The God Kind
The Plan of God Outline
Bible Truth Articles
Free Literature Library
Free Bible Software
Contact Us
Universal Salvation: Spiritual fact or Satanic fiction?

The concept of universal salvation is making the rounds in some COG groups and other groups in recent times. Is this doctrine true, safe and "good news" like so many seem to be espousing, or is universal salvation just another Satanic deception that has far greater implications if this concept is carried to its logical conclusions?

Let us briefly discuss the basics, and bring up a number of scriptures that clearly counter the universal salvation doctrine and create a stumbling block to the feet of those embracing and teaching such a damaging message. Please keep in mind that this is not a complete work. This is presenting a brief argument against the universal salvation belief system and which ask questions which would have to be answered reasonable and scripturally in order to promote continued discussion. Unfortunately, many who present this belief system can't or won't give an answer, of course, because a universal salvation belief says that it isn't necessary to convince anyone of anything because eventually all will be saved, and it doesn't really matter, in the big picture, what someone believes or does now.

As with all articles on this website, if there can be presented sound, reasonable and, especially, scriptural answers to these questions, then I am more than willing to be convinced. This is presented in "argument" format, for even God "reasons" with us and we are to defend our beliefs, and challenge... "test the spirits," to see if they can give an answer that only the spirit and word of God, and truth, can provide. I find it impossible to entertain this doctrine as valid without having these initial, basic questions answered in a reasonable way!

Universal salvation is the belief that God's plan is to save every living human being who has ever lived or will live, period. There are no if, ands or buts about it. They contend that God is stating in a number of scriptures that He will save everyone, and that this is exactly what He will do because He is God and can do whatever He wants to do. Yes, God can do whatever He wants to do, but this is only according to His law, His word, His plan for mankind and His nature. He can't go against those things because He won't.

The nature of the universal salvation doctrine isn't one that is clear and specific. In fact, this doctrine can spiritually damage every approach toward the true God that exists. Wherever anyone is on the spiritual spectrum, the universal salvation doctrine has something for them to latch on to, especially if they are already in weak spiritual territory.

There are four scriptures often quoted to build the universal salvation doctrine:

First Scripture:

1 Tim 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

Will have = NT:2309 = choose or prefer (literally or figuratively); by implication, to wish, i.e. be inclined to, desire, be disposed.

There is no "absolute" indicated by the Greek words translated "will have." It means what it says... that God's will, hope, desire is that everyone will be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth.

to = NT:1519 = into, to, toward, for, among. 1. of a place entered, or of entrance into a place, into, indicating motion or direction; of ethical direction or reference; universally, of acts in which the mind is directed toward, or looks to, something:

This shows that it means a person comes to the point where they understand what truth is... a beginning point of some process. God's will is that everyone be brought to the point of understanding His truth and word, and THIS you can be absolutely sure WILL take place, for there will be NO excuse of "not knowing."

Knowledge = NT:1922 epignosis (ep-ig'-no-sis); from NT:1921; recognition, i.e. (by implication) full discernment, acknowledgement: from NT:1921 epiginosko (ep-ig-in-oce'-ko); to know upon some mark, i.e. recognize; by implication, to become fully acquainted with, to acknowledge:

Notice that 1 Tim 2:4 first mentions "all men to be saved," then goes on to mention coming to the knowledge of the truth. We have to first ask, "Who is responsible for bringing people to the knowledge of truth?" Of course, God is. One should then ask, "What comes first, being saved, or coming to the knowledge of the truth?" Why does Timothy speak in this seemingly reversed chronology regarding the salvation process?

Paraphrasing 1 Tim 2:4, "God desires that all human beings be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth." If we were to take this just at face value, one would have to believe that salvation comes first without knowledge, but this is clearly not biblical as many scriptures show. Therein lies the subtle danger. "Salvation is assured first, then we come to varying degrees of knowledge"... and "any" knowledge of God and Christ is "enough" for salvation, regardless of how much error there might be in that knowledge and obedience.

This is a great excuse for false religion and for accepting those who are embracing it and missing the true plan of God. It encompasses all "Christianity" as being God's true Christianity, however, there are a host of scriptures regarding false Christianity where God warns us about it and to avoid it. Why would He warn us if it wasn't a threat to His people since all will be saved anyway?

What is this saying to us, in truth? To receive salvation... eternal life, one has to come to the full discernment of God's truth. Salvation is the end result of the process of coming to understand the knowledge of God... His laws, His mind, and our being fashioned into the image of Christ AS WE RESPOND to God and His spirit. This scripture, of itself, proves nothing about universal salvation.

Second scripture:

2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

Willing = NT:1014 boulomai (boo'-lom-ahee); to "will," i.e. be willing: be disposed, minded, intend, will.

Straight forward meaning, similar to "will have" (#2039) of 1 Tim 2:4.

Should come = NT:5562 chooreoo, chooroo; properly, to leave a space; to go forward, advance, proceed; to have space or room for receiving or holding something

This denotes motion and activity associated with coming to the knowledge of the truth, NOT something final. Neither does this scripture support a universal salvation doctrine of itself, even with the previous scripture.

Third Scripture:

Rom 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved:

Shall be saved = NT:4982 sozo (sode'-zo); to save, i.e. deliver or protect (literally or figuratively): heal, preserve, save (self), do well, be (make) whole.

In context with vs 25, we see Paul speaking about physical Israel, NOT all mankind. Reference to eternal salvation isn't the correct meaning here. Israel was spiritually blinded in part, allowed by God, but this blindness will be healed... they will be delivered and made whole, by having the spiritual blindness removed. To take this scripture and force it to mean all mankind will be saved is not correctly dividing God's word and is completely out of context. Also, to take this scripture literally in regard to "all," is to leave out the rest of humanity who are NOT a part of "Israel."

Understanding the use of words such as "all" will help dispel this doctrine. "All" Israel shouldn't be taken to mean "every possible individual." Such words are to be understood in context and in light of the rest of the bible. "All," here, doesn't mean "every human alive" anymore than in the following scriptures:

Luke 2:1 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed.

Does this mean that every human existing on the planet was taxed by Caesar? If we are to believe that "all" means "every person alive," then, yes, we would have to also accept this to mean "every human alive" as well. However, we know full well that the whole world, every human being, was NOT taxed by Caesar. This simply meant the "known world" of their area, under their control.

Rev 13:3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast. 4 And they (all the world referenced above) worshipped the dragon which gave power to the beast: and they (all the world referenced above) worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like to the beast? who is able to make war with him?

If "all" means every human being alive, then this scripture is a contradiction of other scriptures. We know that, in fact, the elect, those called and chosen by God, the First Fruits to God, will NOT "wonder after or worship" the beast or false prophet. Therefore, this cannot mean "all" in the sense of everyone alive.

Paul is stating that, "All Israel," to include those called at the time Paul was writing this, AND all those referenced who didn't receive the truth because they were blinded.

Fourth Scripture

1 Cor 15:22 "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive."

We, again, point to the use of the word "all" as discussed above. In addition to this, the "all shall be made alive" isn't stating that this bringing back to life includes to eternal life. The very fact that there is more than one resurrection, and all in the second resurrection being "made alive" are to physical life again, shows this. In other words, because Christ's sacrifice paid for sin, and because this sacrifice MUST be accepted, understood and acted upon, as well as people MUST have understanding of the plan, grow in grace and knowledge of Christ and be conformed to His image... this clearly suggests that the being "made alive" brings them this opportunity to be called and to respond. This is NOT saying they will be made alive by receiving eternal life. To suggest this is to read much more into scripture than is there.

We must also look at these scriptures in context. What do the following two verses say?

1 Cor 15:23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. 24 Then comes the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.

Notice that this mentions nothing of the second resurrection and all other people but those in the first resurrection. We certainly know that all humans who have ever lived and died will NOT be raised in this resurrection at Christ's coming...

Rev 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished.

Isn't this "lived not again till" equal to "all being made his own order?" Notice this isn't included in the 1 Cor 15:22-24 scriptures. Notice also that there is no mention of all those who live and die in the thousand year reign of Christ. These people must be resurrected, too. So where are these people in God's Plan? We need to look further.

We cannot use the above, fourth scripture to teach that every living human ever born will receive salvation.

So where does that leave us? We have four scripture sets generally used to support the doctrine of universal salvation. There are various tangents of this universal salvation theme, including how references to the "lake of fire" are simply referring to correction of people later on by "fire" or "trials," but this argument, when shown below to be fallacious, will take down with it all the tangent "spin" given to many other related beliefs.

If we are to judge righteous judgment, we need to let scriptures tell the complete story and we should consider the sheer weight of evidence against universal salvation. The following are many but by no means all of the scriptural references to eternal death and cessation of consciousness. Just the very mention of this theme should warn us of the factual nature of the concept. Why would God place so many references to choice and death if it weren't a real consideration? At the end of this list of refuting scriptures, in no particular order, I will briefly lay out what I feel are the greatest dangers of this kind of doctrinal position to budding and seasoned Christians alike.


The various books and articles on this subject first set up new definitions which are not bible definitions:

  • death
  • second death
  • lake of fire

For instance, "death" doesn't really mean death in their opinion. In fact, the definition for the "lake of fire" is not taken from the bible, but from ancient pagan Greek religious beliefs and practices, according to their own material.

They have redefined these words to mean something other than what the bible clearly defines them as. They have based their belief system on human reasoning, even to the point of comparing what God is doing with human minds to simple physics and the burning of wood with "fire," where the smoke "rises to a higher level..." and "changes the nature of the wood but doesn't destroy it"...??? This is NOT a biblical way to rightly divide God's word because the bible interprets the bible.

If we allow this type of carnal human reasoning to redefine His word and what God is doing , we can basically make any belief system we wish. Redefining the word "death" is not rightly dividing the word of God when death is clearly defined and shown to be the actual end of life.

The words translated "death" in the New Testament are as follows:

NT: 2288 thanatos (than'-at-os); from NT:2348; (properly, an adjective used as a noun) death (literally or figuratively): - X deadly, (be ... death.)

NT:615 apokteino (ap-ok-ti'-no); from NT:575 and kteino (to slay); to kill outright; figuratively, to destroy: - put to death, kill, slay.

NT:337 anaireo (an-ahee-reh'-o); from NT:303 and (the active of) NT:138; to take up, i.e. adopt; by implication, to take away (violently), i.e. abolish, murder: - put to death, kill, slay, take away, take up.

NT:599 apothnesko (ap-oth-nace'-ko); from NT:575 and NT:2348; to die off (literally or figuratively): - be dead, death, die, lie a-dying, be slain (X with).

NT:520 apago (ap-ag'-o); from NT:575 and NT:71; to take off (in various senses): - bring, carry away, lead (away), put to death, take away.

NT:336 anairesis (an-ah'-ee-res-is); from NT:337; (the act of) killing: - death.

Death isn't "separation from God."

Gen 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, you shalt not eat of it: for in the day that you eatest thereof you shalt surely die.

Here, God plainly tells Adam that if he eats of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, he would die. After Adam and Eve ate of this tree, they were yet alive, so does this mean that death doesn't really mean death as we know it? NO! The death God was referring to was spiritual or eternal death... in other words, the penalty for sin is cessation of life forever... DEATH!

The word "die" comes from OT:4191 muwth (mooth); a primitive root: to die... causatively, to kill:

Jesus Christ came to this Earth and paid the death penalty in our stead. This is the most foundational belief in the Christian faith. Believing this is vital for salvation.

If this word does NOT mean death, then why did Jesus Christ have to "die" an actual death... ceasing His life, and lay in the grave for three days and three nights? Christ came to pay the penalty for sin, which is actual death, NOT some contrived and reasoned spiritual meaning that means something else. Christ actually died on that cross. His life ended. He had no consciousness of those three days and nights. If it were not for the Father resurrecting Him from that death, He would still be dead.

If "death" does not mean actual death... the end of life, then we have to ask more questions. All humans have sinned and "death" happens to all...

Rom 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, (the second death) for (because) that all have sinned:

Death is the result of sin because all have sinned. According to "universal salvation" believers, death doesn't mean actual death or end of life in some way. So, we have to ask, what death is being referred to above if all have experienced it? What death is being referenced in the following scripture?

Matt 16:28 Verily I say to you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

This is clearly referring to death when people are placed in the grave, so THIS death really means death.

Ps 89:48 What man is he that lives, and shall not see death? shall he deliver his soul from the hand of the grave?

This is a clear reference to physical death... end of life and consciousness.

John 8:51 Verily, verily, I say to you, If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death.

John 11:26 And who ever lives and believes in me shall never die.

But wait a minute...Romans 5:12 tells us we have died... received death... every one of us, but in the above two scriptures, Christ tells us that we won't die if we keep His sayings. Something is wrong with the definition of "death" the universal salvation believers maintain. You cannot define death in a willy-nilly fashion. It either means one thing or it means another, but not two different and conflicting definitions. We can't have received death on the one hand, and yet on the other be promised that we would NOT see death if we keep Christ's sayings.

Some argue that if eternal death were the actual meaning in Genesis 2:17, then Christ would have to remain dead for eternity, so therefore, since Christ is NOT now dead, then death doesn't mean death and must mean something different. This might seem reasonable at first, but the bible tells us WHY Christ couldn't remain dead:

Acts 2:24 Whom (Christ) God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it.

Christ, being God, was sinless and was never under the penalty of eternal death for His own sins. He suffered throughout life, then through the crucifixion, and ultimately the Father even turned His back on Christ and left Him alone and without contact for that moment when Christ cried out, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me." Then Christ actually died. The Father separated Himself from Christ because all the sins of the whole world were placed on Him and God cannot abide with sin. That is why He had to actually die, or the sins of the world would not be forgiven. Sin is SO bad that it took the actual death of a God being to remove it and to provide any hope for us. If death simply means "separation from God," or "correction" in the "lake of fire," WHY did Christ have to literally die for us?

Christ did NOT have to actually die if death means anything other than the actual end of life. No argument can escape this fact. The reason Christ did NOT have to remain dead was because, as the scriptures state, it was not possible for death to hold Him because of His character, His nature and His sinlessness. Humankind's nature is such that we have sinned and if we paid the penalty for sin... actual death, we could NOT be resurrected because we are STILL sinners, even after a resurrection to physical life. Our natures must be changed in order to be resurrected to spirit. If "death" is NOT actual death, then all mankind has paid the penalty for sin... the spiritualized "death" that supposedly all are under now. Sin kills, period. Christ's life was given... paying the death we would experience, but universal salvation says that we have already paid that penalty, so, in effect, Christ's sacrifice becomes useless. If death meant anything other than not being alive, then why couldn't we pay for our own sins? What was it about Christ's "death" that was something we simply couldn't do for ourselves if it truly doesn't mean death?

Another thought to consider is this: Why was Christ three days and three nights in the grave? Why didn't the Father resurrect Christ instantly after He died? Why this time delay of three days and three nights? It was to show mankind that death means death... cessation of life, mind, consciousness. Christ was lifeless. No thoughts, no nothing. End of existence. That was the penalty we had over our heads because of sin, and Christ paid it. The Father was showing us that death MEANS death and that human destiny, apart from God, would end that way.

If we approach this subject and allow the bible to define it's own terms, we can see the plain truth on this subject. The "second" death implies that there is a first death and this first death is physical death...

Heb 9:27 And as it is appointed to men once to die, but after this the judgment:

Why would God "appoint" men to death if "death" didn't mean actual death? Did God appoint Adam and Eve to sin... cause them to sin? The "second" death is named "second" because it is similar to the first death, otherwise referring to "second" when referencing "death" would be moot. If God meant anything but actual death, He could have easily stated that without veiling the term in a way that even the bible doesn't define...

Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin is death;

Throughout the bible, when death is discussed, it means just that... DEAD. Christ actually DIED, period. He didn't experience some spiritualized form of "death." He died like every human being who has ever lived has died or we do not have a savior. To believe that Christ paid the death penalty for our sins on the one hand, and then to believe that death doesn't really mean dead, is a disparity which cannot be bridged in truth.

Notice Hebrews 2:9-14:

Heb 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

Heb 2:14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

What are we being told her? Christ was made flesh and blood in order to suffer (taste) death FOR us. If "death" means something other than actual death, why did Christ have to become flesh and blood to "taste" death FOR us? If death is already on us then why does it say that Christ came to taste it FOR us? It is obvious throughout scriptures that Christ came in the flesh to pay the penalty for sin FOR us, which is death as all the above scriptures clearly point to. A blood sacrifice in the death which Christ paid with His own life on the stake means He paid the sacrifice we have incurred due to sin in our lives and which we cannot possibly pay on our own.

The ultimate proof that death means death and NOT "separation from God."

Let's use a bit of logic in this... IF...

  • IF Christ's "body" is all that died, and He was out and about during His body's "burial time..."

...then we can't believe in His sacrifice or His importance in paying the penalty for sin. Consider: If the penalty for sin is death, yet "souls" leave the body after "death," (the body DOES die, doesn't it?) this would mean that sin's penalty is being paid by the death of a physical body... in this case, that of Christ's body. If this is believed by Christianity, "THEN EVERY HUMAN WHOSE BODY HAS "DIED" HAS ALREADY PAID THE PENALTY FOR THEIR OWN SINS."

THINK!!! If the death of Christ's "body" was enough to pay for all sins of all humanity, how does that differ from your body dying, and your "soul" leaving it at "death" to be somewhere else? IT DOESN'T! This would mean that all humans don't really need a savior because they already paid for their own sins at death by their own body dying. If Christ was alive elsewhere those three days and three nights, this means it was just a body... flesh and blood... nothing more... that died. There would be nothing special about that body... no more "special" than your body or my body. If it is merely a "house" we inhabit, and then leave when it "dies," there was no need for Christ to go through the same facade "for us." We already do the exact same thing when "we" die, so this HAS to pay for our own sins, and we can eliminate Christ from the equation. Was Christ's house so much more special... so much more precious? How would this body be an "only begotten" body? God could create a billion of them for Christ to inhabit.

Does "death" of the body really mean dead, but "death" spiritually means "separation from God," or does the body somehow live on separated from us? If the body does, indeed, die, as scriptures state clearly, and there is no "soul" that lives on apart FROM this body, THEN, AND ONLY THEN, would we need salvation from the death God requires for sin. We CAN'T pay for THAT penalty ourselves because there is nothing left after death that has any chance without a resurrection. If there IS a "soul" that lives on after the death of the body... and we pay the "death" penalty with our body dying just like Christ's body died for the payment of sin, HOW IS THIS ANY DIFFERENT?

Apart from Christ's untimate sacrifice of His whole life and being... all He was, we could not be forgiven. WITH this sacrifice... this true DEATH... cessation of consciousness... oblivion... comes the means to escape the true second death... that of ceasing to exist for all eternity.

Do you realize that believing a body is all that died is exactly what Satan is teaching through this doctrine most Christianity believe? It is essentially saying... "WE DON'T NEED CHRIST BECAUSE WE ALREADY DID IT ON OUR OWN." This is a "destructive heresy" within the Christian community, well veiled, and which is a slap in Christ's face as to what He really risked and gave as payment to all humanity, and the depth of the horrors of sin itself. Christ gave His all... His mind, thoughts, all of His being... His whole life, PERIOD. He did not simply pack up and leave the body that died on that cross. When He cried, "Father, into your hands I commend my spirit," He knew He was on death's door, and that the Spirit in man which he spoke of, which He also had, (as all humans have), returned to God. (NOTE: This spirit is NOT the "soul," but is the spiritual component to humankind which creates our minds, our ability to think, reason, create, etc. It is actually a spiritual component God gave that sets us apart from animal mind, and which records our character and nature for later tapping when the resurrection to new bodies takes place...Heb 12:23 " the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect...")

One additional point to consider on the issue of what death is and what it means biblically for mankind. The biblical sacrifices set up by God were a foreshadow of the sacrifice Christ made. These animals were killed, slaughtered, and their blood used to signify the future death that Christ had to bear. In what way do these sacrifices reveal anything about supposed universal salvation? How does the death of probably a billion or more animals over the centuries, right up to 70 AD when the temple was destroyed, point to death not really being death? Was the "death" these animals receive anything less than real death? Did these animals receive "purging and cleansing" through these sacrifices, and not really die?

How can animal deaths reveal anything but the penalty for sin as being actual, real, and eternal death?

The above alone shines a light on the deception this doctrine is wrapped up in, but let's proceed with the many scriptures that discuss life and death and the choice we have in this process. We use the bible to define "death" as meaning the end of life and consciousness, and "lake of fire" as the event which consumes this earth and all who have willingly rejected God and Christ and truth. Nowhere are either terms defined otherwise and to utilize other documents, ideas or beliefs to define God's word is grave error.

By simply redefining "death" and "lake of fire," universal salvation proponents can then go on to change the meaning of countless scriptures which cast doubt on their doctrine. Some of these are listed below, and discussed in light of biblical definitions. There are simply far to many scriptures that relate to choice and decision and we can't lump them all into the same doctrinal support system without having to reason around them all.

It must be made clear that the very concept of "hell fire" comes from the greek word Gehennah, taken from an actual valley in Jerusalem where trash, dead animals and occasional dead criminals were cast to burn or rot away. It was here that the "worms" were, what we know as maggots and perhaps some earthworms that were attracted to the vegetation that was rotting. Everyone in Christ's time knew full well what this "hell" meant, and it had nothing to do with correction or life, and everything to do with real death and destruction. We cannot take this origin and twist it to mean something the Greek doesn't support. If "lake of fire" means correction, why does Christ reference worms and what in the world do worms have to do with correction?

Let's now go through some scriptures that address these issues and use common sense and biblical reasoning.

Rev 19:20 And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshiped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.

2 human beings are killed in the lake of fire. But remember, God is not willing that ANY should perish... yet these two humans clearly perish because the lake of fire is called the second or spiritual, death (see below). Some have said these men are of Satan and not physical... convenient belief, or they say that this is just their first death and they will be resurrected in the second resurrection, but the second death is the ONLY death related to the lake of fire.

Rev 20:14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. Rev 20:15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

Here, proponents of universal salvation claim that this scripture (:14) is actually saying that "death and hell being cast into the lake of fire is the second death." Let's analyze this a bit... if, as they claim, death and hell itself will be destroyed by being cast into the lake of fire and that THIS is what is called the second death, how is it that human beings that are cast into this lake of fire are NOT destroyed in the same way death and hell are destroyed? If people are not destroyed, then death and hell are not either, and they must then remain.

How can the lake of fire "purify" human beings through some sort of a time and punishment event, but that death and hell are affected in another way... destroyed?

:15 - Why reference "whosoever was not found... was cast into the lake of fire" if all are going to be saved and NO one will be destroyed? Why wouldn't these be written in the Book of Life if "all" will be saved? The first death means death... cessation of life and consciousness why should the second death NOT mean the same?

Matt 8:11 And I say to you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven. 12 But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Matt 22:13 Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Here is a clear contrast between God's kingdom, and outer darkness with weeping and grinding of teeth. Are we to believe that some who are saved and in the kingdom will be happy and others saved will be in darkness and weeping and angry?

Matt 24:51 And shall cut him asunder, and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Hypocrites in the kingdom? Sound like salvation to you? Will God allow hypocrites to live forever in the kingdom?

Matt 25:30 And cast you the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

More outer darkness, weeping and anger... nothing indicating salvation, and everything indicating that some will be destroyed... to be in outer darkness, oblivious and unconscious to everything... non-existent.

Matt 25:34 Then shall the King say to them on his right hand, Come, you blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. . .


Matt 25:41 Then shall he say also to them on the left hand, Depart from me, you cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: :46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

Who is being cursed here and where do they get to go? Everlasting fire and punishment! Please note that the punishMENT is everlasting... not to end, this does not say "punishING" continues forever...

Everlasting = NT:166 = aionios (ahee-o'-nee-os); from NT:165; perpetual (also used of past time, or past and future as well):KJV - eternal, for ever, everlasting.

It must be understood that the above word for everlasting comes from a root word meaning "age" or "age lasting," but this word is different from that root and means something different than "age lasting." Notice that this same word is used when referencing eternal life for God's children. If this means "age lasting" only, then eternal life as we have come to understand it from God's word doesn't really mean "eternal." This word carries the concept of "permanence," whether of punishment OR eternal life.

The contrast in Mt. 25 is receiving the kingdom vs being cursed and thrown into fire and suffering eternal death and punishment. This contrast implies that choice is part of the salvation picture, simply because God wants all to be saved, but He warns of what happens if someone doesn't make the grade. If God is going to save everyone, there would be no contrast needed because He would make sure none was needed.

Because those that embrace universal salvation believe the lake of fire is simply "correction" and that those who go into it will be "corrected" and then obtain eternal life, it must be noted that throughout the bible, there is NO mention or reference to this event as being simply "correction," NO reference to HOW this "correction" takes place, WHEN, in the overall plan of God for mankind, this takes place, OR the end of this "correction" and being given spirit life. Why silent on all this when God is so clear on all the other basics such as the first resurrection and the second resurrection?

In addition to this, IF the lake of fire is correction of those who reject Christ and God, how can this same "lake of fire" that will "correct" humans, be the SAME fire that actually destroys the Earth and because of which God will create a NEW Earth? How can it do both? When Christ comes, He ushers in the Kingdom of God. Where will these people supposedly be "tried and corrected" if not on the Earth?

Another question to ask is, if the "lake of fire" is simply a cleansing and purifying that those who have not accepted God and Christ go through to eventually purify them, are we to believe that Satan and the demons will also be purified and cleansed (saved) as well? Notice that the lake of fire is prepared for whom???

Matt 25:41 Then shall he say also to them on the left hand, Depart from me, you cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: :46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

Prepared for mankind? Prepared for purifying and saving humans??? NO! It is prepared for Satan and his demons, and will, according to other scriptures, destroy them completely, so why would any humans cast into the lake of fire (the second death) NOT be destroyed? Why cast Satan and his demons into this same lake of fire if it is for correcting and purifying human beings?

More to consider:

1 Thes 5:19 Quench not the Spirit.

Quench = NT:4570 sbennumi (sben'-noo-mee); a prolonged form of an apparently primary verb; to extinguish (literally or figuratively): - go out, quench.

If people can quench the spirit... extinguish it, then how can they be saved? Quenching something involves free choice, free will on the subject. If it is all up to God, then the spirit wouldn't be quenched.

Luke 13:28 There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when you shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrust out.

What else is there besides the kingdom and salvation? Where are they thrust out to outside of God's kingdom? How can we extrapolate from this scripture that people will be "corrected" when "thrust out," and then be brought back INTO God's kingdom after this "correction?" If the kingdom will be on this earth, where would this "thrusting out" be sending them for the supposed "correction?"

Ezek 18:20 The soul that sins, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. 21 But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die.

Ezek 18:23 Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? says the Lord GOD: and not that he should return from his ways, and live? 24 But when the righteous turns away from his righteousness, and commits iniquity, and does according to all the abominations that the wicked man does, shall he live? All his righteousness that he has done shall not be mentioned: in his trespass that he has trespassed, and in his sin that he has sinned, in them shall he die.

Matt 7:13 Enter you in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leads to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: 14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leads to life, and few there be that find it.

Destruction: NT:684 = apoleia (ap-o'-li-a); from a presumed derivative of NT:622; ruin or loss (physical, spiritual or eternal): KJV - damnable (-nation), destruction, die, perdition, perish, pernicious ways, waste.

If God is saving everyone and doing the leading, why do so many NOT find the "way?" Life and death, again, mentioned here.

These scriptures do not support a universal salvation doctrine. On the contrary, they support the truth that even if someone is righteous (only through God's spirit) and they turn from this... turn from truth back to sin, then they are in danger of (eternal) death once again. God isn't playing word games with unconverted Israel and He isn't speaking of physical death here or else the wicked wouldn't have the chance to repent and turn to righteousness because they would have already died for their sins.

The above scriptures speak about life and death, choice and even falling away from salvation. Satan is the liar who first told man that he wouldn't die if He sinned, and this lie is becoming popular among various COG factions. Many want to make excuses for all the "good" people in the world who claim to worship Christ but don't accept most of God's word or truth. Universal salvation is their answer.

Rev 21:7 He that overcomes shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son. 8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

If one overcomes, they inherit all things, BUT... those who DON'T overcome... what is their state? The fearful, unbelieving, abominable, murderers... and what is their fate? If there wasn't going to be some people in the latter state, there would be no need to even mention the latter fate. If those who overcome "inherit all things," and God is their God, and the over-comer is God's child, what do those who take part in the lake of fire receive after "correction?" The SAME thing???

Ezek 18:31 Cast away from you all your transgressions, whereby you have transgressed; and make you a new heart and a new spirit: for why will you die, O house of Israel? 32 For I have no pleasure in the death of him that dies, says the Lord GOD: wherefore turn yourselves, and live.

Why would God say He doesn't have any pleasure in the death of people if this "death" is correction and purging... the SAME type of correction and purging those who ARE responding to God are involved in?

"Turn yourselves and live" God says to us. Choice again. How convenient it is to have personal choice in salvation taken away and simply be the puppet that no free choice makes us.

Ezek 33:11 Say to them, As I live, says the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn you, turn you from your evil ways; for why will you die, O house of Israel?

Ezek 33:14 Again, when I say to the wicked, you shalt surely die; if he turn from his sin, and do that which is lawful and right; 15 If the wicked restore the pledge, give again that he had robbed, walk in the statutes of life, without committing iniquity; he shall surely live, he shall not die.

These scriptures are not just for ancient Israel, but are also prophetic. God is speaking to modern Israel, and the resurrected Israelites, all Israel, and clearly providing them with a choice of life or death.

Matt 10:22 And you shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endures to the end shall be saved.

Why this contrast... endure to the end equals being saved... if it isn't an issue? If one doesn't endure to the end, what does this mean for that person? Eternal life and salvation anyway AFTER "correction?" Wouldn't those being "corrected" have to "endure" to the end of their correction? Why not "endure" the first time around? Why the contrast?

2 Peter 2:20 For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning. 21 For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered to them. 22 But it is happened to them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.

How could it actually be better to NOT have known the way of righteousness if someone is "overcome" by the pollutions of the world if salvation is guaranteed? How can it be better to NOT know God's truth if universal salvation is a fact? How can it be better NOT knowing the way of righteousness and how can THAT equal salvation as well? What about the next scripture?

Heb 6:4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, 5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, 6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again to repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

Notice it states it is "IMPOSSIBLE?" to renew someone to repentance if they have fallen away? That is, they have freely chosen to reject God's ways and have embraced sin, wrong thinking, once again, and this makes it impossible for God to save them.  Christ's sacrifice is for those who accept it and who respond to the process of salvation and sanctification.  It cannot save someone who, as the scriptures state, crucify Christ again.  The sacrifice CANNOT cover them because they reject it, and therefore, the death penalty falls on them once again, and this death is the second death? for all eternity.  This scripture cannot be discarded as meaningless.  God would not have put it into scriptures if it wasn't something which could happen, yet you say it isn't something that can possibly happen? so who do we believe?

Also notice Matt 12:32

32 "And whosoever speaks a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but who ever speaks against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come." How can this leave any doubt as to the reality of eternal death? If one cannot be forgiven for something they do in this life, EVEN in the next age, where does the "trial and purging" concept come from?

Heb 4:1 Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it.

How can one "come short" of entering God's eternal rest if all will eventually be saved?

Rev 2:7 He that has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches; To him that overcomes will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.

If one doesn't overcome, what is his fate? Salvation and the tree of life anyway?

Matt 23:33 You serpents, you generation of vipers, how can you escape the damnation of hell?

Damnation = NT:2920 krisis (kree'-sis); decision (subjectively or objectively, for or against); by extension, a tribunal; by implication, justice (especially, divine law)

Hell = NT:1067 geena (gheh'-en-nah); of Hebrew origin [OT:1516 and OT:2011]; valley of (the son of) Hinnom; ge-henna (or Ge-Hinnom), a valley of Jerusalem, - hell.

The word "hell" is the same word discussed above regarding a place where things are burned up and rot away. This "hell" isn't the same hell, meaning grave or the first death.

Mark 3:29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost has never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation:

To never be forgiven... having eternal damnation... and yet still receive salvation? Why discuss this if no one could possibly be in such a position? Eternal damnation... meaning eternal death because they choose not to submit and respond.

Heb 6:8 But that which bears thorns and briers is rejected, and is nigh to cursing; whose end is to be burned.

Mal 4: For, behold, the day comes, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, says the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.

Does this sound like "correction?" Not leaving a tree or shrub "neither root nor branch" means that tree is dead with NO hope of sprouting again to life via the root or branch. This clearly means they are dead with no resurrection possible. Burning them up, leaving nothing from which life can again come.

Matt 3:12 Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.

Matt 13:30 Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather you together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

Luke 3:17 Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and will gather the wheat into his garner; but the chaff he will burn with fire unquenchable.

Contrasts again... wheat and chaff, life and death. NOTHING in this comes remotely close to even hinting at "correction" being meant by this "burning" and no mention (anywhere) of these people being welcome back AFTER their supposed lake of fire experience.

2 Thess 1:7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, 8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: 9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;

Punished with everlasting destruction...?

Mark 14:21 The Son of man indeed goes, as it is written of him: but woe to that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! Good were it for that man if he had never been born.

What sense could this make if there isn't some fact to what Christ is saying? What is worse than not being born? If all people born will receive salvation, why would Christ say it would have been better for him to not be born? If one is not born, one has nothing, no existence, no thoughts, zip. Universal salvation says all born will receive salvation and eternal life. Obviously, having lived and turned away from salvation brings only weeping and anger, and the second death... worse than not having ever been born in the first place because of the suffering that takes place and the pain caused by this individual.

Mark 9:43 And if thy hand offend you, cut it off: it is better for you to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:

Mark 9:45 And if your foot offend you, cut it off: it is better for you to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:

Christ is using analogies here, but the message is clear. Why discuss "life vs hell fire" if salvation is assured to all? It wouldn't matter if you sinned with both hands because you would still "enter into life" if universal salvation were true. What harm would there be in having two hands or two feet in hell if universal salvation actually means they will eventually be saved anyway?

John 8:51 Verily, verily, I say to you, If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death.

Christ used the word "if..." If someone keeps His sayings, he shall never see death. Why not say "when" man keeps all my sayings? Why bring death into the thought if death isn't a possibility? Christ isn't speaking about physical death because all who have ever kept His sayings in the past are dead... they HAVE seen physical death.

If this "death" is some sort of spiritualized separation from God or whatever, then does this mean that there are people who have never experienced this "separation?" What "death" is Christ speaking about here?

John 11:26 And who ever lives and believes in me shall never die.

On the other hand, all who go to the lake of fire and do NOT believe in Christ will... WHAT? Never die, too?

Obad. 16 For as you have drunk upon my holy mountain, so shall all the heathen drink continually, yea, they shall drink, and they shall swallow down, and they shall be as though they had not been.

This could only take place if those being referred to here were completely destroyed. Universal salvation says anyone who has ever lived will receive salvation so how can someone be as though they had not been? Physical death alone doesn't explain this, nor does universal salvation, in any interpretation. The only way is for them to cease to exist... be completely destroyed, forever.

Rev 17:8 The beast that you saw was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.

Well, here we have something mentioning... "whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world." Why would God, (who is planning to save everyone according to universal salvation proponents) NOT have some in the very book of life which was written before creation? If all will be saved, they should "all" be in the book of life, right?

Lazarus and the Rich man parable;

Luke 16:25 But Abraham said, Son, remember that you in thy lifetime received thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and you art tormented. 26 And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.

Let's be realistic. How can this parable be explained by universal salvation? How can anyone review all the scriptures above and claim that they don't point to a clear death that could happen? What is this gulf that can't be passed? If it cannot be passed, how can ANY correction make it passable? Obviously those with eternal life cannot pass over to the second death and those who go into the lake of fire (second death) cannot pass from death to life.

Rev 2:11 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches; He that overcomes shall not be hurt of the second death.

Death is death and eternal death is eternal death which cannot be remedied.

The most serious ramifications for the doctrine of universal salvation is what it inevitably leads to. Let's cover some of the more serious issues this false doctrine subtly supports and encourages. Keep in mind that those who embrace universal salvation will admittedly have clever sounding arguments for each of these issues to paint them as innocent and not threatening. Satan's best ploy is to present a lie as an angel of light. The danger is in what believing and accepting universal salvation and rejecting the biblical scriptures really do to one's spiritual foundation if it is allowed to fester and do it's work on the mind and spiritual lives of people?

  1. Universal Salvation strikes at the very salvation that comes only through Jesus Christ.

    As mentioned above, if humans suffer the second "death" as they believe it, and it really doesn't mean death, then Christ's actual death (what allows forgiveness for all humanity) becomes useless. If Christ's death paid the "death" (first OR second) penalty FOR us... in our stead... then NO ONE should have to pay the penalty or be "hurt" by the second death. Universal salvation has humans paying for their own sins and this is a heresy that shames the very sacrifice of Jesus Christ and it's importance... in affect, DENYING CHRIST.

    Another point is this: If salvation is guaranteed to everyone, what need for a sacrifice? Some will say that forgiveness is still necessary and that Christ still had to die, but the subtle danger remains. To be taught that salvation comes regardless of anything or any teaching, then perhaps many being called will be inclined to not pursue God's word or truth upon hearing about universal salvation, or some within the COG can gradually excuse their overcoming or lack thereof with a false sense of security in assured salvation later on. Remember, Satan's fate is the lake of fire, death for eternity, and he wants as many humans as possible to receive his fate as well.

    Some universal salvation believers claim that if God wants to call someone, He can... in other words, to be concerned that someone might not hear the call or respond to it is to believe that God is not omnipotent. So why do scriptures state that "many are called but few are chosen?" How come God calls so many but can't seem to be able to "chose" most of them? Why call many and only chose a few if God is responsible for the whole thing?

    To believe that it is all up to God removes personal responsibility for standing for God's way of life and rejecting false Christianity in many ways. Christ commanded the apostles to preach the gospel to the whole world... but why do that when God is the one responsible for calling and opening minds? Why all the warnings by the apostles about heresy in the Church? Why warn about wolves in the church... tares in the church...? Christ stated that we were to repent and believe the gospel... WHAT Gospel? The Gospel of the Kingdom... and THAT involves human choice.

  2. "Salvation is guaranteed regardless of what you do or believe so don't fret it... you can't do anything to lose out on salvation."

    This is an obvious first step in turning away from believing and accepting law. In other words, if universal salvation is true, then at some point, the obvious conclusion is to ask, "why keep any of God's laws?" This incredibly subtle yet damnable doctrine simply takes any given individual, one step at a time, slowly and subtly away from God's laws. Why keep the Sabbath or Holy Days if salvation is guaranteed? Why do battle now when salvation is still assured without doing that battle now? Satan has, incredibly deceitfully, established this doctrine to waylay God's people and any who might be considering biblical truth. Human nature will put off pain and suffering if they do not have to experience it now and believe they can just wait till they "have" to receive it... which could be too late.

    The argument goes, "Of course I believe in the Sabbath, Holy Days, etc., and I wouldn't give those up." However, carry the universal salvation premise out to its logical conclusion, which is what happens given time and embracing of this deceitful belief, and you will inevitable cast off more and more truth because there is no perceived need to continue. It is the veil once again slowly descending on spiritual understanding that is so prevalent these days. This loss of understanding occurs to all who begin walking away from God's truth, even though they claim they never will. It always happens.

    Unfortunately, many of those who are embracing this belief system have already rejected one and usually more truths of God and this comes along to fill the void and provide a convenient "excuse belief system" which they can latch on to for comfort and support... just long enough to spiritually weaken them even further, until they cast off more truth. It is evil genius that has propagated such an idea.

  3. No personal choice.

    What does this, alone, tell a human, carnal mind? Does it even hint at there being anything to do? Any personal responsibility to set your feet in the right direction is thrown to the wind. How soon we forget Phil 2:12 "Wherefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling." Does this sound like no choice?

    Cleaver arguments arise as to what this scripture actually means, and they always exclude the dozens of scriptures that clearly show personal responsibility. Take a good look at just the New Testament and do an in-depth study of all the verbs... the "action" words that Christ and the Apostles encourage every Christian to be participating in. Try to justify universal salvation by these dozens of scriptures alone. Also, the "lake of fire correction" promoted by this doctrine essentially means God will "force" people to accept and believe His way, regardless of how long the torture takes place. If people can fall away, quench the spirit, not endure NOW, today, WITH God's spirit working, what makes it possible for it to be successful in the "lake of fire correction?"

  4. IF universal salvation is true, then there is no real need to even preach the Gospel because everyone will be saved in spite of not preaching it.

    This means we can comfortable buddy up with any heresy we want because we know that what others believe doesn't matter and we can fellowship (socialize is more correct since fellowship is a spirit and truth issue) with them and be influenced by their beliefs. We can just accept them as they are, and we don't have to feel any need to be lights or examples to others. "We certainly want to be 'politically correct' and not offend or consider others as wrong in their beliefs." After all, how can there really be a "wrong" if one looks at the big... universal salvation... picture?

    In fact, some carry the universal salvation doctrine as far as to believe that everyone who comes to and mouths belief in Jesus Christ is "called" by God, but that they just haven't been given as much truth as those who believe in the Sabbath or Holy Days. If, they contend, they are "good" people, nice, and "do good works," they will be saved and are part of the true COG regardless of their beliefs and practices or understanding. They claim, "We can just agree on what we agree on and ignore anything that isn't agreed upon because it is divisive and harms fellowship and loving others."

    One of the greatest threats to truth is the "ecumenical" movement growing around the world. This is the attempt to blend all religions into some degree of harmony and acceptance despite doctrinal and belief differences. This is the one world government and religion prophesied to develop in the end time, and which will deceive and mislead the world into accepting any form of religion. God speaks to this issue...

    2 John 9 Whosoever transgresses, and abides not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abides in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. 10 If there come any to you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: 11 For he that bids him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

    Do you realize that when someone believes another gospel and doctrine other than what God's word teaches, and we accept their religion, or wish them "godspeed," we are actually partaking in the evil that God considers this... condoning it through accepting their religion as "good enough" and not distinguishing between that which is Holy and unholy to God. This is a serious position to be in with God.

    There are many scriptures that warn us to stay away from false religion. Even a cursory study of false Christianity will reveal the validity of false Christians among the true church and the firm warnings about it. Universal salvation renders these scriptures moot by eliminating any real life and death threats to salvation.

    One more line of thought to consider here. Of course, God wouldn't want ANY living being He created to die. He didn't create life with a desire that any die. Many (if not all) universal salvation believers claim Satan was created evil, based on the following scripture...

    Isa 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

    The word translated "evil" is as follows:

    OT:7451 = ra' (rah); from OT:7489; bad or (as noun) evil (natural or moral): adversity, affliction, bad, calamity, displease (-ure), distress, evil ([-favouredness], man, thing), exceedingly, great, grief (-vous), harm, heavy, hurt (-ful), ill (favoured), mark, mischief (-vous), misery, naught (-ty), noisome, not please, sad (-ly), sore, sorrow, trouble, vex, wicked (-ly, -ness, one), worse (-st), wretchedness, wrong. [Incl. feminine ra` ah; as adjective or noun.]

    From OT:7489 = ra` a` (raw-ah'); a primitive root; properly, to spoil (literally, by breaking to pieces); figuratively, to make (or be) good for nothing, i.e. bad (physically, socially or morally): afflict, associate selves [by mistake for OT:7462], break (down, in pieces), displease, (be, bring, do) evil (doer, entreat, man), showself friendly [by mistake for OT:7462], do harm, (do) hurt, (behaveself, deal) ill, indeed, do mischief, punish, still, vex, (do) wicked (doer, -ly), be (deal, do) worse.

    Given the definitions above, would you translate this word as "evil," and then presume that this means that God actually created Satan evil? Does this sound like a loving God to create someone evil with the intention of destroying them?

    The fact that God is NOT willing that ANY should perish should clue us into His mind on the subject of life. God isn't double minded nor does He change, so He wouldn't have created Satan and the demons evil with the intent that Satan deceive mankind and then plan, inevitably, to destroy their lives later in the lake of fire, which is clearly Satan's, and at least some of the demon's, fate...

    God did NOT create evil. Christ, in speaking to the Pharisees, made this clear...

    John 8:44 You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it.

    If God created Satan evil, then it is God who is the resource for lies... the father of lies... the author, the source, NOT Satan, as Christ states here.

    Rev 17:8 The beast that you saw was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition:

    Perdition = NT:684 apoleia (ap-o'-li-a); from a presumed derivative of NT:622; ruin or loss (physical, spiritual or eternal): damnable (-nation), destruction, die, perdition, X perish, pernicious ways, waste. From NT:622 apollumi (ap-ol'-loo-mee); to destroy fully (reflexively, to perish, or lose), literally or figuratively: destroy, die, lose, mar, perish.

    To claim Satan was created evil and to be destroyed on the one hand, yet on the other hand use 2 Pet 3:9 to claim that God is NOT willing that ANY perish, and that all will receive salvation is a contradiction and not rightly dividing God's word. Satan and the demons had free choice just as all human beings will have free choice at some point in their relationship with God.

    What can these scriptures possibly mean?

    Mark 9:43 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: 44 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. 45 And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: 46 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.  47 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire: 48 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.  49 For every one shall be salted with fire, and every sacrifice shall be salted with salt. 50 Salt is good: but if the salt have lost his saltness, wherewith will ye season it? KJV

    According to your beliefs, this is telling us that those who go into this "figurative" lake of fire will NEVER be out of it? This purifying lake will NEVER end... and will be ongoing... it is never quenched.  How can it possibly be better to enter eternal life with but one eye, than to go through your lake of fire with two eyes, only to come out on the other end complete and entering into life with BOTH eyes, or feet, or hands?  This would be saying that going through the lake of fire is actually better that being in the first resurrection because then you don't have to "cut off" a body part to receive life... that is, you don't have to struggle, and fight your carnal nature and overcome. Can't you see the obvious message Christ is telling us?  Salt that looses it savor is good for nothing as Christ tells it, and is cast out? It isn't reconditioned somehow or remade into salt.

    The true lake of fire will NOT ever be quenched... but it WILL go out of its own accord when all that is burned up will be consumed.  It is not a figurative idea, but a literal event. 

    It is not my intent to see people die.  It is the seriousness of sin and its ramifications which God is trying to point out.  It is a nice, romantic idea to believe that God will force everyone to be saved, and it certainly relieves any stress, (and the scriptures themselves)  regarding so many warnings Christ gave to mankind throughout the bible.  It would be completely useless to waste so much time and writings in warning people, especially the called church members, of not letting down, and not giving up.  Christ stated, "He who endures to the end, the same shall be saved."  So what if one doesn't endure to the end of their calling and rejects it all?  As I wrote above...

    1 John 5:16 If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death . There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it. KJV

    A sin that is NOT unto death and a sin that IS to death?  One is pardonable because of repentance, the other is unpardonable, because there is no repentance.

    Satan had free will, he chose to rebel, and he will likely be destroyed forever.  Why would God allow Satan and his angels to choose death, and yet you say God will not allow Mankind to choose death?  Is God goint to save Satan and the demons?  The lake of fire is not different things for different beings.   It accomplishes the same thing regardless of who goes into it.

    Notice Eze. 28:11-19.  This is clearly describing Satan? This shows that God "ordained" that Satan be the great being He desired, and he was, for a while, but then look what happened to him.  Why did it happen?  He chose to go that way.  He chose to ignore God's teachings and laws.  He "sinned."  Is Christ's sacrifice unable to save Satan?  Is Christ's sacrifice not "enough" to cover even Satan and all the demon's sins?  Of course it is, but will they be saved?  Does God want Satan and the demons to be destroyed?  Is that His will, even though He states that He is not willing that ANY should perish, but that all should come to repentance?  Is God able to save every human, but not able to save Satan and all the demons?

    Imagine, for a moment that Satan is an example of a human "saved" by Christ's sacrifice, but then turns to evil... corrupted himself. How would God "correct" him to bring him back to salvation? Why doesn't God do this same thing with Satan? Why didn't he do it before creating us, and relieve mankind from a huge amount of evil?

    There is a huge conflict created with this position?  You can't say that God is able to save all humans, and yet can't save Satan and the demons.  There MUST be an element that is not being recognized in the reasoning for universal salvation... and that element is free will and choice.  Satan chose, freely, to rebel and to be an enemy to God, and THAT is why he will likely be destroyed in the lake of fire.  God created him so God can destroy him.  We have to be logical in all this, and also use the same criteria to decide all the issues. 

    Remember Lazareth and the rich man? This is an example of one being resurrected to physical life and the lake of fire destruction... with the gulf that cannot be crossed... the torment is the fear that the death penalty brings and that he was soon to be tossed into the lake of fire. That gulf couldn't stop a spirit being from crossing over. It represents the difference between freely choosing klife, and having abandoned it freely earlier in life. Why would there be "weeping and knashing of teeth" in this "correction" where this isn't presented as part of the church and firstfruits lives? It is simple; Some will be weeping becausee they blew it and realize it, and others will be expressing anger and bitterness to the end.

    Doesn't the bible seem conspicuously silent regarding this supposed lake of fire's result, the process, the description of the end of it? The bible has nothing to say regarding this "follow-up" process of "purification and correction."  It is pretty plain about most every other process, but this one is obviously missing, and this lends itself to mere speculation and presumption on people's part on this lake of fire.  You have to twist this meaning to force it to be something other than the literal thing it is.

    It would be a nice thought that "everyone will be saved," but I can't reconcile that belief with hundreds of scriptures and I won't trust to my own ideas of what it says that conflict with what scriptures say and mean.

    Weight out the ultimate conclusion to both doctrinal beliefs, and do it from Satan's perspective.

    "IF" universal salvation is true and is God's actual plan, then belief in God's plan as outlined in the bible and as many of us have been led by God to believe and understand won't ultimately hurt anyone's salvation in the overall plan of God. It does NO spiritual damage, EVER. However, what is the cost if universal salvation is NOT God's plan? Who stands to lose if the universal salvation doctrine is a diabolical lie and what are they losing by embracing this unbiblical belief system?

    You do the math. You judge from God's word as if in a court of law. You weight the evidence and the actual words of God Himself. You discern between what is good and what is evil. The damage done if universal salvation is not true is a serious threat now, and an eternal threat later. It is a steady weakening of God's plan and truth. YES, God has everything in control and His plan WILL be accomplished in the end, but there are consequences that affect life and death that are part of this and we play a part in the plan. God created us in His image, and that image includes free choice and will, or else God Himself has neither. He will NOT force people against their own will and choices because this goes against His character creating process.

The winds of doctrine are blowing, and too many of God's people are not on the Rock and are choosing for themselves their doctrines and how to obey God, and are abandoning multiple scriptures in the process.

Eph 4:14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;

The warning here is that many people do not understand the purpose of the "church" in the first place and some even reject the church authority as set up by God which is what leads to the situation described above and below...

2 Tim 4:3 "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts (desire, or what they want to believe) shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; (wanting to hear what satisfies that personal desire) 4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, (willfully ignoring God's word and truth and NOT proving all things or being teachable) and shall be turned to fables." (false doctrines, heresies, lies and deceptions that satisfy the intent of their hearts).

Many people of God are willingly being blown about because they have, for many reasons, abandoned the structure Christ Himself set up within the collective church. They are spiritually malnourished and are willingly taking the spiritual junk food only Satan can prepare for those who are losing sight of the true plan of God and their part in it.

It is far easier to be blown about with doctrines that are moving in the direction that we carnally would naturally move in anyway. Rather than give up cold turkey on God's truth, universal salvation provides us a slow way to distance ourselves from truth we don't like or which we hold a grudge against. Intellectual vanity loves to embrace "new truth" and to set itself apart from others. Satan sure knows how to resurrect the "old man" in us and too many are making judgments from this perspective and not God's word.

There is going to be a great deal of grief and pain associated with this and the many other false and destructive heresies being taught by equally spiritually malnourished groups and individuals. A divided body that has lost communication between the many parts can only lead to missing spiritual food, and the result is truth mixed with error, and EVERY COG group or individual is in the same boat. Yes, that includes me and that is why I need to earnestly contend for the faith once delivered, and move toward spiritual unity, studying and proving ALL things, wherever they originate from. I NEED what Christ, through the physical collection of people called the church, has to give me and I won't get it by burying my head in one group... one source of supposed spiritual food.

We must allow the collective structure called the church, with its gifts and talents provided it by God via individuals within the Body, and the bible, with its tools for sanctification, to work together to bring edification and true doctrine to God's church and people. We all need to be "buffered" by the workings of ALL the members as ONE body. Our beliefs, ideas, etc., must be allowed to be influenced and modified by the collective action of the whole Body. Anything less than that will allow continued heresy, false doctrine and Satanic deception to continue and multiply unchecked. When we believe that, we will take personal action to reach out in every way possible to the rest of the Body.

We need each other and unless we realize the unity Christ and the Father desire for us now, we will continue to maintain our positions that "our group" is the whole Body and complete enough without the others...

1 Cor 12:21 And the eye cannot say to the hand, I have no need of you: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you. 22 Nay, much more those members of the body, which "seem" (to us) to be more feeble, (unnecessary??) are necessary:

Only one group of God's true people believe they have all they need...

Rev 3:15 I know thy works, that you art neither cold nor hot: I would you were cold or hot. 16 So then because you art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will (am about to) spue you out of my mouth. 17 Because you say, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that you art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:

"We alone are rich and increased with spiritual goods and don't need anything or anyone else." If we maintain this attitude, posture and practice, we are deceiving ourselves, brethren.

Universal salvation is not a biblical sound doctrine and is a danger to all God's people.

He who has the ears to hear, let them hear!

Back to Articles Page!

Godkind web pages created and material written by Jeffrey T. Maehr. Common Law Copyright © 2012. All rights reserved. Reproduction allowed if credit to this website is listed with material. Off site material and some articles authored as stated.