Will All People Be Saved? A Review of “Until the Last One’s Found” by Curt Parton
Christian Universalism is growing in its acceptance among orthodox Christians. By ‘orthodox Christians,’ I mean those who hold to the traditional beliefs and doctrines set down by the church in the early years after the death and resurrection of Christ.
I first came across Christian Universalism a few years ago while I was studying for my Master of Divinity. I read, researched, and weighed the pros and cons of the three prominent views of hell (see my post Three Views on Hell), attempting to discern which is the most scripturally sound and the most congruent with my overall understanding of theology.
Recently, I read Curt Parton’s Until the Last One’s Found: An Introduction to Universal Reconciliation and Restoration. Why read yet another resource on universalism, you might ask. Well, beyond my insatiable desire to learn and read about theological controversies, there were several good reasons:
First, the title grabbed me.
Universal reconciliation and restoration—how beautiful is that subtitle? It paints a wonderful landscape of harmony, justice, and peace among all people and creation.
Secondly, it was marketed to me as a pastoral exploration of Christian universalism.
Parton absolutely delivers on this promise. If you are looking for a deep theological and academic dive into Christian universalism, this isn't it. For that kind of academic and theological rigor, read Thomas Talbott’s The Inescapable Love of God or David Bentley Hart’s That All Shall Be Saved. Until the Last One’s Found is, however, perfect for the layperson wanting to know more about the Scriptural and theological backing for Christian universalism.
Thirdly, it clocks in at a very readable 203 pages,
including a bibliography, a recommended reading list for those interested in further research, and two additional appendix chapters discussing annihilationism and the intersection of Calvinism, Arminianism, and Universalism, both of which are, in my opinion, essential in rounding out the conversation on Christian Universalism.
Lastly, it is always beneficial to read the latest research and theological wrestling regarding any topic,
especially one that is still largely questioned by Christian orthodoxy though it is growing in popularity largely due to the works of writers and thinkers like Parton, Robin Parry, David Bentley Hart, and Thomas Talbott.
And so, I devoured it within a few days.
As already mentioned, Parton hits it out of the park with his readable, relatable writing style. In his introduction, he explains that he teaches his small congregation in a dialectical Socratic style, which comes through in his writing, too. You feel as if you are in conversation with him as he explores the scriptural and theological basis for eternal conscious torment and universalism. Clearly, his conversations with his congregants have been thorough, because he anticipates and answers nearly every question I had as I was reading, and he manages to do so clearly and succinctly. It made for a very enjoyable read.
It’s worth mentioning that Parton comes from a very clear Western Evangelical perspective, therefore he places a high value on Scripture study and Christ’s substitutionary atonement to save all people. From the Wesleyan Quadrilateral (which upholds the four pillars orthodoxy as Scripture, tradition, reason, and experience), Parton clearly values Scripture as his primary source and authority.
We need to be willing to reexamine and reconsider any belief we hold to make sure it actually is biblical…Where stands it written? Where is this belief we hold actually taught in Scripture? Are we rightly understanding the pertinent Scriptures? This process of reexamining and reconsidering our beliefs about hell is what this book is about. (15, Kindle)
I state his background primarily because other traditions such as our Catholic, Orthodox, or even Pentecostal brothers and sisters may emphasize the other three pillars of the Quadrilateral (traditional teachings [i.e. church fathers], experience, and reason) as equal to the authority of Scripture. Whether you agree or disagree with the Quadrilateral or any of these approaches to faithful belief and practice, it is helpful to identify our own tradition’s biases when reading any work on a controversial topic like universalism.
That said, let’s talk about the content of the book.
He first tackles the theological difficulties of hell.
We may completely trust what we’ve been taught about hell, and firmly believe this is what the Bible teaches. Yet when we think about people actually experiencing endless torment, with no possibility of relief—even though we may believe it—we wrestle with the reality of this belief. (18)
The practical implications of this belief are what make it so hard to stomach, especially regarding those who are dearest to us—will my brother/sister/cousin/friend be condemned to hell for all eternity?
The thought that our loved ones might burn in an eternal fire while we apparently sing and dance forever before God’s throne is gut-wrenchingly dissonant with the biblical portrayal of a God of love. Parton briefly lays out the alternatives to the traditionally accepted position of eternal conscious torment—annihilationism and universal reconciliation/restoration (i.e. Christian Universalism)—before examining the biblical and theological support for eternal conscious torment and universal restoration.
My purpose is not to equally explore all the different views, but to provide an accessible introduction to the universal restoration perspective, comparing it to the traditional eternal conscious torment view. (22)
Without spoiling the book, I’ll offer a summary below and highlight the bits that I enjoyed most or would have liked to read more about.
Eternal Conscious Torment
Exploring the biblical words for hell: Sheol, Hades, and Gehenna.
The one complaint I have about this chapter is that two key scriptural words with hell-like connotations were omitted. It left out the Hebrew word bôr, which is often translated as ‘the Pit’ and refers to ‘the grave’ in several locations (Ps. 30:3, Prov. 1:12, Is. 14:15, Ezek. 31:16) Granted, most of these references speak of Sheol and the Pit in the same breath; however, it is important to note that two different words are consistently used.
It also failed to mention the Greek phrase limnōn tou pyros, which is typically translated as ‘lake of fire’ (Rev. 19:20). This phrase is critical in the discussion of hell, since it is where many of our images of a fiery, tormenting hell come from.
“Then the sea gave up the dead (nekros) that were in it, and death (thanatos) and Hades gave up the dead (nekros) that were in them; each one was judged according to their works. 14 Death (thanatos) and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire (limnōn tou pyros). This is the second death, the lake of fire. 15 And anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.” (Rev. 20:13-15, CSB)
Note that four different words are used to describe the dead, death, Hades (the holding place of the dead), and the lake of fire.
Parton keeps this chapter simple and succinct; the scholar in me wanted more exposition on verses like Rev. 20:13-15 and a more comprehensive discussion on the Hebrew and Greek words for death/hell. Alas, I reminded myself that his purpose was in writing a short, clear introduction to the topic instead of a comprehensive study. In that, he did well.
Early church perspectives: I particularly enjoyed this chapter because it debunks the modern evangelical assumption that Christian Universalism is a new-fangled New Age invention. Parton shares his research on the church fathers, listing nine of twenty-three well-respected church fathers as conclusively having supported universalism at some point in their lives (he concedes that Augustine and Jerome would both later recant this position), as well as five others that were inconclusive in their position.
“Has eternal conscious torment been the consistent view of the church throughout history? No, it has not. It definitely wasn’t the consensus view, or even the majority view, for the first five hundred years of the life of the church.” (47)
To me, this is a solid piece of evidence that universalism was not always considered a heresy by the church, and that the prevailing doctrine of eternal conscious torment did not hold the support of the majority of patristic believers, but was instead used by those in power to instill a fear of eternal damnation in the followers of the Western Church (i.e. the Roman Catholic Church) if they did not
Support the Church financially with indulgences and taxes, and
Follow the rules of the Church absolutely, including fighting in war as commanded by the Church (e.g. the Crusades).
The doctrine of hell and eternal conscious torment, it seems, was a power play more than it was supported by Scripture and the early prominent theologians (this was not a major argument in this book, but is one that I have found especially compelling; read Hart’s That All Shall Be Saved for more on this).
Also, notably, those patristic fathers who supported eternal conscious torment were mostly Latin-speaking theologians, while the Greek-speaking theologians primarily supported universalism.
"This is significant because the New Testament was written in Greek—and that obviously includes all the relevant hell passages. This leaves a nagging question we have to address: If the wording in these Greek Scriptures requiring an eternal hell is as clear and unequivocal as we think it is, why did so many Greek-speaking teachers in the early church believe that ultimately everyone would be saved and restored?” (49-50)
Exegesis (biblical support): In response to the above question, Parton moves on to the Greek exegesis of aionios, which is traditionally rendered ‘eternal’ or ‘forever’ (Rev. 14:11, 20:10; 1 Tim. 1:17) in modern English texts. His explanation becomes a little wordy here and may prove dense for the average layperson, however, I'll grant that it is difficult to accurately and succinctly summarize dense Greek exegesis for the average layperson; given the difficulty of the task, Parton does well.
Essentially, he explains the process of translation for this word that, in Ancient Greek literature, usually means ‘age to come,’ not ‘eternal.’ As it turns out,
“…when Jerome translated the Greek Scriptures into Latin, he translated the Greek word aionios—which does not mean eternal—with the Latin word aeternum—which does mean eternal (or at least came to mean eternal). Jerome translated the Greek word aidios (which literally means eternal, as we saw earlier) and the Greek word aionios (which doesn’t mean eternal, but “pertaining to the age”) with the same Latin word, aeternum… And English Bibles today still follow this tradition by translating the very different Greek words aidios and aionios using the same English word—eternal—continuing the same confusion.” (58-59)
Thus, Parton challenges the assumptions of ‘eternal fire’ and ‘eternal damnation’ which we draw from our unfortunately translated Greek-to-Latin-to-English texts (this is one of the reasons the KJV isn’t as reliable a translation as many fundamentalists would have us believe… but that’s a topic for another day).
As it turns out, the concept of eternal hell is not found in the original Greek New Testament text; it only exists in the ways in which we have presupposed a meaning to the word that it did not originally contain, based on faulty translation that has persisted to the post-modern era.
At this point, the frustrated layperson might argue, “Then how do we know that any of the Greek-to-English translation choices are accurate?” Their frustration is warranted. This is the work of translation and language; linguistics are far less static that we’d wish them to be, and accepting the fluidity of language and scholarship is part of being a student of Scripture, as is fact-checking translation choices to the original language.
As our research abilities and access to original texts have expanded, our ability to accurately translate Greek-to-English (or any other language) has vastly improved. This is the ongoing work of biblical scholars and experts in the biblical languages.
Other passages that are typically used to defend an eternal hell: Luke 16:19-31, Mark 9:43-48, Dan. 12:2, Heb. 9:27
Parton discusses the interpretation of these sometimes-controversial passages that describe a fiery, tormenting hell. I will not summarize his arguments here except to say that context matters. Making assumptions that a parable or saying of Jesus is a direct, explicit description of hell when he is trying to make a greater practical point to his followers (i.e. the care of the poor and vulnerable) is to perform eisegesis—that is, putting our own biases into our interpretation of the text.
It is curious that Parton does not explore passages such as Matt. 22:1-14 or Luke 21:8-26, which are sometimes used to describe the eschatological end of time and the resulting destruction of God’s enemies. But again, Parton is succinct and simply explores a few of the main passages that debaters might use in their arguments for eternal conscious torment.
Theological grounds: This chapter discusses some of the prominent theological arguments for eternal conscious torment, such as:
“The justice of God requires eternal punishment.”
“Sinning against the infinitely glorious God requires infinite punishment.”
“The eternal conscious torment of the lost is required to bring glory to God.”
“There is no possibility of salvation after death.”
“Eternal conscious torment is necessary for evangelism.”
“The doors of hell are locked on the inside.”
For each of these, Parton addresses the traditional assumptions one makes about God’s love, justice, and grace that prompt one to reject universalism. Without spoiling, I’ll suffice it to say that Scripture does not affirm any of these statements. You’ll need to read the chapter to find out why and how this is so.
“Scripture tells us a great deal about evangelism and gives us many portrayals of people actually evangelizing, sharing the good news of the gospel with others. But we don’t see anything in the Bible that shows eternal conscious torment to be a necessary component of sharing the good news. In fact, we don’t see warnings about hell to be a part of evangelism in Scripture at all! Many of us are so accustomed to hearing fearful descriptions of hell as motivation for people to be saved—or for us to get out there and share the gospel—that it’s a shock for us to realize the Bible doesn’t do this.” (89, emphasis mine)
To be clear, in his exploration of hell, Parton does not deny the existence of hell, only the existence of an eternal hell of conscious torment. Thus, he moves into an exegetical and theological exploration of universal reconciliation.
A Case for Universal Reconciliation
Old Testament references: Parton uses several OT references to explain that God’s redemption is available to all people even after judgment has been proclaimed. In fact, most often, judgment is the means by which the people (God’s chosen people, Israel, and the ‘outside nations’) come to a restored relationship with God.
The Book of Jonah: God condemned the city of Nineveh for its lawlessness, and then rescinded his judgment after they repented.
Patterns of judgment and restoration against the ‘nations’ and Israel: see Jer. 48:42, 47; 49:47, 49; Lam. 3:31-33; Is. 19:21-25, 45:22-24). Never is God’s judgment proclaimed to be utterly final. God’s heart for restoration is evident throughout the Prophets.
New Testament references: Parton uses some of the most well-known Scriptures in the evangelical world, particularly from the apostle Paul, to argue for universal reconciliation.
Rom. 5:18-19: “Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people. For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.”
Parton argues that the message of salvation has been proclaimed by Jesus to all people by virtue of God’s immeasurable grace: “God’s grace and life are immeasurably more powerful than sin and death. Grace always exceeds sin; grace always abounds much more than sin.” (108, emphasis mine)
1 Cor. 15:21-22: “For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.”
In Parton’s words, “Who dies “in Adam”? Everyone. So, who will be made alive in Christ? Everyone.” (110)
Phil. 2:9-11, Rev. 5:13: “That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”
Is it possible for anyone to bow the knee and acknowledge Jesus as Lord to God’s glory without professing faith in Jesus? Parton argues that it is not. These verses imply support of universal reconciliation for all humanity.
Col. 1:20: “For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him [Christ], and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.”
Again, in Parton’s words, “So, who does God reconcile to himself through Christ? Everyone who was created. Who does that leave out? No one.” (113)
Rev. 21:23-24: Consistently, the nations and kings of the earth in the book of Revelation are portrayed as those rebellious, wicked rulers who reject God’s rule. However, in the New Jerusalem, the kings are depicted as being welcomed into it! This seems impossible, and yet, Rev. 21:23-24 declares that “the city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and the Lamb is its lamp. The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their splendor into it.”
What is the result of this impossible surrender to God’s glory? “There would eventually be no more “sea,” no more sinful, rebellious humanity. There would be no more death. Death would be finally conquered—by emptying it.” (119) There is only life—to the glory of God!
Theological grounds: Parton uses the three-pronged argument from Thomas Talbott’s Inescapable Love, which says that only two of the following three statements may be true:
God loves everyone and intends for each person to be saved.
God will accomplish everything he intends.
Some people will be eternally lost. (127)
As a rule, Calvinists hold to statements (2) and (3), Arminians hold to (1) and (3), and Universalists hold to (1) and (2). It is impossible to hold to all three statements.
“Christian universalists deny the third claim. They don’t see any biblical or theological reason to accept the idea that some people will be eternally lost. They believe God fully intends to save each person and that he is certainly able to accomplish what he intends. Thus, he will do what he intends and will bring each person to the point of repentance and faith in Christ—even if he has to utilize hell to accomplish this.” (127)
Of course, the astute reader will identify that universalism tends to emphasize God’s sovereignty just as Calvinism does, perhaps even at the expense of free will. Parton addresses that, too. The philosophical discussion on free will is too extensive to detail here, so I will only say that the argument centres around the love and absolute goodness God; if we come face to face with that which is Good, True, and Beautiful and we deny it, have we done so freely? Or are we still captive to our blindness, our hard hearts, and our self-centred desires?
“If God is love, if God never fails to be loving, if everything God does is loving—then hell must be loving. Hell must be in the best interest of those who are subjected to it.” (129)
Again, Parton does not deny the existence of hell; in congruence with his exploration of Old Testament patterns of judgment and restoration, he asserts that hell is God’s judgment on the unrepentant for the purpose of bringing them to repentance, that is, restoration and reconciliation.
He argues that if Christ commanded his followers to love our enemies (Matt. 5:43-48) and to forgive one another “seventy times seven times” (Matt. 18:21-22), then why wouldn’t he do the same for his enemies?
Lastly, he identifies Christ’s victory over death as absolutely conclusive. If hell exists for the dead to rot in for all eternity, has Christ conclusively defeated death? Is 1 Cor. 15:55—where Paul declares, “Where, O death, is your victory? Where, O death, is your sting?”—true after all? If Christ has redeemed all people, then yes, it may be true. Yes, we may have full, final, complete victory over death!
Theological challenges to universalism: Parton presents some of the rebuttals that he receives to his presentation of universalism and offers theological explanations in response. There are some dozen questions that he works through, so I won’t rehash them all; most of them revolve around questions of free will, the character of God, particularly whether love and holiness/wrath can coexist, and the purpose of salvation and evangelism.
I appreciated Parton’s succinct, yet clear responses to each question and found them generally satisfactory. I have personally had discussions with others around some of these very same questions and was amused by the consistency of rebuttals and defences for eternal conscious torment.
It seems that people are more willing to believe in a God who will destroy the majority of his creation than one who will save it in its entirety.
Though this was not my first read on universalism, I would highly recommend it as a first resource to a curious congregant. Parton references two other essential books on evangelical universalism: The Evangelical Universalist by Gregory MacDonald and The Inescapable Love of God by Thomas Talbott. I find it curious that he did not reference That All Shall Be Saved by David Bentley Hart, but perhaps this was an intentional choice since Hart is Eastern Orthodox and Parton writes primarily from a strong evangelical perspective.
All said, I quite enjoyed this book. I find no fault in Parton’s exegetical and theological argument for universal reconciliation and restoration. It is not comprehensive, but it is sufficient. As a scholar and theologian at heart, I found myself wishing for more depth in exegesis, however, I am satisfied with what he presented as an introduction to the topic. His recommended reading list provides excellent direction for further research.
I find that I am further convinced of universalism on the basis of Scripture and reason, and even tradition, since there were in fact many early fathers who supported universalism.
I find myself wanting to weep in gratitude and bow at the feet of my Creator and Saviour in humble awe of his incomprehensible love and grace.
That is, I think, more than sufficient reason to seek a relationship with our God through the person and work of Jesus Christ.
We do not need a message of fear, shame, and condemnation to a fiery hell to persuade us of the goodness of God and need for redemption. Hell, though presented in Scripture as a reality for those who refuse to repent, is not the end of the story. God’s love and redemptive work stretches even beyond those borders to bring all people to reconciliation. Hell is the purging fire that rids us of the last vestiges of our hardened hearts. We turn then, and are welcomed, one and all, into the great and glorious kingdom in the age to come.
To God be the glory, Amen!
For more of my thoughts on universalism, see my review of The Evangelical Universalist by Gregory MacDonald. This book delves deeper into how Christian Universalism fits within the biblical narrative as well as the complicated argument of free will.
Understanding the Bible requires more than a surface reading.