You say that “Salvation isn’t about rescuing people from some distant post-mortem consequences that we really have no way of knowing anything about: it’s about how we live now, in relation to one another and in relation to our world.” I would say that salvation is not just about what happens after death. Salvation is not firstly from hell (or annihilation or conditional mortality); it is from sin. Insofar as we are saved (set free) from our sin, we can be confident that we will be saved from hell (or annihilation or conditional mortality). There are 3 tenses to salvation: we have been saved (set free from the penalty/guilt of sin), we are being saved (set free from the power of sin) and ultimately we will be saved (set free from even the presence of sin). So salvation is certainly about the here and now as well as the hereafter. We take hold of the salvation that God offers us by turning from our sin and trusting in Christ, which will affect, as you say, “how we live now, in relation to one another and in relation to our world.”

Concerning the immortality of the soul, I would say that the Christian hope is not that we will have a disembodied existence but rather that our bodies will be resurrected (or that we will be given a new “spiritual body” (1 Cor.15:44)).

You say that “Hell and heaven are both here and now.” I would say that they both begin in the here and now but that they are eternal.

Our hope for this life extends beyond this life; but this life is where that hope is shaped and formed; and what we shall be is hid with Christ in God…

But to me — and I think to an increasing number of people — those terms are largely irrelevant. The way I see it (and the way I think the biblical writers saw it for the most part) salvation is less about the hereafter than it is about the here and now. Salvation isn’t about rescuing people from some distant post-mortem consequences that we really have no way of knowing anything about: it’s about how we live now, in relation to one another and in relation to our world.

I for one do not believe in the immortality of the soul; nor, I’d argue, do most of the biblical writers, although we do see the idea creeping in here and there. But I do believe that in Christ, our lives are enhanced; that Christ has “the words of eternal life” which bring us into a new way of living in relationship with God, and consequently in relationship with those around us.

Hell and heaven are both here and now. In Christ, I choose heaven over hell; I choose love over hate; I choose life over death.

That to me is salvation; and it’s a tough call, a tough journey. But one that’s worth it.

Thanks again for your comments. You don’t see universalism as a great heresy. Would I be right therefore in concluding that you do see it as a heresy? (I have tried to avoid the term “heresy” becuase of its connotations. It seems to me that it is a term which has been misused historically e.g. as when during the inquisition those who disagreed with the Catholic church were branded as heretics and perhaps suffered torture and death as a consequence. Of course Protestant churches were also guilty of persecuting those they considered heretics. In those times heresy seems to have been defined as any belief, even one which is thoroughly biblical, which deviates from what the Church, whether Catholic, Lutheran, Reformed or Anglican, teaches!)

Up to this point I have also avoided getting on to the issue of the implications of embracing universalism as I consider this to be secondary to the question of whether universalism is biblical. However, if I was pressed I’d have to say that I do consider universalism to be a dangerous teaching. If there is no eternal hell (or even annihilation) for those who reject Christ, to be avoided, then evangelism, if it takes place at all, must almost inevitably lose much of its urgency. If I have a choice on a cold wet evening between staying in and watching football (or whatever) on TV and going out to try to reach someone with the gospel, I think I would be more likely just to stay in by the fire if I believed hell to be just temporary. And why should the person with whom I share the Christian message forego the “pleasures of sin” (Heb.11:25) during this life if they can repent shortly after death and escape hell by doing so?

Yours in Christ,
Brian

I would take an Annihalationist position myself, as I cannot find a scripture that suggests eternal conscious punishment.

Thanks for your comment. We would be agreed therefore, presumably, that these verses (2 Thess.1:8-10) pose a serious problem for universalists. I am not an Annihilationist myself, but I have less problem with Annihilationism than I have with universalism.

Just to refer to 1Thes 1:8 – 10. Of course, this passage does not mention either hell (whether hades or gehenna) or eternal punishment. The word for ‘everlasting’ could be understood to mean that the punshment (the olethros – destruction or ruin) will not be reprieved. As such, an argument for Annihilationism can be made just as strongly. It does not necessarily mean that the actual act of punishment goes on for ever.