Richard Beck argues that universalism can (and needs to) preach God’s judgment and wrath just as strongly as “traditionalist” (i.e. believers in a “traditional hell”). The difference is over whether the judgment on sinners is seen as the end of the story.
Beck argues that “eternal punishment” in Matthew 25:
…isn’t about a punishment that goes on and on and on. Rather, eternal punishment is a commentary about where the punishment is coming from. Jesus is saying in Matthew 25 that the punishment of the wicked isn’t going to come from this world. All too often The Powers actually reward wickedness on this earth. So the punishment is not coming from earth, it’s coming from heaven. The word eternal here is more about the location of judgment than about the duration of judgment.
Hence Jesus is “engaged in prophetic speech”, warning that “God’s judgment will be poured out upon those who do not care for the poor, naked, sick, imprisoned and hungry”. As such it was “not about a coming Judgment Day”, but rather “a commentary about today, about goings on right now and right here”:
So what is happening in Matthew 25 is that Jesus is allowing us to see today through the lens of eternity. Through Jesus’ parable we are allowed to see how God sees the world. And, as Abraham Heschel writes, “God is raging in the prophet’s words.”
Hence our preaching should follow similar priorities:
This is why the leading edge of gospel proclamation is always going to be a prophetic utterance, a communication of God’s pathos for the here and now, about the Kingdom coming and its collision with the world. Consequently, a universalist can and should scream hellfire and brimstone with the best of them. By doing so you allow the view of eternity to break into this moment.
I think Beck goes a little too far in arguing that we need to preach judgment rather than universal salvation (and in particular the “99%/1%” split to which he refers), and indeed he acknowledges this in the comments. But Beck’s post, like the quote from Jacques Ellul in my previous post, shows the continuing role for judgment even within a universalist framework.
The phrase that comes to mind to describe this is: muscular universalism. A universalism that is a long way from the “sentimental teddy-bear God” which its detractors argue that it preaches.
Indeed, for many Christians, knowing that the word of judgment and wrath is not the final word may liberate them to be able to speak that word more assertively, rather than shrinking back dismayed by the apparent injustice of unending hellfire.
