Can a Christian be a universalist?

Is it possible for Christian to be a universalist? Some will say no, others will say yes. My position (Matt Slick) is that it is possible for a Christian to be a universalist -- note, I said "possible". But, to be clear upfront, I believe universalism to be a heresy and I would never say, "Universalists are Christians."

Nevertheless, let's say that there is a man who was not a Christian who believes that everyone will be saved. This man is on his death bed in a hospital and is visited by the hospital Chaplin. The Chaplin gives him the gospel about Jesus being God in flesh, dying for our sins, rising from the dead, the need for repentance from sin, trusting in Christ, etc. The man honestly receives Christ and then dies shortly thereafter yet he never repented of the error of universalism. Is he saved or should we say that even though he trusted Jesus as his savior, believed Jesus is God in flesh, died for his sins, and rose from the dead, and fully received Christ, but because he also believed everyone will be saved, he is then going to hell? Would anyone condemn a person to eternal fire for simply believing that everyone will be saved? I cannot see that as being the case.

There are essentials of the Christian faith. I have developed a "doctrine grid" where I have tried to arrange essential and non-essential doctrines into an easily understandable system. The essential doctrines are essential because the Bible says they are. Let me give you two examples. In John 8:24 Jesus said, "Unless you believe that I am, you will die in your sins." This is an essential doctrine because it has a penalty of damnation for denying it. Likewise 1 Cor. 15:14 says that "if Christ be not raised, your faith is in vain." Here too we see an essential doctrine because there is a condition of condemnation upon its denial. So too with the other essentials (justification by faith, monotheism, and the gospel) that the Scripture declare to be essential. See my doctrine grid again.

The question is whether or not universalism in itself denies any of the essential doctrines of Christianity. Though I consider universalism to be a false belief, I cannot automatically pronounce condemnation upon a person who acknowledges the essentials of the Christian faith and also affirms universal salvation. I don't because I don't see the scriptures doing it. Would I consider someone who holds to both the essentials and universalism to be inconsistent and confused? Absolutely! Should they repent? Yes!

But, should we pronounce the judgment of condemnation upon a person for believing a doctrine that the scriptures have not stated is an essential? For those who would say yes, then are you not elevating the non-essentials to the level of essentials? It would be like a person condemning another to damnation because the latter believes in pre-trib rapture (or post, or mid, or even non-cessationism). Since the scriptures do not pronounce judgment of condemnation for a rapture view or a view on the gifts, then neither should we -- and neither should we concerning predestination, election, millennial views, on which day to worship, charismatic gifts, etc., if others hold views different than we do on these issues.

People can be saved in varying degrees of theological error. There are regenerated people who do not understand predestination, don't accept election, don't understand federal headship, are clueless about imputation, Christ's eternal priesthood, covenant, etc., yet they are regenerated. They simply haven't learned those doctrinal truths yet. Are they condemned for not rightly understanding these very important biblical teachings? No, because the ones I just listed in this paragraph are not declared by the Bible to be essential doctrines.

In fact, I did not know that Jesus had physically risen from the dead until two years after I became a Christian. I knew he had risen, but I didn't know how.1 How is that possible? Well, I wasn't taught it or I missed those sermons. But, once I heard the truth, I believed it. Would anyone say I wasn't saved until I believed Jesus physically rose from the dead even though I had received him and trusted him to forgive me of my sins? I certainly hope not. The truth is that I believed in the physical resurrection of Christ because I was saved. I did not become saved because I believed he physically rose. Likewise, for the Calvinists, does regeneration occur when we understand proper doctrine? Or is proper doctrine the result of regeneration? Remember, we are saved in (and from) our sins as well as our errors and God graciously and patiently works correction in us.

Furthermore, I believe that a true Christian (if he erringly holds to universalism), will move away from that error because the Holy Spirit will work the truth within him. Eventually, he will repent and reject it.

Also, I would say that a universalist who openly and knowingly affirms universal salvation after having been clearly taught the truth in scripture, and yet continues to hold to a "second chance" doctrine (as some do), and/or punishment in the afterlife for a duration of time and then salvation occurs, is not a Christian. It is these issues that are so serious as to deny justification by faith. But, let me say it one more time, I believe that there can be ignorant people who erringly hold to universalism, who have not thought universalism's position through properly, and have not been properly exposed to the true teachings of the Bible, who can be saved. I believe it is "possible" for them to be saved in spite of their inconsistency. That is my position.

Now, am I saying that all universalists can be Christian? Not at all. Do I defend universalism? No. Do I think that universalism is a serious problem that undermines the gospel? Yes, I do. But, I can see a scenario where a universalist can be a Christian (death bed) and I believe that it is possible to be saved in confusion and error -- including the confusion and error of universalism. I do not see how believing that all will be saved automatically disqualifies a person from being saved. I don't, because I don't see the scriptures doing it. But, if someone says it does disqualify them, then they would need to demonstrate that from scripture.

Challenge for Critics of this Position

1. There are essential and non-essential doctrines (see doctrine grid). Denial of the essentials negates salvation. Denial of non-essentials does not. If believing in universalism means that a person is not saved, then it must mean that the person has denied an essential doctrine. 
   1. Please cite the essential doctrine(s) that it thus denies.
   2. Please specifically show scriptures that condemn such a person for that belief.
2. If believing in universalism automatically disqualifies a person from being a Christian, then please specify the logic used to make such a pronouncement.
3. If you say it is because they deny the eternal punishment of God, then please demonstrate how such a denial means a person is automatically unsaved.
   1. Please use scripture to support your position.

Remember, I am not trying to defend universalism. I believe it is wrong and against scripture -- as are other errors that do not damn. But, I cannot state in good conscience that if a person believes all will be saved, that it automatically means the person is not saved.

1. 1. 8-23-05

   I have been criticized for this position. Therefore I thought I would add a bit of information for further clarification. When I was first saved the gospel was preached to me and I received Christ as my savior. I called upon the name of the Lord. I sought the Lord Jesus and asked him to forgive me of my sins and I put no reliance on anything in me in anyway. The Lord saved me and he washed me clean. But, I did not continue to go to church because I was not a church-goer. I had gone to that church that night to see a film and ended up receiving Christ. No one sought me out afterwards and no one tried to disciple me. As a result, in my ignorance and drifting, I did not attend a church. I wandered for about two years until the Lord put upon my heart to get close to him. It was at this time in a Bible study that I learned that Jesus had risen physically from the dead. For the best of my recollection I believed that he had risen, I just don't remember knowing that it was a physical resurrection. When I was taught the physical resurrection of Christ from Scriptures I immediately accepted it.
   
   But, there are those who are saying that I was not saved because of this. My response is that I did not get saved because I believed in Christ's resurrection. I believed because I was saved by the grace of God in Christ Jesus. I do not affirm doctrinal regeneration. But, I do very much believe that a true Christian will not deny essential doctrines and because the Holy Spirit is in him, when presented with the truth he will accept it, as did I.