Diodore of Tarsus/Diodorus of Tarsus's universalist views, held in light of his views on his Soteriology/Romans 10

Diodore of Tarsus, or, as some name him, Diodorus of Tarsus, and His Universalism in Light of His Soteriology

Much has been said concerning the universalist views attributed to Diodore of Tarsus, or, as some name him, Diodorus of Tarsus. These views, however, must be examined in light of his soteriology, and particularly in light of his commentary on Romans 10.

Diodorus of Tarsus, or, as some name him, Diodore of Tarsus, taught that salvation was received through believing and through asking God in prayer. He writes on Romans 10:11-13:

"Necessarily he set forth 'those who call upon him.' For God does not give grace without discernment, extending it even to those who are unwilling to offer so much to the Benefactor as at least to ask and pray with him. And lest anyone say that many fail to call upon the Lord Jesus out of ignorance rather than unbelief and ingratitude, he shows through what follows that God took away even the excuse of their ignorance, sending evangelists and heralds who urge and invite them to ask for the gift. Therefore he added what follows."

This passage establishes that Diodorus of Tarsus understood Romans 10 as teaching two conditions for salvation. The sinner must believe, and the sinner must ask and pray to God for the gift of grace.

Yet the same Diodorus of Tarsus, or, as some name him, Diodore of Tarsus, also held to a form of universalism. He writes in Joseph Simon Assemani's Bibliotheca Orientalis:

"For the wicked there are punishments, not perpetual, however, lest the immortality prepared for them should be a disadvantage, but they are to be purified for a brief period according to the amount of malice in their works. They shall therefore suffer punishment for a short space, but immortal blessedness having no end awaits them, the penalties to be inflicted for their many and grave sins are very far surpassed by the magnitude of the mercy to be showed them. The resurrection, therefore, is regarded as a blessing not only to the good, but also to the evil."

Logically, this is absolutely from the Origen school of thought.

Origen of Alexandria taught the same restorative view. In The Philocalia of Origen, he writes:

"For God governs the souls of men, not, if I may so speak, according to the scale of an earthly life of fifty years, but by the measure of eternity; for He has made the intellectual nature incorruptible and akin to Himself; and the rational soul is not debarred of healing, as if the present life were all."

If Diodorus of Tarsus borrowed his universalism from Origen, then we must ask whether Diodorus of Tarsus also borrowed his soteriology on Romans 10:9-10 from Origen. The answer is that he did not.

Origen, commenting on the same passage, treats the confession of Romans 10 as a public profession flowing from a life already transformed. He writes:

"But consider whether instead it ought to be understood that whoever truly, and not falsely, confesses with the mouth that Jesus is Lord, is confessing Christ Jesus as his Lord. And lest he first himself be subjected to the lordship of wisdom, righteousness, truth, and as many virtues as Christ is, he is declaring mammon not to be his lord any longer, that is to say, he is no longer to be subject to worldly desires and affections, nor to the lordship of sinning. Christ Jesus is the Lord; he is declaring publicly that he is free from the power of death and the devil. And whoever believes in his heart that God raised him from the dead, it is certain that he believes this through the power of God, and believes that God will raise him up together with him, so that he is not held down by death. It should not have been raised within himself, if he were still to be subject to death. For the words of the Apostle to us are: 'The words that follow agree with this view: As the Scripture says, "Everyone who believes in him will not be ashamed."' But if anyone has sins, and is subject to them, he will certainly be ashamed; and anyone who has fear and dread will say to himself, 'O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from the body of this death?' Anyone who still sustains the shame of sin seems not to believe."

Here Origen presents the confession as a public profession, evidence of a life already submitted to Christ. Diodorus of Tarsus, however, presents the calling upon the Lord as an actual asking and praying to God for salvation itself.

Therefore, although Diodorus of Tarsus shared Origen's universalism, Diodorus of Tarsus held a different soteriological method. His universalism did not determine his view of Romans 10. His view of Romans 10 was instead shaped by an earlier school of thought, a school which taught that grace is obtained through asking and praying to God, and that this asking and praying follows believing the gospel.

This distinction is critical. It demonstrates that Diodorus of Tarsus, even while holding to Origen's universalist framework, did not surrender the biblical doctrine of two conditions for salvation. He did not reduce Romans 10 to a mere public profession. He instead taught that the sinner must believe, and the sinner must ask and pray to God for salvation.