Introduction

What happens to the billions of people throughout history who died without ever hearing about Jesus? This profound question drives James Beilby’s groundbreaking work on postmortem theology. In his 2021 book “Postmortem Opportunity: A Biblical and Theological Assessment of Salvation After Death,” Beilby, a systematic theology professor at Bethel University, presents what Christianity Today calls “an unconventional fourth option” beyond the traditional categories of exclusivism, inclusivism, and universalism. His answer challenges centuries of Christian doctrine while maintaining evangelical commitment to salvation through Christ alone.

The stakes could not be higher. If God truly loves every person and desires their salvation, as Scripture states, how can countless millions face eternal condemnation without ever having a real chance to respond to the gospel? Beilby’s postmortem opportunity theory attempts to resolve this tension by arguing that those who die without genuine opportunity to hear and respond to the gospel will receive that opportunity after death. This position maintains that explicit faith in Jesus Christ remains absolutely necessary for salvation, but extends the timeframe for when that faith decision can occur. The implications reshape our understanding of God’s justice, love, and the ultimate fate of humanity.

Beilby’s Theological Framework

James Beilby constructs his postmortem opportunity theory on two foundational commitments that seem contradictory but which he argues are both biblically necessary. First, he maintains a “solidly traditional” position that explicit, conscious, and intentional faith in Jesus Christ is required for salvation. There are no anonymous Christians, no salvation through other religions, and no automatic universal salvation. Second, he takes an “outside-the-box” stance that death does not necessarily end salvific opportunity and that some people might receive their first genuine chance to hear the gospel after they die.

This framework emerges from what Beilby identifies as a crucial theological problem. God desires everyone to be saved and come to knowledge of the truth, as 1 Timothy 2:4 clearly states. Yet billions have died without hearing the gospel message. Beilby’s solution maintains evangelical orthodoxy while extending God’s grace beyond the traditional boundary of death. He writes from “an orthodox strand” of Christianity that assumes “the ontological necessity of Jesus Christ for salvation” – meaning Jesus is the only way to the Father, not merely one path among many.

The distinction between the unevangelized and what Beilby uniquely calls the “pseudoevangelized” proves essential to his argument. The unevangelized include those who lived in times and places where the gospel never reached, those who died in infancy, and those lacking cognitive ability to understand the gospel message. But Beilby’s category of the pseudoevangelized breaks new theological ground. These are people who technically heard about Christianity but received such a distorted or harmful version that they never encountered the true gospel. African-American slaves who heard a gospel used to justify their oppression, victims of sexual abuse by Christian leaders, and those raised in abusive religious environments all fall into this category. Beilby argues these people deserve genuine opportunity to encounter the real Christ, not the twisted version presented to them.

Core Theological Arguments

The heart of Beilby’s case rests on God’s universal salvific will combined with divine justice and love. His theological logic flows clearly: if God genuinely desires every individual’s salvation, and if salvation requires conscious faith in Christ, then God must provide opportunity for that faith response either in this life or the next. Since Scripture and Christian theology give no compelling reason why God cannot or would not do this, Beilby argues for “a strong possibility of postmortem opportunities.”

God’s Universal Salvific Will

The biblical testimony about God’s desire for universal salvation forms Beilby’s primary foundation. He emphasizes that God “desires everyone to come to repentance” (2 Peter 3:9) and “loves each and every person and genuinely desires to be in relationship with them.” This isn’t abstract theological speculation but reflects the consistent biblical portrait of a God who actively pursues the lost. The parables of the lost sheep, lost coin, and prodigal son all demonstrate that God seeks the lost, even when the lost got themselves lost. If God’s salvific will truly extends to every person, Beilby argues, then limiting salvation opportunity to earthly life contradicts God’s revealed character.

Divine Justice and Love Arguments

God’s justice demands that people face judgment based on genuine opportunity, not arbitrary circumstances of birth or geography. How can a perfectly just God condemn someone who never had real opportunity to respond to the gospel? Beilby argues this would make salvation dependent on historical accident rather than personal response to God’s grace. Similarly, divine love that supposedly extends to all humanity rings hollow if billions never receive even the chance for salvation. Love pursues, love persists, and according to Beilby, God’s love doesn’t stop pursuing at the moment of physical death.

Theological Method and Biblical Authority

Beilby openly acknowledges that “the Bible nowhere overtly teaches the possibility of postmortem conversion.” However, he argues that legitimate theology often develops through reasonable inference from Scripture rather than explicit proof texts. The doctrine of the Trinity, the concept of original sin, and the belief in an “age of accountability” for children all represent theological conclusions drawn from biblical principles rather than direct biblical statements. Beilby’s method requires three criteria: his position cannot contradict clear biblical teaching, must be based on reasonable inference from Scripture, and needs to remain consistent with God’s revealed character.

Biblical Foundation

While acknowledging the biblical evidence remains contested, Beilby builds his case on several key passages that suggest postmortem salvific activity.

1 Peter 3:18-20 – Christ Preaching to Spirits in Prison

This passage describes Christ going “in the spirit” to preach to “the spirits in prison” who disobeyed long ago in Noah’s time. Beilby interprets this as Christ’s descent between his death and resurrection to offer salvation to those who died before his coming. Though he admits these are “infamously opaque passages,” the text suggests Christ’s salvific work extended beyond the living to include the dead. Alternative interpretations exist – some argue Christ preached through Noah to his contemporaries, others see this as proclaiming victory over demonic forces. But the postmortem interpretation has ancient support and fits the passage’s apparent chronology.

1 Peter 4:6 – Gospel Preached to the Dead

Peter writes: “For this is why the gospel was preached even to those who are dead, that though judged in the flesh the way people are, they might live in the spirit the way God does.” The text explicitly mentions “gospel” (good news of salvation) rather than mere proclamation, and states a salvific purpose – “that they might live in the spirit.” While critics argue this refers to people who heard the gospel while alive but have since died, Beilby sees connection to 1 Peter 3:19, suggesting ongoing postmortem evangelism.

Supporting Passages

Ephesians 4:8-9 speaks of Christ descending to “the lower parts of the earth” and leading “captivity captive,” which Beilby interprets as liberating righteous souls from Sheol/Hades. Romans 2:12-16 establishes that God judges fairly according to the revelation people received, suggesting those with limited revelation aren’t automatically condemned. The combination of these passages, while individually debatable, creates cumulative evidence for postmortem opportunity.

Three Moments of Opportunity

Though Beilby’s book reportedly discusses three distinct moments when postmortem opportunity might occur, the available sources provide limited specific detail on this framework. Based on theological inference and related scholarship, these moments appear to be:

At the Moment of Death

The transition from life to death might provide what Jerry Walls calls “optimal grace” – a moment of heightened spiritual clarity where individuals encounter Christ directly. This theory suggests that at death, when earthly distractions fall away, every person faces ultimate reality and receives opportunity to respond to God’s love. The moment becomes a threshold experience where genuine choice remains possible before final destiny is sealed.

In an Intermediate State

Between death and final judgment, souls might exist in an intermediate state where evangelism continues. This connects to Christ’s descent to preach to spirits in prison and suggests ongoing divine pursuit of the lost. This intermediate period wouldn’t be purgatory in the Catholic sense of purification through suffering, but rather a continued opportunity for those who never properly heard the gospel to encounter Christ and make their eternal choice.

At the Final Judgment

Even at the final judgment, Beilby suggests the unevangelized might receive their opportunity to respond to Christ. This doesn’t mean endless second chances but rather ensures that judgment is based on genuine response to the gospel rather than ignorance. He emphasizes that “while I do not believe that death is the end of salvific opportunity, I do believe that salvific opportunity ends at the day of judgment. After judgment has been passed, it is final.”

Historical Theological Support

The idea of postmortem salvation opportunity has deep historical roots in Christian theology, particularly among the early church fathers.

Clement of Alexandria (c. 150-215 AD)

One of the first Christian universalists, Clement believed God’s punishment was educational rather than purely retributive. He taught that “God’s punishments are saving and disciplinary [in Hades] leading to conversion, and choosing rather the repentance than the death of the sinner.” Clement argued that souls, once freed from bodily limitations, could perceive truth more clearly and respond to God’s grace. He wrote that Jesus “saves all,” though the methods vary – some through learning and punishments, others through dignity and honor.

Origen (c. 185-254 AD)

The most influential early advocate of universal restoration, Origen believed all rational beings would eventually be saved through God’s purifying fire. He taught that even Satan’s hostile will would ultimately be destroyed, though his created nature would be preserved and redeemed. For Origen, the biblical promise that “God will be all in all” (1 Corinthians 15:28) meant complete universal restoration. His views profoundly influenced Eastern Christianity, though later councils condemned universal salvation.

Gregory of Nyssa (c. 335-394 AD)

Perhaps the most complete universalist among the church fathers, Gregory believed in total restoration of all creation. He declared: “This is the end of our hope, that nothing shall be left contrary to the good, but that the divine life, penetrating all things, shall absolutely destroy death from existing things.” Remarkably, Gregory presided over the Council of Constantinople (381 AD) which perfected the Nicene Creed, suggesting his universalist views weren’t considered heretical at that time. He taught that “the body of Christ is the whole of humanity” and that God’s purifying fire would eventually cleanse every soul.

Contemporary Theological Voices

Modern theology has seen renewed interest in postmortem opportunity, with several prominent scholars developing sophisticated arguments.

Jerry Walls

A Methodist philosopher at Houston Baptist University, Walls has written extensively on hell, purgatory, and heaven from a Protestant perspective. His work “Purgatory: The Logic of Total Transformation” argues for a Protestant understanding of purgatory focused on sanctification rather than satisfaction for sins. Walls believes purgatory should be “modified to allow for postmortem repentance” and sees it as God completing the transformation begun in earthly life. He provides philosophical arguments that God’s perfect love requires providing genuine opportunity for salvation to all people, potentially extending beyond death.

Gabriel Fackre (1926-2018)

Fackre developed the “divine perseverance” doctrine, arguing that God’s pursuit of sinners continues beyond physical death. He declared: “Sinners who die outside the knowledge of the gospel will not be denied the hearing of the Word.” Based primarily on 1 Peter 3-4, Fackre believed God’s perseverance “will contest all the makers of boundaries, including the final boundary, ‘the last enemy, death.'” His approach maintains evangelical commitment to conscious faith while extending the timeframe for conversion.

Donald Bloesch (1928-2010)

This evangelical theologian held nuanced views, arguing that while salvation is fixed at death for those in Christ, “condemnation of those who never knew Christ is not yet decided at death.” Bloesch stated boldly: “It is my contention that a change of heart can still happen on the other side of death.” He conceived of hell as a “sanitorium of sick souls presided over by Jesus Christ,” suggesting redemptive rather than purely punitive purpose.

Clark Pinnock (1937-2010)

Pinnock combined inclusivism with openness to postmortem salvation. While believing people could be saved through response to general revelation, he also argued that Scripture doesn’t require that “the window of opportunity is slammed shut at death.” His theological evolution from strict Calvinism to open theism included growing conviction that God’s love extends opportunity for salvation as widely as possible.

Theological Parallels with Near Death Experiences

While maintaining focus on theological rather than scientific aspects, there are striking parallels between Near Death Experience accounts and postmortem opportunity theology.

Life Reviews as Divine Encounters

Research shows that 22% of NDEs include a “life review” where individuals experience their entire life from others’ perspectives, particularly focusing on acts of love and how they treated others. This phenomenon parallels the Christian concept of standing before God in judgment, but with a crucial difference – NDE life reviews often involve self-judgment in the presence of unconditional love rather than external condemnation. James Beilby suggests such encounters could represent moments when the unevangelized or pseudoevangelized finally encounter Christ’s true nature, potentially allowing for postmortem conversion.

The Moment of Death as Spiritual Awakening

NDEs frequently occur during clinical death when brain activity is minimal, yet experiencers report heightened awareness and crystal-clear thinking. Jerry Walls’ concept of “optimal grace” at death aligns with these accounts – a moment when earthly limitations fall away and individuals encounter ultimate reality. Approximately 65% of NDEs include encountering a brilliant light described as a being of perfect love, with one-third of Western experiencers identifying this being as Jesus. These encounters correlate with New Testament descriptions that “God is love” (1 John 4:8) and “God is light” (1 John 1:5).

Free Will and Genuine Choice

About 31% of NDEs involve encountering a boundary or being given a choice to return to life or continue into the afterlife. This emphasis on personal agency supports postmortem opportunity theology’s insistence on free will and genuine choice even after death. Stories of atheists and non-Christians calling out during hellish NDEs and being rescued align with Beilby’s framework of postmortem opportunity for those who never genuinely encountered Christ in life.

Responding to Common Objections

Beilby systematically addresses the major biblical and theological objections to postmortem opportunity.

“Appointed to Die Once, Then Judgment” (Hebrews 9:27)

Critics argue this verse definitively closes the door on postmortem salvation. Beilby provides detailed exegetical analysis showing the passage’s context compares Old Covenant animal sacrifices with Christ’s single sacrifice. The point emphasizes that humans die once just as Jesus died once, not that salvation opportunity ends at death. Beilby notes:

“It is possible to believe that the judgment that an unevangelized person experiences includes an opportunity to hear the gospel and that they are judged by their response to that offer.”

“This Life Becomes Irrelevant”

If people get another chance after death, why evangelize now? Beilby restricts postmortem opportunity as “an exception to the rule” – available only to those who failed to receive sufficient opportunity in life. “It is God, and not you, who deems someone to be in need of a Postmortem Opportunity.” Anyone who hears the gospel must decide now, with no guarantee of tomorrow. This preserves evangelistic urgency while addressing the fate of the truly unevangelized.

“Everyone Would Be Saved”

Wouldn’t everyone choose salvation when confronting God’s reality after death? Beilby argues that knowing God exists doesn’t automatically produce repentance, especially for those hardened by lifetimes of sin. He notes that “beholding God did not help Satan when he rebelled in heaven.” The beatific vision of God doesn’t override free will or automatically transform rebellious hearts. Some may still choose self over God even with full knowledge.

Historical Novelty

Critics claim postmortem opportunity lacks historical precedent. However, research reveals that four of six theological schools in Christianity’s first 500 years held universalist views that included postmortem salvation. Clement, Origen, and Gregory of Nyssa all taught forms of postmortem opportunity. The doctrine’s decline followed Augustine’s influence and later church councils, not because it lacked early support but due to shifting theological politics.

Conclusion

James Beilby’s postmortem opportunity theology offers a profound reconceptualization of salvation’s timeline while maintaining evangelical commitment to Christ’s exclusive role in redemption. By distinguishing between the unevangelized and the pseudoevangelized, Beilby addresses not only those who never heard the gospel but also those who encountered distorted versions that obscured Christ’s true nature. His framework preserves the necessity of conscious faith in Jesus while extending God’s grace beyond death’s boundary.

The theological arguments from God’s universal salvific will and divine justice create compelling logical pressure for postmortem opportunity. If God truly desires all to be saved and is perfectly just, then condemning billions for accidents of history and geography seems incompatible with the biblical portrait of divine character. While Scripture doesn’t explicitly teach postmortem conversion, neither does it definitively preclude it, and reasonable theological inference suggests its possibility. The support from early church fathers like Clement, Origen, and Gregory of Nyssa, combined with contemporary voices like Jerry Walls and Gabriel Fackre, demonstrates this isn’t theological innovation but recovery of ancient Christian hope.

Perhaps most significantly, Beilby’s work addresses profound pastoral and existential questions that haunt many believers. What about loved ones who died without hearing the gospel? What about those whose only encounter with Christianity came through abuse and oppression? Postmortem opportunity theology doesn’t promise universal salvation – Beilby firmly maintains that hell remains real and final judgment seals eternal destinies. But it does offer hope that God’s love pursues every soul with genuine opportunity for redemption. In Beilby’s framework, none are condemned for ignorance, only for genuine rejection of clearly presented grace. This vision of divine justice and mercy may prove his most lasting contribution to Christian theology.