Is There a Case for Universalism?

I don't really agree with the concept of universalism or ultimate reconciliation. I wish it was true because I don't want anyone to go to hell - especially my nearest-and-dearest who don't know the Lord.

It seems to me that as the message of grace steers us away from the long-held image of a scary, vengeful God, there is an inclination to also steer away from the concept of hell for some people. They say, "How could a God who loves us so much send people to hell?" They mean well, I suppose, but they are getting led astray by their own wishful thinking, I feel.

There are some rather scary verses in the Bible. Like when the ground swallowed-up a man and his family; then there is Ananias and Sapphira, who dropped dead instantly after Peter accused them of lying to the Holy Spirit; and how can we forget the story of Sodom and Gomorra who's entire inhabitants, except Lot and his wife, were destroyed? Well, Lot's wife nearly escaped and would have if she did not look back and get turned into a pillar of salt!

There are a whole lot of rather scary verses in the Bible which we cannot fathom in the light of grace: it all seems so plausible when we are sold-out to the notion of an angry God who demands perfection from His children. But it can become confusing when we realise that God is not as harsh as we used to think He was.

The way I see it is that there are things that God does that we struggle to understand - and I don't think we are meant to make sense of it. All we can do is to trust in God and know that He loves us. Perhaps the gravitation towards Universalism or Ultimate Reconciliation is an attempt at reconciling this seeming discrepancy when a person comes into the revelation of grace?

When it comes down to Biblical facts - I cannot see anything in scripture which refutes the hell doctrine. Personally, I wish the whole hell thing simply did not exist - but according to the Bible - it seems to exist. Hell is just another one of those scary doctrines in the Bible that simply does not make sense to the newly enlightened grace believer.

It seems to me that God is bound to certain obligations because of who He is and because He requires absolute perfection. We could never attain that level of perfection, and therefore, Christ died for us. Perhaps hell is another one of those things that exist due to who God is and the way in which mankind was created?

We could always broaden the main argument supporting Universalism (how could a God who loves us do such a thing) to Jesus dying on the cross: how could a God who loves people so much, allow Jesus to be tortured and to die a slow, agonising death? The Universalists don't ask that question - do they?

It seems that Jesus dying on the cross was one of those inevitable obligations that had to be fulfilled by God, in a way that seems to veer to the opposite extreme of His character, in a way that causes people to eventually doubt His love for us.

In conclusion, I would really, really love to embrace the doctrine of Universalism or Ultimate Reconciliation - but there does not seem to be compelling enough evidence in the Bible to support such a notion. Believers can, like they often do, take one or two verses in isolation and make them fit their own beliefs - they do this for prosperity and so forth - so why not Universalism? All of scripture needs to be read in the right context, knowing who it was written to and when, knowing that we are now redeemed in Christ - only if we believe.