I have put off writing this article for a long time. Not because I haven’t studied this subject, but because I have. For about three years now, I have wrestled with Eternal Conscious Torment in one form or another. I’ve read the Scriptures. I’ve studied the original words. I’ve gone back into the Old Testament. I’ve looked at the historical setting. I’ve read the arguments of theologians and scholars who defend Eternal Conscious Torment, annihilationism, and Christian universal reconciliation. I’ve read people I agree with and people I completely disagree with. And I’ve prayed about it—a lot.

If you’ve followed my writing for any length of time, you have actually watched part of this journey unfold. I’ve previously written about universal reconciliation. I’ve written about aiōnios and kolasis in Matthew 25:46. I’ve written about Gehenna and why I no longer believe the English word “hell” accurately communicates the different words and judgment contexts found in Scripture. At the time, I viewed many of those as separate studies. Looking back now, I don’t think they were separate at all. They were pieces of a much larger picture that I was slowly beginning to see.

I want to make something clear before we get very far into this article. I am not writing this because I think I have everything figured out. I am certainly not claiming that everyone who disagrees with me hasn’t studied the subject. There are intelligent, sincere, Bible-believing Christians on all three sides of this debate. That is why I have tried to approach this differently.

I didn’t want to begin with a doctrine and then collect verses that supported it. I wanted to put the three major views on the table, look at the strongest biblical evidence for each one, and then ask which view makes the most sense of the whole biblical story. Eternal Conscious Torment teaches that those ultimately judged by God remain consciously under punishment without end. Annihilationism teaches that the wicked are ultimately destroyed and cease to exist. Christian universal reconciliation teaches that God’s judgments are real, serious, and necessary, but that judgment is not God’s ultimate purpose. Ultimately, all things are reconciled to God through Jesus Christ.

For years I tried to understand which view best fit Scripture. I didn’t want to believe universal reconciliation simply because it sounded nicer. Emotion cannot be our authority. At the same time, I didn’t want fear or tradition to decide the question either. My approach has been the same one that eventually led me to fulfilled eschatology: go back to the text, pay attention to audience relevance, examine the original language where necessary, understand the Old Testament background, allow Scripture to interpret Scripture, and be willing to change my mind if the evidence requires it.

The more I did that, the more one question kept coming back to me:

What did Jesus actually accomplish?

I believe that question is much bigger than asking what happens in some place English translations have traditionally called “hell.” In fact, discovering what was underneath that English word was one of the biggest turning points in this entire journey. But before we get there, I want to start where Paul starts.

With Adam.

The Problem Begins With Adam

Paul tells us:

“Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men…” — Romans 5:12

This is where the problem begins. Adam. Sin. Death. Something happened through Adam that affected humanity. Paul continues, “Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses…” (Romans 5:14). That point becomes extremely important later because death did not begin with the Law of Moses. Death was already reigning before Sinai.

But then Paul begins comparing Adam with Christ. This is where I believe we need to slow down and actually follow Paul’s argument instead of reading our theology into it.

“Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life.” — Romans 5:18

Look at the parallel. Through Adam: all men → condemnation. Through Christ: all men → justification of life. Paul uses the same expression for “all men” on both sides.

Nobody reads the Adam side and says Adam merely made condemnation available to everyone. Adam’s act actually accomplished something. Sin entered. Condemnation came. Death reigned. So eventually I had to ask myself why I had always been taught to read the Christ side differently. Adam actually succeeds in bringing condemnation and death, but Jesus merely makes justification and life possible?

That becomes even harder for me when I continue reading Romans 5, because Paul’s entire point seems to be that what Christ accomplished is greater than what Adam accomplished. Paul says, “But the free gift is not like the offense” (Romans 5:15). He repeatedly uses language like “much more.” Then he says:

“But where sin abounded, grace abounded much more.” — Romans 5:20

That verse bothered me for a long time. If Adam’s sin ultimately succeeds in bringing the entire human race under sin and death, but Christ’s grace ultimately rescues only a portion of the humanity Adam affected, in what sense did grace abound much more? Did Adam accomplish more than Jesus?

I don’t believe that’s Paul’s argument.

Now, I also don’t believe Romans 5:18 should carry this entire doctrine by itself. One thing I have learned through this whole journey is that no single verse should be forced to carry an entire theology. But then I found Paul making virtually the same comparison again.

“As in Adam All Die…”

Paul writes:

“For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive.” — 1 Corinthians 15:22

The Greek is straightforward: hōsper gar en tō Adam pantes apothnēskousin, houtōs kai en tō Christō pantes zōopoiēthēsontai. Or simply: “For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive.”

I want to point something out here because I have heard this verse quoted in a way that almost becomes a translation of its own. People will say, “It means all who are in Christ will be made alive.” That may be someone’s interpretation of the verse, but those extra words are not actually what Paul wrote.

Paul does not say, “As all humanity dies in Adam, so all who happen to be in Christ will be made alive.” He says, “As in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive.” Now, someone can still argue that the second “all” should be understood as those belonging to Christ. That is a legitimate interpretive argument. But we should call it what it is: an interpretation. It is not something explicitly written into Paul’s sentence.

And we still have to deal with the parallel. Who are the “all” dying in Adam? Humanity. Then Paul says, “so also in Christ all will be made alive.” And immediately afterward: “But each one in his own order…” (1 Corinthians 15:23).

That matters. Paul isn’t necessarily describing everyone experiencing everything at the exact same moment. There is an order. Christ is the firstfruits. Then those who are Christ’s. Then Paul moves toward what he calls “the end.”

And that word firstfruits caught my attention too. A firstfruit is not the entire harvest. It is the beginning of the harvest. James 1:18 even describes believers as “a kind of firstfruits of His creatures.” Revelation 14:4 likewise speaks about firstfruits to God and the Lamb.

Again, I am not claiming the word firstfruits proves universal reconciliation. But it fits a pattern that kept becoming harder for me to ignore. And then Paul tells us where the whole process is ultimately going.

Who Is the Last Enemy?

Paul continues:

“For He must reign till He has put all enemies under His feet.” — 1 Corinthians 15:25

Christ’s reign has an objective. He reigns until His enemies are subjected. Then Paul identifies the final enemy:

“The last enemy that will be destroyed is death.” — 1 Corinthians 15:26

That verse became huge for me.

Notice what Paul does not say. The final enemy is not humanity. The final enemy is not unbelievers. The final enemy is Death.

And what happens to death? Death is destroyed.

Then Paul reaches the end of his argument:

“Now when all things are made subject to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.” — 1 Corinthians 15:28

That is Paul’s destination. Christ reigns. Every enemy is subjected. Death is destroyed. God becomes all in all.

That’s when another question started bothering me. If something Scripture calls the “second death” continues forever for countless people, in what sense is Death actually destroyed? If a portion of creation remains forever separated from God, what exactly does “God all in all” mean?

Those questions eventually took me all the way back to Genesis.

What Kind of Death Are We Talking About?

We often hear the word “death” and immediately think of someone’s physical body dying. But Scripture doesn’t use death that narrowly.

God told Adam:

“in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.” — Genesis 2:17

Yet Adam didn’t physically drop dead that day. Something else happened. Adam hid from God. Judgment came. He was driven from Eden. And then we are told something extremely important: Adam lost access to the Tree of Life.

Genesis 3:22–24 describes God removing Adam from the garden and guarding the way to the Tree of Life. That means the death problem is about more than someone’s physical heartbeat stopping. Something happened relationally and spiritually: sin, alienation, condemnation, separation from God’s presence and life, loss of access to life.

The New Testament uses “death” this way too. Paul tells people who were obviously walking around physically alive, “And you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins” (Ephesians 2:1). Jesus gives us another beautiful example with the prodigal son. The father says, “for this my son was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found” (Luke 15:24). The son had not physically died. He was alienated, lost, separated, then restored.

And Jesus says something in John 11 that becomes almost impossible to understand if every reference to death must mean biological death:

“Whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die.” — John 11:26

Christians still physically die. So Jesus was clearly speaking about a deeper kind of death.

That became extremely important when I went back to Revelation.

The Second Death and the Death of Death

Revelation 20:14 says:

“Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.”

I had read that verse countless times. But I had always rushed immediately to the people being judged. Then one day I stopped and really looked at what John says goes into the lake of fire.

Death itself.

And Hades.

Death isn’t a physical human being. Hades isn’t a biological organism. So whatever John is describing, the imagery is already larger than individual bodies being burned.

Then John continues into Revelation 21:

“There shall be no more death.” — Revelation 21:4

Look at that progression. Death exists. Death enters the lake of fire. Then: no more death.

Now compare Paul: “The last enemy that will be destroyed is death.” And then go back even farther. Isaiah 25:8 says, “He will swallow up death forever.” Paul directly draws from Isaiah when he says, “Death is swallowed up in victory” (1 Corinthians 15:54).

Look at the progression through Scripture. Isaiah says Death will be swallowed up. Paul says Death will be destroyed. John sees Death and Hades thrown into the lake of fire. Then John says there is no more Death.

That does not look accidental to me. It looks like one story.

And that’s why I no longer believe the lake of fire should automatically be defined as a place where God somehow preserves death forever. John shows us the exact opposite.

Death goes into the fire.

Then Death is gone.

The Bible Ends Where Genesis Began

And then something happens that I believe is one of the most important parts of Revelation.

The Tree of Life comes back.

Think about this. Adam loses access to the Tree of Life in Genesis. Then Revelation 22 says:

“In the middle of its street, and on either side of the river, was the tree of life…” — Revelation 22:2

And later:

“Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life…” — Revelation 22:14

I don’t believe that imagery is random.

Genesis begins with humanity losing access to life because of sin. Revelation ends with access restored. Genesis begins with alienation from God’s presence. Revelation ends with God’s dwelling. Genesis introduces the curse. Revelation says, “there shall be no more curse.” Genesis introduces death. Revelation destroys Death. Genesis closes access to the Tree. Revelation opens access again.

That is the reversal of Adam.

And this is where fulfilled eschatology becomes absolutely essential to my understanding. If Revelation is fulfilled—and I believe its own time statements require us to understand it that way—then we are not still waiting for the Tree of Life to become available thousands of years after John. The way into God’s presence has already been opened through Jesus Christ.

Hebrews says:

“Therefore, brethren, having boldness to enter the Holiest by the blood of Jesus…” — Hebrews 10:19

The barrier has been removed. Through Christ, we have access.

To me, the restored Tree of Life at the end of Revelation represents the restored life and fellowship with God that Adam lost. That is why the removal of Death and the restoration of the Tree belong together.

The Sting of Death Is Sin—and the Power of Sin Is the Law

Something else in 1 Corinthians 15 began making much more sense once I started looking at this covenantally.

Paul says:

“The sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is the law.” — 1 Corinthians 15:56

Notice where that appears. In the same chapter where Paul tells us Death will be destroyed. Paul connects: Death → Sin → Law.

Now, I want to be careful here. The Mosaic Law did not create Adamic death. Romans 5 already told us “death reigned from Adam to Moses.” But the Law entered into an already-existing Adamic condition of sin and death.

Romans 5:20 says, “Moreover the law entered that the offense might abound.” Romans 7 says, “when the commandment came, sin revived and I died.” Then: “the commandment, which was to bring life, I found to bring death.”

And then we come to 2 Corinthians 3. Paul refers to the Old Covenant written and engraved on stones as “the ministry of death.” Then he calls it “the ministry of condemnation.” Those are Paul’s words. And then he says that ministry was passing away.

Hebrews says the same thing differently:

“Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.” — Hebrews 8:13

That matters tremendously from a fulfilled perspective. The apostles were living during a covenantal transition. The New Covenant had been established through Christ’s blood. Yet the temple was still standing. The Levitical priesthood was still functioning. Sacrifices were still being offered.

That old covenantal world was still visibly there. But the inspired writers said it was passing away, growing old, and ready to disappear.

Then AD 70 came. Jerusalem fell. The temple was destroyed. The sacrifices ended. The covenantal center of that former administration disappeared.

So when I read Revelation’s language about Death and Hades being removed, I don’t read it in isolation from everything else happening in the New Testament. I see the larger biblical story: Adam, sin, death, law, condemnation, Christ, grace, righteousness, life.

I am not saying the Mosaic Law itself was Death. The problem reaches all the way back to Adam. But the Law became part of the covenantal administration in which sin, condemnation, separation, and death operated. And Christ brings that old ministry to its end.

If Revelation Is Fulfilled, Why Do People Still Physically Die?

This is an obvious question, and I think it’s an important one.

Revelation says, “There shall be no more death.” But people still physically die. So either Revelation 21:4 remains unfulfilled—which creates major problems for Revelation’s repeated statements that the prophecy was near—or we need to reconsider what kind of Death John is describing.

From a fulfilled perspective, I believe the answer is the deeper Adamic/covenantal death we have already been examining: separation from God’s life and presence. That is what has been overcome in Christ.

Physical death still happens. But physical death does not have the covenantal power it once held. That is why Jesus could say believers would “never die” even though their physical bodies still died.

And this is why I believe the Tree of Life is available now. We aren’t waiting for access to God. Christ has already opened the way.

One of the Biggest Turning Points for Me: Discovering What Was Under the Word “Hell”

This was honestly one of the biggest moments in my entire journey.

For most of my Christian life, I saw the word “hell” in an English Bible and automatically pictured one thing: a fiery supernatural chamber where unsaved people went after physical death and remained forever.

Then I started studying the actual words underneath that English term. And everything got complicated very quickly.

I discovered that English translations have historically used “hell” to represent different biblical words and concepts: Sheol, Hades, Gehenna, and in one New Testament passage, the verb associated with Tartarus. Then Revelation gives us another image altogether: the lake of fire.

Those are not one Greek or Hebrew word. They have different backgrounds and contexts.

That realization was incredibly eye-opening for me. It didn’t make me a universal reconciliationist overnight. Actually, it gave me more questions than answers. But it forced me to stop allowing one English theological word to control passages that the biblical writers expressed differently.

Gehenna Changed Everything for Me

Gehenna is connected with the Valley of Hinnom outside Jerusalem. And once I went back into the Old Testament, I found its prophetic background.

Jeremiah 7 warns Jerusalem:

“Therefore behold, the days are coming… when it will no more be called Tophet, or the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, but the Valley of Slaughter…”

Then Jeremiah says:

“The corpses of this people will be food for the birds of the heaven and for the beasts of the earth…”

Jeremiah 19 again connects the Valley of Hinnom with coming judgment upon Jerusalem.

That changes the context tremendously.

When Jesus warned first-century Judeans about Gehenna, He was using a place and prophetic image already connected with covenant judgment upon Jerusalem. And later Jesus tells that same generation that catastrophic judgment was coming upon them.

That connection makes far more sense to me than assuming Jesus took a known prophetic location associated with Jerusalem and silently transformed it into the name of an endless supernatural torture chamber.

I also want to correct something from one of my earlier articles. I repeated the popular claim that Gehenna was a continually burning first-century garbage dump. After studying that claim more carefully, I would not use it as part of my argument today.

The evidence for the familiar continuously burning garbage-dump story is much later and is not solidly established for Jesus’ day.

And honestly? I don’t need it.

The actual Old Testament background of Gehenna is stronger. It was the Valley of Hinnom. Jeremiah already used it as a symbol and location of Jerusalem’s coming covenant judgment.

That’s enough.

This is part of the reason I no longer like using “hell” as a catch-all theological word. I would rather say what Scripture actually says: Gehenna. Hades. Sheol. The lake of fire. Judgment.

That keeps us much closer to the text.

Acts 3:21 and the Restoration of All Things

One of the passages I discussed in my earlier universal reconciliation article is Acts 3:21. I believe it deserves much more attention than I gave it there.

Peter says heaven must receive Christ:

“until the times of restoration of all things, which God has spoken by the mouth of all His holy prophets since the world began.”

The Greek noun translated “restoration” or “restitution” is ἀποκατάστασις — apokatastasis.

Acts 3:21 speaks of the apokatastasis pantōn—the restoration of all things. The noun carries the sense of restoration or re-establishment.

Now I want to be very careful here. The word apokatastasis itself does not automatically mean, “Every individual who ever lived will eventually be saved.” That would be asking one Greek word to prove too much.

But Peter does not merely use the word “restoration.” He says, “the restoration of all things.” And then he says something even more important: God had spoken about it “by the mouth of all His holy prophets.”

That sent me right back into the Old Testament.

If Peter says the prophets had been speaking about restoration, maybe we should actually look at the prophets and see what kind of God they reveal.

And what I found became another major part of this journey.

“He Will Swallow Up Death Forever”

Let’s begin with Isaiah again.

Isaiah 25 describes God’s ultimate victory and says:

“He will swallow up death forever, And the Lord GOD will wipe away tears from all faces…” — Isaiah 25:8

That should sound familiar because both Paul and Revelation use this language. Paul’s resurrection argument culminates in Death being swallowed up. Revelation describes tears being wiped away and Death disappearing.

The prophets were already pointing toward this.

And then Isaiah 45 gives us another remarkable passage. God says:

“Look to Me, and be saved, All you ends of the earth!” — Isaiah 45:22

Then:

“I have sworn by Myself… That to Me every knee shall bow, Every tongue shall take an oath.” — Isaiah 45:23

Notice the context. Look to Me. Be saved. All the ends of the earth. Then every knee bows. Every tongue acknowledges God.

That becomes extremely important when Paul quotes this language.

Every Knee WILL Bow

Philippians 2:10–11 is often translated, “that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow…” I think the English “should” can unintentionally sound to modern readers like Paul is saying, “Hopefully they ought to bow.”

That is not Paul’s point.

The Greek speaks of the purpose/result of Christ’s exaltation: pan gony kampsē—every knee bowing. And Paul’s wording comes directly out of Isaiah 45’s declaration that every knee shall/will bow.

So I believe a clearer way of communicating Paul’s meaning in English is:

Every knee will bow.

And Paul is incredibly comprehensive: those in heaven, those on earth, those under the earth. Then: “every tongue [will] confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”

Now, I know the objection. Some say, “They’re defeated enemies. They will be forced to admit Jesus won.”

That’s possible as an interpretation.

But then I go back to Isaiah 45. The source passage isn’t merely about defeated rebels grudgingly acknowledging a conqueror. God says, “Look to Me, and be saved, all you ends of the earth!” Then every knee bows. Every tongue acknowledges Him.

And Paul says the confession that Jesus Christ is Lord happens “to the glory of God the Father.”

Can someone argue this is forced submission? Yes. But after seeing the Isaiah context, I personally find that interpretation much less convincing than I once did.

“He Will Not Cast Off Forever”

Then I started noticing something else throughout the Old Testament.

God’s judgment is real—sometimes terrifyingly real. But God’s anger is repeatedly described as something that ends.

Lamentations 3:31–33 says:

“For the Lord will not cast off forever. Though He causes grief, Yet He will show compassion According to the multitude of His mercies. For He does not afflict willingly, Nor grieve the children of men.”

That passage became extremely important to me.

God judges. There is grief. But: He will not cast off forever.

Then Micah says, “He does not retain His anger forever, Because He delights in mercy” (Micah 7:18). Why doesn’t His anger remain forever? Because He delights in mercy.

Psalm 103:8–9 says, “The LORD is merciful and gracious, Slow to anger, and abounding in mercy. He will not always strive with us, Nor will He keep His anger forever.”

Isaiah 57 says, “For I will not contend forever, Nor will I always be angry…” (Isaiah 57:16). Then God speaks about the one He has judged: “I have seen his ways, and will heal him.”

Notice that. Judgment. Then healing.

Hosea says, “Come, and let us return to the LORD; For He has torn, but He will heal us; He has stricken, but He will bind us up” (Hosea 6:1).

Again: He tears, then heals. He strikes, then binds up.

Deuteronomy 32:39 says, “I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal.” And Hannah says, “The LORD kills and makes alive; He brings down to the grave and brings up” (1 Samuel 2:6).

That last one especially caught my attention because the Hebrew is talking about Sheol.

God brings down to Sheol.

And God brings up.

Now, none of these passages individually proves universal reconciliation. Most have immediate covenantal contexts involving Israel or particular judgments. I want to be very clear about that because I don’t want to commit the same kind of proof-texting I criticize in other theological systems.

But together they establish something important about the biblical pattern of divine judgment:

Judgment does not automatically mean restoration is impossible.

God wounds and heals. Brings down and raises up. Judges and restores.

His anger does not get the final word.

Sodom Really Made Me Stop

Sodom is one of Scripture’s clearest images of devastating divine judgment. Fire. Destruction. Nothing about the judgment of Sodom sounds mild.

Yet Ezekiel 16 says something fascinating.

God speaks of restoring Sodom and her daughters and later says Sodom and her daughters will “return to their former state.”

I want to be careful again. Ezekiel is using corporate prophetic language. I am not saying Ezekiel 16 alone proves that every individual person who lived in historical Sodom will eventually experience salvation.

That would go beyond the text.

But it proves something that matters greatly to this debate: something can experience God’s devastating judgment and still subsequently appear in biblical restoration language.

That means the argument, “God destroyed them, therefore restoration can never follow,” simply isn’t a universal biblical rule.

Jeremiah gives us similar patterns with judged nations. Moab comes under severe divine judgment, yet Jeremiah 48:47 says, “Yet I will bring back the captives of Moab in the latter days.” Elam comes under judgment, then Jeremiah 49:39 says, “I will bring back the captives of Elam.”

Again, specific prophetic contexts.

But the pattern is undeniable.

Judgment can be severe without necessarily being God’s final purpose.

God’s Fire Can Destroy Without Destroying the Person

The same thing happens with biblical fire.

Malachi calls God “a refiner’s fire.” What does a refiner’s fire do? It destroys. But what does it destroy? The impurity. The object being refined emerges purified.

Then Paul gives us an interesting example in 1 Corinthians 3. He says God’s fire tests a person’s work. The work can be burned up. The person suffers loss. Yet Paul says:

“he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire.”

Now, that passage is about Christian builders and their works. I am not going to pretend it directly explains the lake of fire.

It doesn’t.

But once again it establishes a category that I had rarely heard discussed: God’s fire can destroy something associated with a person without annihilating the person.

So when Scripture says “fire,” the argument is not finished.

Fire does not automatically mean endless conscious torment. And fire does not automatically mean annihilation.

We have to ask what the fire is doing in the actual context.

What About Aiōnios and Kolasis?

My study of Matthew 25:46 was another major step in this journey.

Most English translations say:

“And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

I previously wrote an entire article examining the Greek words aiōnios and kolasis. That study opened my eyes to the fact that the words we see in English translations often carry histories and ranges of meaning that aren’t obvious to modern readers.

But I also want to say something important now. My continued research has caused me to refine some arguments I made earlier.

And I’m okay with that.

If we’re actually seeking truth, we shouldn’t be afraid to say, “I would word that differently now.”

I would no longer argue that aiōnios simply means “temporary.” That’s too simplistic. The word has a semantic range. It can refer to age-related duration, enduring realities, and in some contexts what English speakers would describe as eternal.

Context determines its force.

I would also no longer say kolasis simply means “pruning” and therefore necessarily means restorative correction. It has an older history involving pruning, checking, or restraint, but by New Testament times it can absolutely mean punishment.

Again: context matters.

And here’s the thing. The case doesn’t need either word to be forced into a predetermined universalist meaning.

The much bigger issue with Matthew 25 is something fulfilled eschatologists should immediately recognize:

Where are we in the discourse?

Matthew 25 follows Matthew 24. Jesus is still giving the Olivet Discourse. The conversation began with the temple. Jesus repeatedly tells His disciples, “When you see…” “When you hear…” “Let those who are in Judea flee…”

Then He says:

“Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place.” — Matthew 24:34

That statement has to matter.

Before someone can use Matthew 25:46 as unquestionable proof that Jesus was describing the endless postmortem punishment of every unbeliever throughout human history, they first have to establish that this is actually the judgment being discussed.

From a fulfilled eschatology standpoint, I don’t believe that works.

Especially when Daniel 12 sits behind so much of this language. Daniel speaks of resurrection, life, shame, and judgment. Then when Daniel asks about the fulfillment, the answer is connected with the time “when the power of the holy people has been completely shattered.”

That brings us right back into the covenantal world that reached its judgment in the first century.

What About “Forever and Ever” in Revelation?

Now let’s deal with one of the strongest passages for Eternal Conscious Torment.

Revelation 20:10 says the devil, beast, and false prophet are tormented “day and night forever and ever.”

I don’t want to explain that away. If we’re going to examine these views fairly, we have to deal with the strongest evidence against our own conclusion.

But we also need to read Revelation the way Revelation was meant to be read.

John’s imagery is saturated with the Old Testament.

For example, Revelation says of Babylon:

“Her smoke rises up forever and ever.” — Revelation 19:3

Yet Revelation also describes Babylon as violently thrown down and “shall not be found anymore.”

So is Babylon being continuously preserved forever so that it can keep being destroyed? Or is rising smoke prophetic imagery showing the complete and irreversible nature of the judgment?

Go back to Isaiah 34. Isaiah describes God’s judgment upon Edom and says, “Its smoke shall ascend forever.” Edom is not literally producing an endless column of smoke today. The judgment occurred. The prophetic imagery communicated its completeness.

The Old Testament does something similar with unquenchable fire. An unquenchable fire is not necessarily a fire that never reaches the end of what it is consuming. It is a fire that nobody can put out before God’s judgment is accomplished.

That distinction matters.

And then look carefully at Revelation 20:10. The verse specifically identifies the devil, the beast, and the false prophet. These are already figures in John’s apocalyptic imagery.

Then when John discusses the broader lake-of-fire judgment, he tells us what the lake represents: “This is the second death.” And then Death itself goes into it.

That entire picture has to be considered before turning “forever and ever” into a systematic doctrine about every human being’s endless conscious experience.

But Doesn’t Scripture Say People Are Destroyed?

Yes.

And this is why annihilationism deserves to be taken seriously.

Scripture uses words like destroy, perish, death, consume. Annihilationists are right to make us deal with them.

At one point, annihilationism made substantially more sense to me than ECT. If the wicked are destroyed and cease to exist, then at least suffering truly ends. Death really disappears.

But the more I studied, the more I ran into another problem.

The Greek verb apollymi, often translated “destroy” or “perish,” does not automatically mean “cease to exist forever.” The same word-family can describe something that is lost.

Think about Luke 15. The lost sheep. The lost coin. The lost son. And what happens?

The lost is found.

The father even describes the son this way: “this my son was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.”

Now, I am not saying every occurrence of apollymi means temporary loss.

Absolutely not.

Again: context.

But what it does mean is that we cannot simply see “destroyed” and automatically insert, “permanently removed from existence with no possibility of restoration.”

The word itself doesn’t prove that.

And then I ran into something much harder for annihilationism.

Annihilation Is Not Reconciliation

Colossians 1 became one of the biggest passages in this entire journey for me.

Paul says of Christ:

“For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth…” — Colossians 1:16

Then just a few verses later:

“and by Him to reconcile all things to Himself… whether things on earth or things in heaven, having made peace through the blood of His cross.” — Colossians 1:20

Read those statements together.

All things created through Christ.

Then: all things reconciled through Christ.

And notice the words Paul chooses: reconcile, peace, the blood of His cross.

This became a major problem for annihilationism for me. If I permanently destroy my enemy so that my enemy no longer exists, I have not reconciled that enemy to myself.

I eliminated him.

Those are not the same thing.

Paul doesn’t say, “God reconciles the things that respond and permanently erases everything else.”

He says, “through Him to reconcile all things to Himself.”

That doesn’t mean Colossians 1 alone ends the debate. But it has to mean something.

And I don’t think annihilation is the same thing as reconciliation.

God Has Mercy on All

Then Romans 11 became another major passage.

Paul is dealing with actual unbelief—Israel’s unbelief. But notice that their unbelief is not necessarily the last chapter.

Paul says, “blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.” Then: “And so all Israel will be saved.”

Then he reaches Romans 11:32:

“For God has committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all.”

Again, there is a parallel.

All in disobedience.

All receiving mercy.

Then Paul breaks into worship and finishes the section:

“For of Him and through Him and to Him are all things…”

That language stopped me.

From Him.

Through Him.

To Him.

All things.

God Desires All to Be Saved

Then Paul says in 1 Timothy 2 that God “desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.” Then: “Christ Jesus… gave Himself a ransom for all.”

And then 1 Timothy 4:10 says:

“we trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe.”

I think that verse deserves more attention.

Paul does not say, “Savior exclusively of believers.” He says, “Savior of all men, especially of those who believe.”

Again, I’m not asking one verse to prove the whole case. But now look at the accumulation.

All made alive.

All receiving mercy.

All things reconciled.

Savior of all.

Ransom for all.

At some point I had to ask whether I was allowing those statements to say what they actually say.

Is This Merely Something God Would Like to Accomplish?

The standard response to 1 Timothy 2 is, “God wants everyone to be saved, but human free will prevents Him from getting what He wants.”

That is a theological explanation.

But then I came to Ephesians 1.

Paul says God has made known “the mystery of His will, according to His good pleasure which He purposed in Himself…” (Ephesians 1:9).

Then he tells us something about that purpose:

“that… He might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on earth—in Him.” — Ephesians 1:10

Then:

“who works all things according to the counsel of His will.” — Ephesians 1:11

Now we’re not merely talking about something God vaguely wishes would happen.

Paul uses words like will, good pleasure, purpose.

And what is in view?

All things gathered together in Christ.

That’s much harder for me to reduce to God hoping creation eventually cooperates.

Jesus Said He Would Draw All to Himself

Then Jesus says:

“And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all peoples to Myself.” — John 12:32

I know the contextual argument. Greeks had just come seeking Jesus. So someone can legitimately argue that “all” emphasizes all peoples—Jew and Gentile—not merely Israel.

That’s fair.

But even then, notice the direction of John’s Gospel. John calls Jesus “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.” The Samaritans call Him “the Savior of the world.” John 3 says “that the world through Him might be saved.”

And then Jesus says, “I… will draw all to Myself.”

John 12:32 alone doesn’t settle universal reconciliation.

But once again: it joins the pattern.

What About People Who Die Unbelieving?

This was another assumption I had to question.

I had always been told, “Once you physically die, that’s it. Whatever your condition was at death is permanently fixed forever.”

The verse normally brought forward is Hebrews 9:27:

“And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment…”

But that verse does not actually say what I had been told it says.

It says: death → judgment.

It does not say: death → repentance becomes impossible.

It does not say: death → God no longer extends mercy.

It does not say: death → reconciliation becomes metaphysically impossible.

Universal reconciliation doesn’t deny judgment. The question is what God’s judgment ultimately accomplishes.

Then I went back to Peter.

First Peter 3 says Christ “went and preached to the spirits in prison, who formerly were disobedient…” Now, the Greek verb there means to proclaim, so I don’t think that verse alone proves Jesus was offering salvation to them.

But then Peter says:

“For this reason the gospel was preached also to those who are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.” — 1 Peter 4:6

That is much more interesting.

There are different interpretations. Some believe Peter means the gospel had been preached to these people while they were alive and they subsequently died. Others understand Peter as describing proclamation to people in the state of death.

I have read both arguments.

I’m not going to pretend there isn’t a debate.

But here’s where I landed: Scripture is not nearly as clear that physical death permanently ends God’s ability to reach someone as I had always been told.

Hebrews 9:27 certainly doesn’t say it.

And the Petrine passages at least force the question open.

What About Free Will?

Another objection I have spent a lot of time thinking about is free will.

Someone will say, “If everyone is ultimately reconciled, God would have to force people to love Him.”

I don’t believe that’s necessarily true.

Look at Paul. Paul was not on the Damascus road searching for Jesus. He was persecuting Jesus’ people. Christ confronted him. Paul’s resistance was overcome. His understanding changed. His heart changed. Eventually he genuinely loved the very Christ he had opposed.

Was Paul turned into a robot?

No.

God can overcome resistance without destroying the human person. He can reveal truth. Remove blindness. Correct false beliefs. Judge sin. Humble pride. Discipline. Heal. Bring someone to repentance.

So I no longer automatically accept the argument that human free will must possess the ability to frustrate God’s restorative purpose forever.

I simply don’t see where Scripture teaches that.

Revelation Doesn’t End With Closed Gates

There is another part of Revelation’s ending that became very interesting to me once I began understanding Revelation as fulfilled New Covenant imagery.

Revelation 21 describes the New Jerusalem. Then says:

“Its gates shall not be shut at all by day…” — Revelation 21:25

The gates are open.

Then Revelation 22 gives us the Tree of Life:

“The leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.” — Revelation 22:2

Healing. Nations. Tree of Life. Open gates.

Then the chapter describes people outside.

And finally the Spirit and the bride say, “Come!” And: “Whoever desires, let him take the water of life freely” (Revelation 22:17).

I want to be careful here. I don’t believe we can simply say, “Open gates prove people walk out of the lake of fire.”

Revelation never explicitly says that.

And the invitation at the end can certainly function as John’s appeal to his readers.

But from a fulfilled perspective, something still stands out to me. If New Jerusalem is a present New Covenant reality, then the picture is not of God sealing a finished universe where absolutely no further movement toward Him can occur.

The picture contains open gates, healing, living water, the Tree of Life, an invitation to come.

That fits remarkably well with the idea of God’s kingdom continuing to bring healing and reconciliation to the nations.

Christian Universal Reconciliation Is Not “All Roads Lead to God”

I need to pause here because the word universalism creates all kinds of misunderstandings.

I am not saying every religion leads to God. I don’t believe that.

I am not saying Jesus is optional.

I am not saying repentance doesn’t matter.

I am not saying sin doesn’t matter.

I am not saying judgment doesn’t matter.

Christian universal reconciliation, as I understand it, says something much more Christ-centered:

If all are ultimately reconciled, they are reconciled through Jesus Christ.

One Savior. One Mediator. One Lord. One cross.

Paul doesn’t say creation reconciles itself. He says God reconciles all things “through the blood of His cross.”

Every knee ultimately bows to whom? Jesus.

Every tongue confesses whom? Jesus Christ as Lord.

So this isn’t a smaller view of Jesus.

For me, it has increasingly become a larger view of the victory of Jesus.

My Earlier Research Into the Early Church

Another part of this journey involved church history.

I started reading early Christian writers because I wanted to know whether universal reconciliation was simply some modern idea invented by people uncomfortable with biblical judgment.

It isn’t.

Christians were discussing forms of ultimate restoration very early. Clement of Alexandria spoke about God’s correction in strongly remedial terms. Origen became famous for his theology of apokatastasis. Gregory of Nyssa also wrote in ways that have historically been understood as envisioning the ultimate removal of evil and restoration. Theodore of Mopsuestia likewise became associated with restorative understandings of judgment.

Now, I want to be more careful here than I have been in some previous writings.

I previously repeated the claim that four of six major early theological schools taught universal reconciliation and that universal reconciliation was simply “the majority belief of the first 500 years.”

After reading further, I don’t think I need to state that with that degree of certainty.

Early Christianity was diverse, the evidence is complicated, and broad statistical claims about what “most Christians” believed in the first centuries are much harder to demonstrate than a meme or quote graphic makes them sound.

What I can say confidently is that Christian universal reconciliation is not a modern invention. Major early Christian theologians seriously taught versions of restoration. And the early church was not nearly as monolithic on final judgment as many Christians today assume.

I also studied Augustine’s enormous influence on Western theology. Augustine certainly helped shape the Western tradition’s understanding of judgment, original sin, grace, and final punishment. He worked primarily in Latin and had significantly less facility with Greek than the Greek-speaking theologians of the East.

But I no longer think my biblical case should depend on attacking Augustine.

Even if Augustine had been the greatest Greek scholar who ever lived, Scripture would still be the authority.

Church history can help us understand how doctrines developed. It cannot decide what Scripture means.

So I have tried to let the historical material remain exactly where it belongs: supporting evidence, not the foundation.

Comparing the Three Views Fairly

After spending years with this, I think each view deserves to be represented by its strongest case.

Eternal Conscious Torment

ECT takes divine judgment extremely seriously. Its advocates point to passages such as Matthew 25:46, Mark 9, 2 Thessalonians 1:9, Revelation 14, and Revelation 20:10. Those aren’t verses we should pretend don’t exist.

But ECT increasingly creates problems for me when I step back and look at the entire biblical storyline.

Death is supposedly destroyed, while the second death somehow remains forever. God reconciles all things, while part of creation remains forever unreconciled. Every knee bows and every tongue confesses Jesus as Lord, while countless creatures supposedly remain eternally alienated from Him. God becomes all in all while an eternal realm of separation remains.

And many of the strongest traditional arguments depend upon treating Gehenna, Hades, the lake of fire, prophetic smoke, unquenchable fire, and age-language as though they were all talking about the exact same thing.

After studying those terms in context, I no longer believe they are.

Annihilationism

Annihilationism has a stronger case in several areas, in my opinion. It takes words like death, perish, destroy, and consume seriously. It allows suffering to actually reach an end. It doesn’t require God to preserve someone alive eternally for the purpose of experiencing death.

That’s why annihilationism became very attractive to me for a while.

But eventually I came back to the same problem:

Annihilation is not reconciliation.

If God permanently erases part of His creation because it remains unreconciled, then all things were not reconciled. They were divided into things reconciled and things eliminated.

Yet Paul doesn’t describe Christ’s final accomplishment that way.

He talks about all made alive, mercy upon all, all things reconciled, all things gathered in Christ, every knee bowing, every tongue confessing, Death destroyed, God all in all.

That became difficult for me to square with permanent annihilation.

Christian Universal Reconciliation

Universal reconciliation has its own questions. It has to take judgment seriously. It has to deal honestly with destruction passages. It has to deal honestly with Matthew 25. It has to deal honestly with Revelation 20.

It cannot simply redefine every unpleasant word as “temporary correction.”

I don’t believe that approach is sound exegesis.

But universal reconciliation does something the other two views increasingly struggled to do for me: it allows the entire biblical storyline to reach the destination the apostles repeatedly describe.

Adam’s damage is overcome by Christ. Grace really does abound much more. Those who die in Adam are made alive in Christ. God really does have mercy on all. Christ really does reconcile all things. Every knee really does bow. Every tongue really does confess Jesus Christ as Lord. Death really is destroyed. And God really does become all in all.

Look at the Whole Story

This is where I personally had to stop.

Not at one Greek word. Not at one verse. Not at one church father. Not at one emotional argument.

I had to step back and look at the entire biblical story.

Adam sins. Death enters. Humanity loses access to the Tree of Life. Sin reigns. Death reigns. The Law enters. Transgression abounds. Paul calls the Old Covenant the ministry of death and condemnation.

Then Jesus comes.

Grace abounds much more. Christ fulfills the Law. The New Covenant is established. The old ministry passes away. Jesus gives Himself as a ransom for all. He draws all to Himself. Peter speaks about the apokatastasis—the restoration of all things. Paul says all things are reconciled through the blood of Christ’s cross. God shuts all up in disobedience so that He may have mercy on all. Every knee bows. Every tongue confesses Jesus Christ as Lord. All die in Adam. All are made alive in Christ.

Christ reigns until every enemy is subjected.

The final enemy is Death.

Death is destroyed.

John sees Death and Hades thrown into the lake of fire.

Then there is no more Death.

The Tree of Life that Adam lost appears again. Its leaves are for the healing of the nations. The gates stand open. The invitation is: Come.

And Paul tells us the destination:

“that God may be all in all.”

At some point I had to ask myself:

What if those aren’t isolated verses that need to be explained away? What if they are telling one story?

Fulfilled Eschatology Changed This Entire Discussion for Me

I don’t believe I would understand this the way I do today if I hadn’t first gone through my journey into fulfilled eschatology.

Once I stopped moving Jesus’ time statements thousands of years away from His audience, the judgment passages began falling back into place. Gehenna became connected with Jerusalem again. Matthew 24 and 25 became one discourse again. Daniel 12 became connected to the shattering of the holy people again. Revelation’s “soon,” “near,” and “shortly” mattered again.

The passing Old Covenant ministry of death mattered. The New Jerusalem became a New Covenant reality. The Tree of Life became present access to God. The removal of Death became part of Christ’s accomplished covenantal victory rather than something postponed indefinitely into our future.

And suddenly Genesis and Revelation began looking like two ends of one story.

Adam loses access. Christ restores access. Adam brings death. Christ destroys Death. The Law magnifies sin. Christ fulfills the Law. The Old Covenant ministers condemnation. The New Covenant brings life. Death and Hades are removed. The Tree of Life returns. The nations receive healing. God dwells with His people.

That is where fulfilled eschatology and universal reconciliation began intersecting for me.

Where I Personally Land

After roughly three years of wrestling with Eternal Conscious Torment, reading arguments from all three major perspectives, studying Scripture for myself, revisiting my earlier research, correcting things I believe I previously overstated, studying the Greek where it matters, returning again and again to the prophets, considering the covenantal setting, and spending a lot of time in prayer, I have reached a conclusion.

My personal belief is that Christian universal reconciliation currently has the strongest overall scriptural foundation of the three views.

I don’t say that lightly. And I don’t say it dogmatically.

There are passages I am still studying. There are questions I am still asking. I fully expect people who read this article to challenge parts of it.

That’s okay.

This isn’t meant to be, “I figured it out, and now everyone else needs to agree with me.”

That isn’t the purpose of this article.

This is me opening my research notebook and showing you where the evidence has taken me.

And I want to emphasize something else. My conclusion is not that judgment isn’t real. God judges. My conclusion is not that sin doesn’t matter. Sin destroys. My conclusion is not that repentance doesn’t matter. It does. My conclusion is not that everyone gets to God however they want. They don’t.

If Christian universal reconciliation is correct, then reconciliation happens through Jesus Christ and Jesus Christ alone.

The question is not whether everyone can somehow bypass Jesus.

The question is:

How complete is the victory of Jesus?

I Want You to Decide

This is where I want to leave this with you.

Don’t believe Christian universal reconciliation because I believe it. Don’t reject Eternal Conscious Torment because I reject it. Don’t accept annihilationism because someone gives you five verses containing the word “destroy.”

Study.

Read Romans 5 in context. Read Romans 11. Read the entire argument of 1 Corinthians 15. Read Colossians 1 from creation through reconciliation. Read Acts 3 and ask what Peter meant by the apokatastasis of all things.

Then go back and read the prophets Peter said had spoken about that restoration.

Read Isaiah 25. Read Isaiah 45. Read Isaiah 57. Read Lamentations 3. Read Micah 7. Read Hosea 6. Read Deuteronomy 32. Read 1 Samuel 2. Read Ezekiel 16. Read Jeremiah’s Gehenna passages before assuming what Jesus meant by Gehenna.

Read Matthew 24 and 25 as one discourse.

Read Revelation through the Old Testament.

Follow Death from Genesis to Revelation.

Follow the Tree of Life from Genesis to Revelation.

Ask why Death itself is thrown into the lake of fire. Ask why there is no more Death afterward. Ask why the Tree Adam lost appears again. Ask why the nations are being healed. Ask why the gates aren’t shut. Ask why every knee bows. Ask why every tongue confesses Jesus Christ as Lord. Ask what it means for God to reconcile all things through the blood of Christ’s cross.

And then decide.

Which view has the strongest biblical foundation?

ECT?

Annihilationism?

Christian universal reconciliation?

You may look at everything I have presented and reach a different conclusion than I have.

And that’s okay.

I am presenting my findings.

You have to decide what you believe Scripture teaches.

My Conclusion

For me, after studying all three positions, I keep coming back to one question:

Who ultimately accomplishes more—Adam or Jesus?

Adam’s disobedience brought sin, condemnation, alienation, death. But Paul doesn’t say Jesus barely manages to rescue a portion of what Adam ruined.

Paul says:

“where sin abounded, grace abounded much more.”

So this is where I currently land.

Adam does not get the final word. Sin does not get the final word. The Law does not get the final word. Condemnation does not get the final word. Judgment does not get the final word. Death does not get the final word.

Jesus does.

Isaiah said Death would be swallowed up. Peter spoke of the restoration of all things. Paul said all would be made alive in Christ. Paul said all things would be reconciled through the cross. Paul said every knee would bow and every tongue confess Jesus Christ as Lord. Paul said Death would be destroyed. John saw Death and Hades cast into the lake of fire. Then John saw the Tree of Life again.

And after Death entered the fire, John wrote:

“There shall be no more death.”

That is where three years of studying this subject have brought me.

Not to a God who ignores sin. Not to a God who never judges. Not to a gospel where Jesus doesn’t matter.

But to a God whose judgment ultimately serves His redemptive purpose and to a Jesus whose victory is greater than I once believed.

My personal opinion, based on the research I have done, the Scriptures I have studied, the arguments I have read from all three sides, my understanding of fulfilled eschatology, and a lot of prayer, is that Christian universal reconciliation best accounts for the biblical evidence as a whole.

But that is my conclusion.

I’ve presented the evidence that has brought me here.

Now I encourage you to open your Bible, test everything I’ve said, pray about it, and decide for yourself which view has the strongest scriptural foundation.

Because ultimately, my opinion isn’t the authority.

Scripture is.