What is your view on universalism—the doctrine of the reconciliation and restoration of all things?
This text is from a question-and-answer session with David Gooding.
I imagine that, if you hold universalism to be true, you would be obliged in the end to talk about the reconciliation of Satan himself, he also being a creature, and one of the 'all things' in the universe.
We also have the question in Britain. The late Basil Atkinson, who was a pillar of support to evangelical students in Cambridge for many years, was a universalist, and some others are still. One of the arguments adduced is that, if there is to be a large number of impenitent who are lost forever, then Christ will not 'in all things have the pre-eminence'. The assurance that in all things he will be first and have the pre-eminence must mean, surely, that he wins the greater victory, and the redeemed are at least more than those who are lost? If all are to be finally reconciled, then of course the victory will in that sense be complete. My difficulty comes from the plain, straightforward statements of Scripture. For instance, far from all being reconciled, a passage like 2 Thessalonians 2 talks of God sending a strong delusion that they might believe the lie, that they might be damned. Why? 'Because they refused to love the truth' (2 Thessalonians 2:10).
Let me illustrate it from the case history of Saul of Tarsus. He tells us that he obtained mercy when he got converted, because he did what he earlier did in ignorance and unbelief. Ponder that for a moment. If you had gone up to Saul of Tarsus when he was on the Damascus road and said, 'Saul, do you know what you are doing?', he would have said, 'Of course I know what I am doing!' 'Well, what are you doing?' 'I am persecuting these Nazarenes, and seeking to blot out the name of this impostor, Jesus of Nazareth.' So he knew what he was doing; and how would you account for his later statement, 'because I did it in ignorance and unbelief'? (1 Timothy 1:13). I understand it to be because he had never been illuminated by God's Spirit.
You are not merely talking about mental intelligence when you say you did it in ignorance; you are talking about the illumination of the Holy Spirit. Therefore, the man, not having been illuminated, could be given mercy. When somebody who has had his eyes opened still rejects the truth and will not have it, knowing that it is of God and of his Holy Spirit, there is nothing God himself can do to change it. That is the solemnity.
Take the illustration in Hebrews 6:4–6. 'You will never get them to change their minds,' says the writer. 'It is impossible to renew them to repentance.' It does not say that it is impossible for God to forgive them; he will forgive all who repent. But for these particular people, it is impossible to renew them to repentance. There can be no forgiveness without repentance.
You say, surely there must be? No, says the writer. It is like the ground: the rain comes down, and one bit produces herbs while the other bit produces thorns. Well, what will you do? You say, more rain please! But it will be more rain, and more thorns. The Holy Spirit, God's final witness, comes to a man and illuminates his heart and soul, and knowingly—knowing that it is of God—he rejects it. What has God left with which to bring him to repentance? You say, let God do a bit of thunder, lightning, or something! Is lightning and thunder a greater power than the Holy Spirit? Is it so that a little bit of torment would do what the Holy Spirit can't do? We mustn't say that. It is possible, therefore, for a man to knowingly come face to face with the Holy Spirit, who is God, and say no. And when he does that, it is impossible to renew him to repentance, because God himself has nothing else with which to renew him to repentance.
It is Scriptures like that which convince me that universalism cannot be true.
David Gooding
