Some of the universal salvation arguments put forward by scholars like Talbott and “MacDonald” (Robin Parry) are quite clever at dodging opposing proof texts. It's not hard to see how people find their arguments so winsome.
You’re probably thinking, “But what about all those passages that speak of hell as eternal?” Talbott and Parry would simply retort that they believe hell is eternal in a sense. They believe that given an eternity everyone in hell would eventually come to regret their rebellion and wish for reconciliation with God.
Since God is love, isn’t it safe to assume He will grant repentant believers in hell their reconciliation? My answer is no and my reason is based in part on a weird text which almost always gets ignored.
You’re probably thinking, “But what about all those passages that speak of hell as eternal?” Talbott and Parry would simply retort that they believe hell is eternal in a sense. They believe that given an eternity everyone in hell would eventually come to regret their rebellion and wish for reconciliation with God.
Since God is love, isn’t it safe to assume He will grant repentant believers in hell their reconciliation? My answer is no and my reason is based in part on a weird text which almost always gets ignored.
Maybe the weirdest argument against Universalism in exegetical history:
 |
| An Egyptian deity with iconographic affinities with some the divinities in Biblical apocalyptic texts |
II Peter 2.1-10 and (Peter’s source) Jude 5-7 endorse the story from 1 Enoch about God’s imprisonment of angelic beings who slept with the daughters of men. Jude quotes and mentions the book of Enoch by name in v.14. I will not elaborate all the reasons these texts can only be faithfully interpreted as references to the Enoch event but will name two. [1]
Realizing that Peter has this worldview in mind explains one text that evangelicals are usually creeped out by and obfuscate: 1 Peter 3:14-22. This passage pictures Jesus descending to the spirits in prison and preaching their defeat. Peter is using a direct allusion to 1 Enoch in which the Watchers were imprisoned in the underword (ταρταρώσας.)
The author of Enoch gives a first person account of a visit he paid to these beings and how they were crying out for forgiveness.[2] Enoch records their petition to be released from their anguish and brings it before God. God emphatically denies it. Starting in chapter 14, Enoch goes and preaches to the Watchers their eternal defeat and imprisonment.[3]
The author of Enoch gives a first person account of a visit he paid to these beings and how they were crying out for forgiveness.[2] Enoch records their petition to be released from their anguish and brings it before God. God emphatically denies it. Starting in chapter 14, Enoch goes and preaches to the Watchers their eternal defeat and imprisonment.[3]
It doesn't matter that I am quoting a non-inspired text. It's obvious from Peter’s other mentions of the Enoch event in conjunction with the flood, the destruction of Sodom, and the rescue of Lot that he considers this idea in Enoch to be historical (II Peter 2:4-9).
The assumed historicity of these events is demanded because Peter lists them in defense of his argument in 2:3 that God’s “condemnation of wickedness is not idle.” Peter relates the story of Enoch’s preaching to the spirits imprisoned with Jesus’ resurrection and how, by being raised, Jesus was declaring also the defeat and eternal imprisonment of God’s enemies.
The assumed historicity of these events is demanded because Peter lists them in defense of his argument in 2:3 that God’s “condemnation of wickedness is not idle.” Peter relates the story of Enoch’s preaching to the spirits imprisoned with Jesus’ resurrection and how, by being raised, Jesus was declaring also the defeat and eternal imprisonment of God’s enemies.
So there exists divine beings condemned to eternal torment for their sins. They have entreated God for forgiveness and God has denied their request. When Jesus defeated death, He (figuratively or literally) was declaring to them their eternal imprisonment in a like manner.
It is unwarranted to assume that God will simply free people from hell if they come to desire forgiveness. In the only Biblical case in which we can observe God’s attitude in this exact situation, Peter implies He will not. Notice Enoch’s absolute statements that their torment will be eternal and unending; that is the way ancient Jews parsed things.
Jude reflects his source Enoch when he speaks of their “eternal chains” (v.4). Second-Temple Jews apparently didn’t have some mental allegiance blocking them from these types of affirmations about God. The author is emphatic in his connection of this to the unsaved: “Just as was true of those angels who did not keep their position…They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.” (Jude 1:7)
It is unwarranted to assume that God will simply free people from hell if they come to desire forgiveness. In the only Biblical case in which we can observe God’s attitude in this exact situation, Peter implies He will not. Notice Enoch’s absolute statements that their torment will be eternal and unending; that is the way ancient Jews parsed things.
Jude reflects his source Enoch when he speaks of their “eternal chains” (v.4). Second-Temple Jews apparently didn’t have some mental allegiance blocking them from these types of affirmations about God. The author is emphatic in his connection of this to the unsaved: “Just as was true of those angels who did not keep their position…They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.” (Jude 1:7)
_______________________________________________________________________
1) a) The Greek word translated “hell” in II Peter is not the expected Hades but the anomalous ταρταρώσας. In almost every case this word appears it is in reference to the Greek myths about the fall of the Titians. Jews used this special term which discussing the Watchers because they noticed its parallels with the Titan giants (for example, Josephus Ant. 1.73). Peter has certainly borrowed his use of the word ταρταρώσας from Enoch.
b) In Jude 6-7 we know for grammatical reasons that Jude is ascribing sexual sin to the angels (note also, his mentioning of this in the context of Noah). The antecedent of τούτοις (masculine) should not be taken as “cites” πόλεις (feminine) in that passage because it would imply gender confusion.
2) 1 Enoch 13:3-6:
Then I went and spoke to them all together, and they were all afraid, and fear and trembling seized them. And they besought me to draw up a petition for them that they might find forgiveness, and to read their petition in the presence of the Lord of heaven. For from thenceforward they could not speak (with Him) nor lift up their eyes to heaven for shame of their sins for which they had been condemned.
I wrote out your petition, and in my vision it appeared thus, that your petition will not be granted unto you throughout all the days of eternity, and that judgment has been finally passed upon you: yea (your petition) will not be granted unto you. And from henceforth you shall not ascend into heaven unto all eternity.