The ' restoration of all things ' of which St. Peter spoke was thus not a restoration in the large sense of a Universalist doctrine, but a moral and spiritual recovery of Israel such as Malachi had foretold and St. John proclaimed in preaching the baptism of re- pentance. That St. Peter at this stage of his career could not have entertained any idea of a universal restoration is proved by his later experiences at C;esarea (Ac 10). And If it is suggested that the phraseology of the verse is due to St. Luke, the writer of Acts, with his much wider outlook, it has to be considered that a close fidelity of the historian to his sources is suggested by St. Peter's whole speech, embodying as it does a purely Jewish form of Christian expectation quite diU'erent from the later perspective of the Church after the door had been opened to the Gentiles and the national life of .Judaism lijid been destroyed.
2. The idea. — A discussion of the NT doctrine of restitution or restoration, however, cannot be limited to an examination of the particular term. The idea of a ' restoration of all things ' is raised not only by this speech of Peter's but by one or two of our Lord's utterances, and above all by certain striking statements and declarations in the Pauline Epistles.
(1) The saying of Jesus in Mt 17"" (Mk 9") has been already referred to. But in 19^' we find Him speaking of the ' regeneration ' (iraXij'7ei'e(r/a), when the Son of Man shall sit on the throne of His glory. The word 7raXi>'7ej'e<r(a in this passage is practically synonymous with the diroKaTdtTracns of Ac 3-' (cf. Jos. Aiit. XI. iii. 8, 9, where the words are used interchangeably of the national restoration under Zerubbabel). Jesus is referring to that hope of a renovation of heaven and earth which formed part of the Jewish Messianic expectation (Ennr/i xlv. 4, 5 ; cf. 2 P 3", Rev 21') and was based on Is 65"
VOL. II. — 21
66'^. No more here than in Rev 21, where we have the Apocalyptist's conception of the aTroKaTda-Taan or TraXivyeveaia, is there any suggestion of a uni- versal restoration of sinful beings (see Rev 21' 22"). The same thing must be said of Jn 1'2*-, which is sometimes adduced in the interests of a Univer- .salist doctrine. The context (v.-"'-) shows the point of the verse to be that the uplifting of Jesus on the Cross (cf. 3'"-) would draw to Him Gentiles as well as Jews.
(2) It is in St. Paul's writings, liowever, and especially in such passages as Ro II'-, 1 Co 15""-, Ph 2"'- ", Eph 1»- ">, Col I-", that support is chiefly sought for the idea of a universal restoration. But the argument of Ro U shows that in v.^-, as in Jn 12''-, ' all ' means Jew and Gentile alike. In I Co 15--, again, nothing more is asserted than a uni- versal resurrection of the dead, and in vv.-''"^ what is in view is a subjugation of all forces that arc hostile to the Divine Kingdom so that God may be all in all. And if we find that in Ph 2i''- " the adoration of the Exalted Jesus is represented as an act in which the whole creation participates, while in Eph 1'", Col 1™ Christ appears as summing up all tilings in Himself and reconciling all things unto Himself, these soaring utterances cannot be interpreted apart from St. Paul's emphatic teach- ing that the wages of sin is death (Ko 6-^), and that destruction .awaits the enemies of the Cross of Christ (Ph 3'^). In the light of such texts it seems safe to conclude that the Apostle's ' universalism ' implies not a universal redemption of individuals, but a restoration of the disordered world to unity and hiirmony by an elimination of all di.scordaut elements or a subdual of all hostile powers.
(3) Support for a restorationist doctrine is some- times sought in those passages of the Pastoral E]iistles where it is said that God ' willeth that all men should be saved' (I Ti 2^), that He is 'the Saviour of .all men, specially of them that believe ' (4'"), that His grace ' hath appeared, bringing salva- tion to all men ' (Tit 2"). Yet it seems hardly possible to affirm more here than that the Divine saving purpose brings salvation within the reach of all, while the realization of that purpo.se depends upon the attitude of the individual to the Divine griice. Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners (I Ti 1'*) ; but to obtain mercy men must 'believe on him unto eternal life' (v."'). In the same Epistle we read that destruction (fiXeSpos ; cf. 2 Th 1^) and perdition (dTriiXfta ; cf. Ph P^) await those who walk in the way of their own lusts (I Ti 6»).
Attractive as it is, the idea of universal restora- tion Hnds little support in a careful exegesis. Those who advocate it tisually fall back upon conjectures suggested by the hidden possibilities of the future life or general considerations with re- g.ard to the grace of Christ and the Fatherly love of God. Even when a case has been m.ade out for Universalism from the direct utter.anees of the NT, it has to be admitted that the materials for a case against it .are abundantly present. To Martensen it seemed that on this subject the Scriptures set before us an unresolved antinomy corresponding to the antinomy between the sovereignty of God and the free will of man. The Divine saving purpose is universal in its scope, but it is conditioned by human freedom. The one entitles us to cherish ' the larger hope'; the other suggests tliat in the very nature of man there lies the ^jossibility of final condemnation {Christian Dogmatics, Eng. tr., 1866, pp. 474-484).