walked up and down. Perfect [art] thou in thy ways, from the day of thy being produced, till perversity hath been found in thee. By the abundance of thy merchandise they have filled thy midst with violence, and thou dost sin, and I thrust thee from the mount of God, and I destroy thee, O covering cherub, From the midst of the stones of fire. High hath been thy heart, because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom because of thy brightness, on the earth I have cast thee, before kings I have set thee, to look on thee, from the abundance of thy iniquity, by the perversity of thy traffic, thou hast polluted thy sanctuaries, and I bring forth fire from thy midst, it hath devoured thee, and I make thee become ashes on the earth, before the eyes of all beholding thee. All knowing thee among the peoples have been astonished at thee, wastes thou hast been, and thou art not — to the age.” (Ezek. 28:11-19 YLT)

...thou hast taken up this simile concerning the king of Babylon, and said... “How hast thou fallen from the heavens, O shining one [Lucifer], son of the dawn! Thou hast been cut down to earth, O weakener of nations. And thou saidst in thy heart: the heavens I go up, above stars of God I raise my throne, And I sit in the mount of meeting in the sides of the north. I go up above the heights of a thick cloud, I am like to the Most High. Only — unto Sheol thou art brought down, unto the sides of the pit.” (Isa. 14:4, 12-15 YLT)

The problem with seeing these passages as describing the “fall of Satan” should be obvious; they are not about the devil. Rather, they are explicitly about the king of Tyre and the king of Babylon respectively. And the first passage cannot be describing anything other than the human king of Tyre, even if it uses figurative imagery, because twice in the immediate context it says that this king is “a man” (vv. 2, 9). Likewise, the second passage, about the king of Babylon, also describes this king as a “man” (v. 16) and is said to be describing the judgment of Babylon (vv. 22-23), not of a spiritual being.

    The idea that the the Adversary fell from heaven [1] likely came out of the idea that God cannot create anything that is evil, even to serve a better purpose, despite clear statements to the contrary (Job 2:10; Isa. 45:7). However, in contrast to the strained interpretations of Ezekiel 28 and Isaiah 14 to support this doctrine, we have explicit statements that the Adversary has always been an adversary and a slanderer. It is said that he was both a murderer and a sinner from the beginning (Jn. 8:44; 1 Jn. 3:8); although this could, theoretically, be interpreted in a way that is compatible with the doctrine of the “fall of Satan”, the most clear and natural interpretation is that the Adversary was created as a sinner. So, although I would not be too dogmatic on this issue (because there aren’t many passages that discuss it), the most scriptural position seems to be that the Adversary did not fall, but was created as a sinner.

    Furthermore, rather than the Adversary working against God’s ultimate will, there are indications in scripture that he is ultimately an agent of God’s will, and as firmly under the sovereignty of God as we humans are. According to 1 Chronicles 21:1, it was the Adversary that provoked David to take a census of Israel, apparently going against God’s will, for which David was later punished. And yet, according to 2 Samuel 24:1, it was Yahweh that provoked David to take a census of Israel! This is only an irreconcilable contradiction unless we recognize that the Adversary is, ultimately, working out God’s sovereign will as much as we humans are [2], even though he may perceive himself as working against God’s preceptive will. Furthermore, in Job 2:1-6, the Adversary is unable to lift a hand against Job until given permission by Yahweh, and Job later identifies the ultimate source of the evil against him as God (Job 2:10).

    However, this does not mean that the Adversary is purposely working in accordance with God’s will. After all, in both the Old and New Testaments, the Adversary is presented as, well, an adversary. We can conclude that, although the Adversary is ultimately working towards the purposes which God has created for him (whatever they may be), he still perceives himself as working against God’s will (which in a sense is true, as he is going against God’s preceptive will).

    So, rather than seeing the Adversary as a created angelic being that fell away from God and is now working against Him, the biblical picture of the Adversary is as one who was created specifically for the purpose of adversity, and is just as much under the sovereignty of God as we are. The “angels” or “messengers” of the Adversary, however, which are called “demons” elsewhere, do seem to have been corrupted and deceived by the Adversary (for example, see Rev. 12:4, 7-9). With this in mind, let’s examine the question of whether these beings will eventually be reconciled to God.

    Position #1: the Adversary and his angels are beyond redemption

The first position, held by some universalists, is that only humans are able to be saved and reconciled to God, and all other beings are beyond redemption. This position is what I call ‘anthropological universalism’. This position was held by several early Christian theologians like Origen of Alexandria and Basil of Caesarea. There are a few passages that can be adduced in support of anthropological universalism:

“Then shall he say also to those on the left hand, Go ye from me, the cursed, to the fire, the age-during, that hath been prepared for the Devil and his messengers” (Matt. 25:41 YLT)

According to the traditional interpretation of this passage, the age-during fire (of Gehenna?) has been prepared for the Adversary and his angels, even though many humans (the “goats”) will go there as well. However, this is not the best interpretation of this passage based on its overall context; this passage (Matt. 25:31-46) is describing the judgment of the surviving Gentile unbelievers that will remain after the end of the tribulation, with the “sheep” who helped Israel during its time of adversity being granted access to the kingdom, and the “goats” who persecuted Israel being sent far away from the kingdom in Israel and treated as slaves.

    The “age-during fire” in this passage seems to be a figurative description of the adversity which the “goats” are set to experience during the Messianic age (cf. Deut. 4:20; Isa. 48:10; Ezek. 22:20; 1 Pet. 1:7; 4:12). These goats will comprise the “nations” that Christ and believers will “rule over with a rod of iron” (Ps. 2:8-9; Rev. 2:26-27; 19:15), and who will be treated as slaves, forced to obey in all things or suffer severe consequences as a reprimand for their harsh treatment of Israel (Joel 3:5-8; Zech. 14:16-19). 

    So then, it cannot be the punishment of the ‘age-during fire’ itself that will be prepared for the Adversary and his angels, because they will be confined to an ‘abyss’ during the time that this punishment of the goats is taking place (2 Pet. 2:4; Jude 6; Rev. 20:1-3). Rather, this fire is prepared for them in the sense that it will make ready the nations for the deception that the Adversary and his angels will perpetuate at the end of the Messianic age (Rev. 20:7-9). Thus, this passage doesn’t really provide any input on the issue of whether the Adversary and his angels will be saved.

    But even if the traditional interpretation, that the ‘age-during fire’ was prepared for them in the sense that they will be punished by it, was correct, what would this really prove anyway? All that it would show is that the Adversary and his angels will be punished in fire for an ‘age-during’ period. Since the adjective αιωνιος rarely, if ever, means strictly “without end” when used in scripture, this passage would still be equivocal on the issue of whether their punishment will eventually end.

messengers also, those who did not keep their own principality, but did leave their proper dwelling, to a judgment of a great day, in bonds everlasting [αιδιοις], under darkness He hath kept (Jude 6 YLT)

This passage is somewhat stronger evidence that certain fallen angels will never be reconciled. This is because the bonds in which these angels are kept are described as αιδιος, an adjective which does mean strictly “eternal” in Greek. However, the context qualifies the period for which these angels will only be kept in bonds under darkness as only until the “judgment of a great day”, which the parallel passage of 2 Peter 2:4 supports. So then, in what sense are these bonds αιδιος? Another possible translation of this word in this context is “imperceptible” or “invisible”, based on its etymology from the words α- (“not”) and οιδα (“to see/perceive”), which would be equivocal as to whether the punishment of these angels will eventually end.

and the Devil, who is leading them astray, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where [are] the beast and the false prophet, and they shall be tormented day and night — to the ages of the ages. (Rev. 20:10 YLT)

This passage characterizes the torment of the Adversary, the beast, and the false prophet as εις τους αιωνας των αιωνων (“for the ages of the ages”). Cross-referencing this passage with others like Gal. 1:5; Php. 4:20; 1 Tim. 1:17; Rev. 7:12; 10:6; and 15:7, which describe the glory and life of God as continuing “for the ages of the ages”, it is argued that the torment of these beings will never end, for the glory and life of God are likewise unending.

    However, just because God’s glory and life will continue for the ages of the ages does not mean that they will end after that time. It is worth noting that other things categorized as “for the ages of the ages” in scripture, such as the dominion and reign of Jesus Christ (2 Tim. 4:18; Heb. 13:21; 1 Pet. 4:11; Rev. 1:6; 5:13; 11:15) and the dominion of the saints (Rev. 22:5), are explicitly said to end in 1 Corinthians 15:24-28 when Jesus will abolish all rule, power, and authority and hand over the kingdom to God, voluntarily subjecting Himself to the Father. In fact, an argument can be made from this passage that the torment of the Adversary, beast, and false prophet will end:

Premise 1. Christ will reign for “the ages of the ages” (Rev. 11:15).

Premise 2. The reign of Christ will eventually come to an end (1 Cor. 15:24-28).

Premise 3. The torment of the Adversary, beast, and false prophet will continue for “the ages of the ages” (Rev. 20:10).

Conclusion. The torment of the Adversary, beast, and false prophet will eventually come to an end.

Although Revelation 20:10 does not necessarily prove that the torment of these three beings will end - any more than Philippians 4:20 proves that the glory of God will come to an end - it is at the very least equivocal on this issue, because we know that other things characterized as lasting “for the ages of the ages” will also end.

    Position #2: the Adversary and his angels will be reconciled

The second position, which I call ‘full universalism’, is that the Adversary and his angels will be reconciled along with the rest of humanity. Full universalism was believed by several of the theological heavyweights of early Christianity, including Gregory of Nyssa and (at first) Jerome of Stridon. This position finds its greatest scriptural support in Colossians 1:15-20:

[Christ] is [the] image of the invisible God, [the] firstborn of all creation, because in him was created the all things, in the heavens and upon the earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones or lordships or rulers or authorities, the all things has been created through him and for him. And he is before all things, and the all things has been established in him. And he is the head of the body, the assembly, who is the beginning, a firstborn out of the dead, so that in all things he may become [the one] having preeminence, because in him all the fullness [of God] was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile the all things to Himself, [he] having made peace through the blood of his cross, through him, whether the [things] upon the earth, whether the [things] in the heavens.

According to this passage, the “all things” which will be reconciled to God are the same all things described earlier as “the all things in the heavens and upon the earth, the visible and the invisible”, that is, clearly all beings without exception. This is confirmed by the use of the definite article throughout this passage, which shows each instance of τα παντα to be referring to the same set of ‘things’. This is also the same “all things” which Christ is preeminent over, elsewhere said to be all things in the heavens and upon the earth, whether living or dead (Matt. 28:18; Rom. 14:9 cf. Eph. 1:10).

    Since, per Revelation 12, both the Adversary and his messengers are currently in the heavens, the “all things in the heavens” that will be reconciled certainly includes them. And furthermore, the fact that Jesus is most certainly preeminent over the Adversary - in fact, that is one of the very reasons that He came, to gain power over and nullify the authority of the Adversary (Jn. 12:31; Heb. 2:14; 1 Jn. 3:8) - makes it even more clear that the Adversary is part of the “all things” being considered in this passage. But if the Adversary is part of the “all things” which are created in Him, and which He is preeminent over, then he must also be part of the “all things” which will be reconciled to God through Him.

    Furthermore, Paul states that one category of the “all things” that will be reconciled is the rulers (αρχαι) and authorities (εξουσιαι) in the heavens. And yet this is almost exactly the terminology he uses elsewhere to describe the demonic forces which we currently our enemies:

Put on the panoply of God, to enable you to stand up to the schemes of the Adversary, because ours is not the wrestling with flesh and blood, but with the rulers, with the authorities, with the world-rulers of this darkness, with the spirituals of evil, in the heavenlies. (Eph. 6:11-12)

There can be little doubt that Paul had the same idea in mind when writing about the “rulers” and “authorities... in the heavens” in both his epistle to the Colossians and to the Ephesians. But this means that the same demonic forces that are currently our enemies, including the Adversary, will eventually be reconciled to God. Even if, as non-universalists argue, this Colossians passage is simply describing a potential reconciliation [3], this is still incompatible with the mainstream position that neither the Adversary nor his angels even have the possibility of being saved.

    Another passage that supports the idea that the Adversary and his angels will eventually be reconciled to God is 1 Corinthians 15:24-28:

...then the consummation, when he may deliver the kingdom to the God and Father, when he may nullify all rule and all authority and power. For [it] is necessary [for] him to reign until He may put all the enemies under his feet. [The] last enemy is being abolished: the death. For He subjected all things under his feet. Now when it may be said that all things have been subjected, [it is] clear that the [One] having subjected the all things to him [is] excepted. Now when the all things may be subjected to him, then also the Son himself will be subjected to the [One] having subjected the all things to him, so that God may be the all things, in all.

According to this passage, all of God’s enemies will be subjected to Christ and put under His feet. Of course, the Adversary and his angels are to be included in the category of “the enemies” which will be subjected to Christ and put under His feet. However, throughout the Pauline corpus, the notion of subjection to Christ is always connected to reconciliation, not a subjection of destruction. For example, see Php. 2:9-11 and 3:21, which present the subjection of all things to Christ as a glorious time in which all will bow to Him and acknowledge Him as Lord, and Ephesians 1:21-23, which connects the subjection of all things with the same subjection by which Christ is head of the church, namely, reconciliation.

    However, even if we did not have these other passages that present subjection to Christ as reconciliation, the final verse of this passage should remove any remaining doubt, as it says that after this subjection God will be “the all things, in all” (τα παντα εν πασιν). For God to be “in all”, all beings must first be reconciled to Him, including the enemies that have been subjected under Christ’s feet. Therefore, Paul’s prophecy in 1 Cor. 15:24-28 provides further evidence that the Adversary will be reconciled to God, at the end of the ages of the ages for which his torment will continue (Rev. 20:10).

    Finally, the last passage that supports the idea that even rebel angels (including the Adversary) will eventually be saved and reconciled is Ephesians 3:8-11:

To me, the less than least of all saints, was given this grace: to preach the incomprehensible riches of the Christ to the Gentiles, and to enlighten all [as to] what [is] the administration of the secret, the [one] having been hidden from the ages in God, the [One who] created the all things, so that now the manifold wisdom of God may be made known through the assembly to the rulers and to the authorities in the heavenlies, according to a purpose of the ages which He made in the Christ, Jesus our Lord.

Compare this to what Paul wrote at the end of the same epistle to the Ephesians:

Put on the panoply of God, to enable you to stand up to the schemes of the Adversary, because ours is not the wrestling with flesh and blood, but with the rulers, with the authorities, with the world-rulers of this darkness, with the spirituals of evil, in the heavenlies. (Eph. 6:11-12)

There can be no doubt that Paul was writing about the same demonic forces, the “rulers and authorities in the heavenlies”, when he wrote the first passage as the second. However, he expects that in the oncoming ages when the body of Christ will be seated with Christ in the heavens (Eph. 2:6-7), we will also be evangelizing the same demonic forces which are currently our enemies. This is inconceivable if it is impossible for fallen angels to be saved, which is the mainstream position of Christianity.

    Paul’s epistle to the Ephesians shows that at the very least it is possible for fallen angels to be reconciled to God, which in turn implies that they will be reconciled to God. This is because according to God’s very nature, His sovereignty over all and love for all, He must effect the reconciliation of any being that has the potential to be reconciled to Him (as I argued in my last post).

    These three texts provide very strong scriptural evidence that both the Adversary and his fallen angels will be reconciled to God along with the rest of humanity. Not only do we have explicit statements that all of the rulers and authorities in the heavens (referring to demonic forces) will be reconciled to God through Christ (Col. 1:16) and that all of God’s enemies will be subjected and reconciled, thus making God the all things in all (1 Cor. 15:24-28), but we are also told that one of the duties of the body of Christ is to evangelize these demonic forces (Eph. 3:8-11). In contrast, the texts that are used to argue that the Adversary and his angels will not be saved are fairly equivocal on this issue. Because of this, I think we can be certain from scripture that all of God’s enemies, including the Adversary, will be reconciled to Him in the end.

______________________________

[1] It should be noted that, although the fall of the Adversary from heaven is described in scripture (Lk. 10:18, Rev. 12) this is depicted as a future event that will occur close to the time that the Messianic kingdom is established on earth.

[2] For scriptural support of this position, see Job 23:13-14; Ps. 33:14-15; Prov. 16:1, 4, 9, 33; 19:21; 20:24; 21:1; Isa. 45:5-7; Jer. 10:23; Lam. 3:37-39; Dan. 5:23; Acts 17:25, 28; Php. 2:13; Jas. 4:13-15; Rev. 17:17.

[3] This interpretation is hard to reconcile with the grammar of this passage, since the verb “to reconcile” is not in the subjunctive mood (which would introduce an element of uncertainty) but in the infinitive mood.

Two conclusive arguments for universal salvation

     Argument #1 (God will save all people)

Premise 1. God has mercy on, and hardens, whomever he wills according to his will [thelēma] (Rom. 9:18; cf. Eph. 1:4-5, 11)

Premise 1*. God can save anyone that he wills. [This is a weaker form of Premise 1 which leads to the same conclusion.]

Premise 2. God’s will [thelēma] is that all people ultimately be saved (1 Tim. 2:4; cf. Isa. 45:22; Ezek. 33:11; Matt. 5:44-45, 48)

Conclusion. God will ultimately have mercy on and save all people.

     Premise 1

For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” So it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God who shows mercy. For the scripture says to Pharaoh, “I have raised you up for the very purpose of showing my power in you, so that my name may be proclaimed in all the earth.” So then he has mercy on whomever he chooses, and he hardens the heart of whomever he chooses. (Romans 9:15-18, NRSV)

This passage makes it clear, in no uncertain terms, that one’s current position as either having been shown mercy or having been hardened is not according to one’s own will, but the will [thelēma] of God. Although Arminians would dispute this notion, largely on the basis that God would not arbitrarily assign people to ‘eternal damnation’, this is made absolutely clear elsewhere in scripture as well. Those who have been saved in this lifetime are repeatedly called the “chosen” or “elect” (Matt. 20:16; 22:14; Rom. 8:33; Col. 3:12; Tit. 1:1; 1 Pet. 1:1; too many others to cite).

    Furthermore, many other passages show that our faith is itself a gift from God, predestined to us long before any choice that we ourselves make:

At that time Jesus said, “I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and the intelligent and have revealed them to infants” (Matt. 11:25, NRSV)

Then the disciples came and asked him, “Why do you speak to them in parables?” He answered, “To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given.” (Matt. 13:10-11, NRSV) 

“No one can come to me [Jesus] unless drawn by the Father who sent me; and I will raise that person up on the last day.... But among you there are some who do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the first who were the ones that did not believe, and who was the one that would betray him. And he said, “For this reason I have told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted by the Father.” (John 6:44, 64-65, NRSV)

The combination of these three passages shows that not only does the Father determine who is able to perceive the mysteries of the kingdom and come to Jesus, but also determines the reverse — in fact, Jesus says that the very reason why some of his disciples would later leave and betray him is because the Father predestined it. This only makes sense if both faith and unbelief are predetermined by God.

For God has imprisoned all in disobedience so that he may be merciful to all... For by the grace given to me I say to everyone among you not to think of yourself more highly than you ought to think, but to think with sober judgment, each according to the measure of faith that God has assigned. (Rom. 11:32; 12:3, NRSV)

Paul distinguishes between those to whom God has shut up in disobedience (all people), and the few to whom God has allotted a measure of faith (Christians). Again, in both cases, it is God who ultimately causes one’s faith or unbelief respectively — human ‘free will’ has no part in it.

He [God] chose us in Christ before the foundation of the world to be holy and blameless before him in love. He destined us for adoption as his children through Jesus Christ, according to the good pleasure of his will... In Christ we have also obtained an inheritance, having been destined according to the purpose of him [God] who accomplishes all things according to his counsel and will (Eph. 1:4-5, 11, NRSV)

[God] saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works but according to his own purpose and grace. This grace was given to us in Christ Jesus before the ages began (2 Tim. 1:9, NRSV)

Like in Romans 9:15-18, Paul twice remarks in Ephesians 1:4-11 that our faith and salvation has been predestined to us according to God’s will [thelēma]. Therefore, we can conclude that our faith is not out of ourselves, but is a gift from God, as Paul explicitly states elsewhere in this same epistle (Eph. 2:8-9). Furthermore, Paul says in both of these passages that God gave this grace to us before the world was created, only now manifesting it to us (as he also says elsewhere, esp. Titus 1:2-3). This makes clear that our having been given grace can’t be dependent on a choice that we ourselves make, since the choice was already made by God even before the creation of the world.

For he has graciously granted you the privilege not only of believing in Christ, but of suffering for him as well (Php. 1:29, NRSV)

Here, again, Paul clearly says that our belief in Christ has been granted to us; and not only that, but even the suffering that the Philippian church experienced was brought about by God, showing that the unbelief of others is ultimately part of his will as well.

[Christ is] “A stone that makes them stumble, and a rock that makes them fall.” They stumble because they disobey the word, as they were destined to do. (1 Pet. 2:8, NRSV)

In this verse, Peter says in no uncertain terms that anyone who disbelieves the gospel was appointed to that unbelief. This is in accord with his statements elsewhere that those who believe in this lifetime are “elect” or “chosen” by the Father (1 Pet. 1:1-2; 2:9; 5:13).

    These are far from the only passages that teach that God controls both faith and unbelief: for example, see John 1:12-13; 15:16; Acts 13:48; Rom. 8:28-30; 1 Cor. 1:27-28; 3:5-9; 1 Thess. 1:4; 2 Thess. 2:13; 2 Tim. 2:25-26; Heb. 6:1-3; and Jude 4. In summary, the faith or unbelief of humans today is not based on our own choices that we make, but God’s choosing us according to his will [thelēma]. A discussion of whether free will truly exists in the libertarian sense is not the main topic of this article (although I do not believe it does [1]), but these passages make clear that even if it does, our faith is not based on those ‘free will’ choices. Thus, we have arrived at Premise 1: God has mercy on, and hardens, whomever he wills according to His will [thelēma].

    Premise 1*

The Bible clearly teaches that our faith is a result of God’s grace toward us, a decision that he made before the world was created, which we therefore could have had no part in. Even if the Bible didn’t tell us this, however, it follows directly from God’s omniscience (infinite knowledge). If indeed God knows everything, then he knows what circumstances would be required for each person to come to faith in him. If there are no circumstances in which a person could possibly be saved, that means the person was damned from the beginning, which is equivalent to hyper-Calvinist double predestination (that the vast majority of Christians rightfully reject). God’s omnipotence (infinite power) also means that he can bring about these circumstances. Thus, as a logical consequence of God’s omniscience and omnipotence, we can arrive at Premise 1*: God can save anyone that he wills.

    Premise 2

First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for everyone, for kings and all who are in high positions, so that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and dignity. This is right and is acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires everyone to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. (1 Tim. 2:1-4, NRSV)

According to this passage, God wills (thelei) that all mankind would be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth. Calvinists dispute that this passage actually refers to all mankind, and argue that either (1) it is simply saying that God wills all the elect to be saved, or else (2) this refers to God’s preceptive will and not his providential will.

    The first objection, that this passage is merely referring to all the elect and not all mankind, is false. Calvinists are correct to point out that “all” (pas) does not always mean all without exception (for example, in Matt. 3:5-6 and Luke 2:1), because it is sometimes used hyperbolically, but the referent of the “all” in 1 Timothy 2:4 is clearly all mankind (pantas anthrōpous) and not simply the elect. There are no qualifications or contextual indications that anything less than every human without exception is meant here, unlike in the other verses that Calvinists point to where “all” does not mean all without exception. How much more clear could Paul have been that God does indeed will all people to be saved? It’s eisegesis to suggest that this means only “all the elect.”

    Furthermore, just two verses earlier, Paul establishes that one of the groups which God wills to be saved is “kings and all who are in authority”. At the time that this epistle to Timothy was written, the king in power was the Roman emperor Nero, who was about as far from the elect as one can get — he’s considered to be one of the worst tyrants in Roman history, who initiated the first widespread persecution of Christians. In fact, many preterists believe that Nero was Antichrist, the fulfillment of the ‘Beast’ prophecy of Revelation 13:1-10. If Paul was including him in the category which God wills to be saved, it’s impossible that 1 Timothy 2:4 is only referring to all the elect and not all mankind.

    However, even if we were not sure that 1 Timothy 2:4 were truly referring to all mankind, other passages make clear that God does indeed will all mankind to be saved. One of the key passages that proves this is Matthew 5:43-48:

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be children of your Father in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the righteous and on the unrighteous... Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.” (Matt. 5:43-45, 48, NRSV)

This passage shows that the Father loves even his enemies, and that this love of all people — including the enemies of God — is integral to his very perfection. If God ceased to perfectly love all people, then he would no longer be perfect, and therefore he would no longer be God.

    And what is love, fundamentally? Love is that which does no harm to another (Rom. 13:10), and which works for the ultimate good of the object of love, despite any temporary chastising that may occur (Heb. 12:6-11). The prophet Jeremiah tells us that, although God sometimes justly brings grief and affliction to those he loves, he always afterward shows compassion (Lam. 3:31-33). Therefore, because love is fundamental to God’s very being (1 John 4:8), and his love for all people (even his enemies) is integral to his perfection, it’s inconceivable that he could not work toward the ultimate good of all people — meaning that God indeed wills that all mankind (without exception) would eventually be saved.

    The second Calvinist objection to the view that God’s will is for all people to be saved is that this verse is describing God’s preceptive will — meaning His general call for people everywhere to be saved — and not God’s providential will, by which He works all things. However, this verse, in saying that God wills all people to be saved, uses the same Greek verb (thelei) that Paul uses in Romans 9:18 when he writes that “[God] has mercy on whom he wills [thelei], and whom he wills [thelei] he hardens” and in Ephesians 1:6, 11 when describing the will by which God works all things. This is God’s will [thelēma] — in the same way that God has mercy on and hardens whom he wills, he also wills that all people should ultimately be saved.

    In summary, the Bible is clear that God wills the ultimate salvation of all mankind, meaning truly all people without exception. This fact is confirmed by Ephesians 1:10 (NASB), which states that “the mystery of His will [thelēma]... [is] to bring all things together in Christ, things in the heavens and things on the earth.” In fact, God’s perfect love for all people, including his enemies, is integral to his very being and perfection, which means that he must work everything for the ultimate good of all people. This leads us to the second premise: God’s will [thelēma] is that all people ultimately be saved.

    Conclusion

If God has the ability to provide faith and unbelief to people in accordance with his will [thelēma], and if God’s will [thelēma] is that all people will ultimately be saved and shown mercy, the only possible conclusion is that God will ultimately have mercy on and save all people. This conclusion follows directly from the premises. Since, as I showed in the last two sections of this post, both of these premises are proven by scripture beyond a doubt, the conclusion of universal salvation is also, beyond a doubt, the biblical truth.

    Although this argument stands on its own as irrefutable proof of universal salvation, there are also several passages that teach this truth directly. For example,

For to this end we toil and struggle, because we have our hope set on the living God, who is the Savior of all people, especially of those who believe. (1 Tim. 4:10, NRSV)

He [God] has made known to us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure that he set forth in Christ, as a plan for the fullness of time, to gather up all things in him [Christ], things in heaven and things on earth. (Eph. 1:9-10, NRSV)

Therefore God also highly exalted him [Jesus] and gave him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bend, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (Php. 2:9-11, NRSV)

Note: Paul is referencing a passage in Isaiah (44:22-24) in which God swears by Himself that all people will bow and swear allegiance to him — this is a promise that God made and will, beyond a doubt, come to pass (Num. 23:19; Heb. 6:18). Since no one can say “Jesus is Lord” except in the holy spirit (1 Cor. 12:3), this certainly describes the salvation of all people everywhere.

The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For “God has put all things in subjection under his feet.” But when it says, “All things are put in subjection,” it is plain that this does not include the one who put all things in subjection under him. When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to the one who put all things in subjection under him, so that God may be all in all. (1 Cor. 15:26-28, NRSV)

For God has imprisoned all in disobedience so that he may be merciful to all. (Rom. 11:32, NRSV)

Thus, God’s will for all to be saved shall, undoubtedly, come to pass. The fact that God will ultimately save all people is taught by scripture, both directly and by logical necessity.

    One common (particularly Calvinist) objection to this is that not all people are part of the “elect”, and so not all people have been chosen to receive salvation by God. After all, Jesus said that “many are called but few are elected” (Matt. 22:14), that few find the narrow path to life (Matt. 7:13-14), and that not even all who say to him, “Lord, Lord,” will enter his kingdom (Matt. 7:21-23). Furthermore, the book of Acts implicitly states that not all people have been appointed to “eternal life” (13:48). Does this not prove that not all people will be saved, and render the above argument invalid?

    Actually, this exact same argument can be used against these imaginary detractors: because we know beyond a doubt that God will save all people (see the above), and yet God does not elect some people to “eternal life”, not being elected to “eternal life” must not be incompatible with one’s eventual salvation. And as a matter of fact, the scriptural evidence supports this conclusion.

    The phrase translated as “eternal life,” zōē aiōnios (translated better as “life of the [Messianic] Age”), actually refers to receiving life and reigning with Christ in the Messianic Age, as I argued extensively in this series of posts regarding the definition of aiōnios. Only those who are saved in this life will receive this life of the Age and reign with Christ. However, the salvation of all will not be accomplished until Christ gives up the kingdom to the Father and stops reigning (1 Cor. 15:24-28), which will occur at the end of the ages. [2] Therefore, not receiving the life of the Age is compatible with eventual salvation, because all people will not be saved until after the Messianic Age (and thus after the life of the Age).

    Argument #2 (Jesus will save all people)

Premise 1. Jesus loves all people, including his enemies, in accordance with God’s precept “you shall love your neighbor as yourself” (Matt. 5:43-48; 22:39-40; Mk. 12:31). If he failed to keep this precept, he would be a sinner.

Premise 2. Jesus has the authority to give salvation to anyone who has been placed under his command (John 17:2).

Premise 3. Jesus has been given all authority over heaven and earth (Matt. 28:18) and over living and dead (Rom. 14:9), which includes all people that have ever lived.

Conclusion. Jesus will save all people that have ever lived.

    Premise 1

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be children of your Father in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the righteous and on the unrighteous... Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.” (Matt. 5:43-45, 48, NRSV)

This passage is in the larger context of the Sermon on the Mount, in which Jesus presents a new interpretation of the law for Israel to follow. Jesus’ command to love one’s enemy as oneself is, therefore, to be considered one of the precepts of the law. This is confirmed elsewhere in the gospel accounts:

And one of them, a lawyer, asked him a question to test him. “Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest?” He said to him, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ This is the greatest and first commandment. And a second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.” (Matt. 22:35-40, NRSV)

In this statement, Jesus brings the commandment “you shall love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev. 19:18) out of obscurity and establishes it as one of the two foremost commandments, upon which the entire law hangs. And as he stated in the Sermon on the Mount, this same love applies not only to one’s neighbor, but even to one’s enemies. Since Jesus obeyed (and continues to obey) the law perfectly, never sinning (2 Cor. 5:21; Heb. 4:15; 1 Pet. 2:22; 1 John 3:5), we can be certain that Jesus perfectly loves all people at all times. In fact, if Jesus failed to love all people, then he would be found a sinner, and his death would be worthless.

    As described earlier in this post, love is that which does no harm to a neighbor, and which works for the ultimate good of the object of love, even if it involves temporary affliction and chastisement (Rom. 13:10; Heb. 12:6-11; cf. Lam. 3:31-33). Therefore, we can be certain that Jesus never harms a single person without making sure that it works for the ultimate good of that person; otherwise, as said already, he would be found a sinner, and his death made worthless. We have now arrived at our first premise for argument #2: Jesus loves all people, including his enemies, in accordance with God’s precept “you shall love your neighbor as yourself.”

    Premise 2

After Jesus had spoken these words, he looked up to heaven and said, “Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son so that the Son may glorify you, since you have given him authority over all people, to give eternal life to all whom you have given him. And this is eternal life, that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.” (John 17:1-3, NRSV)

As proven in my defense of premise 1 (and 1*) of argument #1, God the Father has the sovereignty to give whoever he wills the gift of faith and salvation. According to this passage, that same sovereignty has been given to Jesus, who has the authority to provide “eternal life” to anyone whom the Father has given Him. Since Jesus immediately defines “eternal life” as knowing God and Christ, [3] this means that Jesus has the authority to supply whomsoever He wishes with a saving faith.

    This very thing — Christ gracefully providing a person with saving faith — is explicitly described at least once in scripture, in the case of Saul of Tarsus (Paul). When Saul was on the road to Damascus, he was “still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord” (Acts 9:1). And yet, as soon as Christ appeared to him in a vision, his grace powerfully overwhelmed Saul and provided him with the faith he needed to be saved. This is confirmed in Paul’s own writings:

I am grateful to Christ Jesus our Lord, who has strengthened me, because he judged me faithful and appointed me to his service, even though I was formerly a blasphemer, a persecutor, and a man of violence. But I received mercy because I had acted ignorantly in unbelief, and the grace of our Lord overflowed for me with the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus. The saying is sure and worthy of full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners—of whom I am the foremost. (1 Tim. 1:12-15, NRSV)

Jesus’ grace was more than abundant to provide Paul with the “faith and love that are in Christ Jesus,” even though he had been a blasphemer and persecutor with no hope of redemption. In fact, we are told that the very reason that Jesus provided Paul with grace is because he acted ignorantly in unbelief, for “Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners.” Therefore, we can be certain of the second premise of this argument: Jesus has the authority to give salvation to anyone who has been placed under his command.

    Premise 3

Keeping in mind that Christ has the authority to give faith to anyone who has been placed under his authority, we might ask, how many people have been placed under his authority? In fact, this is answered in the very same verse that we just examined: God has given Him authority over “all flesh” (John 17:2). But there is still some ambiguity in this: does Christ only have authority over those who are currently living, or only over humans, or humans and angelic beings, or is it literally all conscious beings?

    This question is answered elsewhere in scripture:

And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.” (Matt. 28:18, NRSV)

For to this end Christ died and lived again, so that he might be Lord of both the dead and the living. (Rom. 14:9, NRSV)

Jesus’ authority extends over all things in heaven and on earth — this includes not only humans, but also angelic and demonic beings (cf. Eph. 6:12). Furthermore, his authority extends over both the dead and the living, and these categories likely encompass all conscious beings that have ever lived, even animals, which are called nephesh chayyah or “living souls” (Gen. 1:20-21, 24). Even if we take “dead and living” in Romans 14:9 to refer to only humans, which is a possible interpretation, this still includes every human that has ever lived.

    Thus, we have arrived at Premise 3: Jesus has been given authority over all people (at least including all humans and angelic beings) that have ever lived.

    Conclusion

If Jesus truly loves all people, meaning that he wills their ultimate good, and if he has authority to provide anyone under His power with a saving faith, and if Jesus has been given authority over all conscious beings that have ever lived, the only logical conclusion is that all people that have ever lived will be saved by Jesus. Like in argument #1, the conclusion follows directly from the premises, and the premises are clearly supported by scripture.

    This argument stands on its own as proof of universal salvation, but again, this truth — that Jesus will save and reconcile all people — is also affirmed directly by certain passages. For example:

For there is one God; there is also one mediator between God and humankind, Christ Jesus, himself human, who gave himself a ransom for all — this was attested at the right time. (1 Tim. 2:5-6, NRSV)

For in him [Jesus] all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him God was pleased to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, by making peace through the blood of his cross. (Col. 1:19-20, NRSV)

But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died through the one man’s trespass, much more surely have the grace of God and the free gift in the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, abounded for the many... Therefore just as one man’s trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one man’s act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. For just as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous. (Rom. 5:15, 18-19, NRSV)

Note: Although some detractors claim that, because the “all mankind” of v. 18 is elsewhere called “the many,” this needn’t refer to all people without exception. However, it is clear from the context that “the many” refers to all people without exception, because it is the same amount of people who died and were made sinners that will be given grace and made righteous. Humanity as a whole is simply being referred to as “the many” as a contrast with “the one [man].”

For the love of Christ urges us on, because we are convinced that one has died for all; therefore all have died. And he died for all, so that those who live might live no longer for themselves, but for him who died and was raised for them. (2 Cor. 5:14-15, NRSV)

Therefore, we can be sure that Christ will bring about the salvation and reconciliation of all people, whether in the heavens (angelic beings) or upon the earth (human beings). This fact is taught in scripture both directly and by logical necessity, as also in argument #1.

    But what about ‘hell passages’?

    These two arguments have shown that universal salvation is clearly taught in scripture, both directly and by logical necessity. However, there are some passages that non-universalists consider to be difficult for universal salvation. These passages fall into three categories:

1. Passages that state that certain people will be judged and punished, but without stating specifically the length of the punishment or whether there is hope of redemption (e.g., Matt. 10:28; 13:49-50; Php. 3:18-19).

2. Passages that state that certain people will be punished and/or destroyed eternally (e.g., Matt. 25:46; Mk. 3:29; 1 Thess. 1:9; Jude 7).

3. Passages that state that less than all people will be saved (e.g., Matt. 7:13-14, 21-23; Acts 13:48).

    The first category of passages actually provides no evidence against universal salvation, and is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of what universalists believe. The arguments above only prove that all people will, ultimately, be saved and reconciled. There’s no argument against the idea that God punishes people at all, a fact that is also clearly taught in scripture. The question is not whether God will punish people at all, but whether that punishment will be eternal and without hope of redemption. According to the biblical authors, God punishes people in order to restore them (Lam. 3:31-33; Heb. 12:5-11), which goes against the idea of hopeless, eternal punishment.

    The second category of passages, those which state that people will be punished and/or destroyed eternally, is based on an unfortunate mistranslation of scripture. Those passages which characterize punishment as “eternal” do not use the Greek words that mean strictly “without end”, like aidios and ateleutos, but the Greek word aiōnios, which literally means “age-lasting” or “pertaining to/of the Age.” [4] Other passages describe this punishment as eis tous aiōnas tōn aiōnōn (Rev. 14:11; 20:10), meaning literally “for the ages of the ages,” the same period for which Christ will be reigning over the kingdom (Rev. 11:15). Both the life of the Age and punishment of the Age prophesied in scripture will last only until the end of the Messianic Age, when sin and death will be abolished, Christ will step down and voluntarily subject himself to God the Father, and God will finally be all in all (1 Cor. 15:24-28).

    The third category of passages, which are interpreted by non-universalists as saying that not all people will be saved, is based on a misinterpretation of scripture. There are no passages which say that any person will never be saved. The passage parallel to Matt. 7:13ff in the gospel of Luke (13:23-30) makes clear that this is about entering the Messianic kingdom, as are all of Jesus’ other parables which describe the “casting out” of people from the kingdom. Since few people actually enter the Messianic kingdom, and all others will instead be saved only at the end of the Messianic Age, this provides no challenge to the belief that all people will eventually be saved. Likewise, other passages which state that certain people will not receive “life of the Age” (e.g., John 3:36; Acts 13:48) have no bearing on whether all people will be saved after the Messianic Age.

    Because all of the prooftexts for non-universalism fall into three categories, being either based on misunderstanding, mistranslation, or misinterpretation, there is really no good evidence against universal salvation. Furthermore, even if a few passages (especially Matt. 7:13-14; 25:46; Mk. 3:29; and Rev. 14:11 which are the most commonly used against universalists) can be interpreted in a way that contradicts universalism, this in no way addresses the above arguments which show that the broad themes of the Bible, like God’s love for and sovereignty over all people, necessitate the eventual salvation of all. We should rejoice in the truth that Paul tells us to “insist on and teach”: that God is the savior of all mankind, especially of those who believe (1 Tim. 4:10-11).

______________________________

[1] Based on passages like Job 23:13-14; Ps. 33:14-15; Prov. 16:1, 4, 9, 33; 19:21; 20:24; 21:1; Isa. 45:5-7; Jer. 10:23; Lam. 3:37-39; Dan. 5:23; Acts 17:25, 28; Php. 2:13; Jas. 4:13-15; Rev. 17:17.

[2] See the original Greek of Lk. 1:33 and Rev. 11:15, both of which state that Christ will reign “for the ages” (eis tous aiōnas).

[3] As noted above, the term “eternal life” or “life of the Age” refers to living and reigning with Christ in the Messianic Age. However, in the Johannine corpus, it has a more specific meaning. According to John, we already “have” the life of the Age in the present tense if we believe (John 3:36; 5:24; 6:47, 54; 1 John 5:11, 13). It is defined as “knowing God and Christ” (John 17:3). This is more than a mere intellectual knowledge, and involves God and his Son actually coming to dwell in communion with us (John 14:23; 1 John 1:3; 2:24; 3:23-24; 4:12-13). The love of God is being “perfected” in those who are in communion with the Father and the Son (1 John 2:5; 4:12, 18). This is a spiritual blessing which believers possess now. The fact that Jesus can grant this blessing shows that he, like God, is sovereign over our salvation.

[4] The word aiōnios is the adjective form of the word aiōn, meaning “age.” Furthermore, as I argued extensively in another series of posts, the words aiōn and aiōnios (along with their Hebrew equivalent olam) are used all throughout scripture to describe lasting (but not everlasting) things. See the fifth post in the series for a comprehensive debunking of ‘eternal punishment’ interpretations.