Allen asserts that annihilationism “seems to be making a strong resurgence today among evangelicals.” That may be an overstatement, but it is a helpful correction to the assumption many have that the view only exists among the cults and theological liberals. Most of us who are labeled annihilationist² argue from the same belief in an inerrant, infallible, authoritative scripture as Allen and John MacArthur do. We are solidly in the evangelical camp, and reject the concept of an endless hell on scriptural grounds. We appreciate it when that is admitted.

Allen accurately portrays our view when he says we “don’t allow (God’s wrath) to extend beyond the lake of fire.” As we read the book of Revelation, the lake of fire is precisely described as the place of final punishment, and that the lake itself will commence the second death, from which there is no possible resurrection. It is the ultimate end of the old age, and its consummation will make room for the new heavens and new earth.

The Bible teaches that every sin not atoned for by the blood of Christ will be punished thoroughly in that lake of fire, then death and hell itself will be thrown into it. These words describe an end – a solution to a problem that had a beginning. It is fitting that Revelation should give us the story of how God’s grace will eventually correct the result of the rebellion which is recorded in Genesis.

This second death will be a horrible, agonizing, event in which every transgression against God’s holiness will receive its appropriate punishment. Not until that happens – and God is thoroughly vindicated – will he “snuff every unbeliever out of existence.” He will do so because he has determined what the ultimate wages of sin are. He did not decree that sinners will have the luxury of an eternal life anywhere – not even hell. The wages of sin is death. Eternal life is a gift he has reserved for those he has saved by grace.

Allen makes four specific assertions about how we argue our case against an endless hell. Each of these assertions speak to the heart of the issue, so each is worthy of analysis and a reply.

1)Allen asserts that we redefine the word eternal.
Allen quotes John MacArthur, who asserts that annihilationists “would like to redefine the word aionios and say, ‘well, it doesn’t really mean forever.’” He refers specifically to Matthew 25:46, where Jesus describes two final destinies. Jesus says that the sheep (those who treated the least of his brothers with compassion) will go away into eternal life. The goats (those who do not treat the least of his brothers kindly) will go away into eternal punishment.

The word aionios is an adjective. Its purpose is to explain and further define another word – in this case a noun. Like any other adjective (indeed, practically any other word) aionioshas more than one possible meaning. For example, the adjective “hot” may describe the day’s temperature, or it may explain that certain jewels have been stolen. The meaning of the adjective depends a great deal upon the noun it modifies. Any one adjective can have a number of possible meanings in its semantic range. The term itself has no set meaning. Its meaning is determined by the context – in this case, the noun it modifies.

Annihilationists are not guilty of redefining the term eternal. In Matthew 25:46 the termeternal is used twice. In both cases the term modifies an event in such a way as to draw attention to its finality, and so aionios should thus be translated permanent. In one case – eternal life — the noun life clearly depicts the event when believers will inherit immortality: permanent life.³ In the other case, the term punishment also describes an event: destruction in hell. Both the noun kolasis and its corresponding verb kolaz? refer to an anticipated event.⁴ The Bible elsewhere describes this event as “the day of the LORD”⁵ or “the day of judgment.”⁶ When the noun that aionios defines refers to an event in time, then the meaning implied by aionios is not perpetual. A more accurate definition in that case is permanent. The English word eternal can mean either.

Other biblical examples of this use of aionios include:

• the permanent sin which can never be forgiven (Mark 3:29).
• the permanent weight of glory compared with our slight momentary affliction (2 Corinthians 4:17; 1 Peter 5:10).
• the permanent things that are unseen compared to the transient things that are seen (2 Corinthians 4:18).
• the permanent house (body) in the heavens compared to our temporary tent (body) on earth (2 Corinthians 5:1).
• the permanent destruction the lost will face at Christ’s return (2 Thessalonians 1:9).
• the permanent comfort and good hope we have through God’s grace (2 Thessalonians 2:16).
• the permanent glory that accompanies salvation in Christ (2 Timothy 2:10).
• Philemon’s permanent return to Colossae, after being parted from them for a while (Philemon 1:15).
• The permanent salvation made possible by Jesus, our great high priest (Hebrews 5:9).
• The permanent judgment that will take place after the resurrection of the dead (Hebrews 6:2).
• The permanent redemption secured by Christ’s sacrifice in the heavenly sanctuary (Hebrews 9:12).
• the permanent covenant made possible by the shedding of the blood of Christ (Hebrews 13:20).
• entrance into the permanent kingdom provided for all those who make their calling and election sure (2 Peter 1:10-11).

Most other uses of aionios in the New Testament are when the term describes God,⁷ or something that comes from God: his gospel,⁸ or the fire he uses to destroy the wicked on judgment day.(( Matthew 18:8; 25:41; Jude 7.)) In neither of these cases is the emphasis on duration. The emphasis is on God as the source. That is why Jude tells us that Sodom and Gomorrah serve as examples of undergoing a punishment of aionios fire. Sodom and Gomorrah were completely destroyed. The destruction was not a perpetual process, but an event in which they were punished by God, the eternal one.

Greek adjectives can appear in plural form, and when that is done to aionios in the New Testament, it is so that the term can modify a plural noun,((2 Corinthians 4:18 “the things that are unseen are eternal.”)) or it refers to an event predicted or promised long ago, which has now been fulfilled or revealed. The three examples of this are:

• “Now to him who is able to strengthen you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery that was kept secret for long ages”⁹
• “who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began.”¹⁰

The final example actually uses aionios twice, once in the sense of permanent, and once in the sense of something promised long ago “in hope of eternal life, which God, who never lies, promised before the ages began.” ¹¹
In summary, annihilationists are not redefining aionios. This article has surveyed every use of aionios in the New Testament and has not found a single reference where it has to describe a perpetual process. Once released from the shackles of the presuppositions of pagan philosophy, we are simply free to describe how the Bible consistently uses the term.

2) Allen asserts that we object to an endless hell on moral grounds.

Allen claims that annihilationists cannot fathom a holy and merciful God perpetually torturing billions of people in hell because we see it as “a form of cruel and unusual punishment.” We do often make arguments like this, but not as a means of judging God on our standards. We simply point out that the picture of God that the Bible uniformly presents is of One whose justice is always tempered by mercy. He destroyed the earth with a flood, but in his mercy saved Noah’s family and the animals with the ark. He destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah for their sins, but saved Lot and his daughters by his mercy. The psalmist declares, “his anger is but for a moment, and his favor is for a lifetime.”¹²

Our real objection to a perpetual hell on moral grounds is that we see it as inconsistent with God’s character as revealed in his word. Perhaps there are those who go too far with this line of reasoning and say “if God were a God who tortured people forever, then I would not believe in him.” The only logical response to such an argument is “then you would be tortured forever.” We try not to cross that line in our arguments against a perpetual hell. We honestly believe that when all the biblical evidence is presented, God is not revealed to be a sadistic monster who will keep people alive forever simply to torment them.

3) Allen asserts that we fail to understand the theology of justice.

Allen spends four out of 13 paragraphs in his post arguing that annihilationists reject an endless hell because we do not get how sinful sin is, and how holy God is. He says our view “fails to account for a lawgiver who is infinite and eternal by nature.” He implies that if we really understood God, then we would see how a never-ending hell fits into his plan. To be fair, he admits that even those who believe in a place of perpetual torture have problems with it when they contemplate its severity. He insists, however, that those contemplations are there because of “how little we understand the sinfulness of sin on the one hand, and the holiness of God on the other.” He argues that since God’s thoughts are higher than our thoughts (Isaiah 55:8-9), then we should ignore those contemplations and accept a perpetual hell on faith.

But we annihilationists are theologians too. We know how dangerous it can be when God’s people are told to accept a line of reasoning on faith, and to avoid questioning. From the Gospels, it is clear that Jesus spent a great deal of his time on earth questioning and arguing against the contemporary theologians and accepted doctrines of his day.

It is true that God’s thoughts are not our own. It does not follow that the doctrine of an endless hell clearly represents God’s thoughts. We argue that the doctrine of an endless hell is the result of the syncretistic combination of what the Bible says about final punishment with the pagan philosophy of innate immortality. The idea of a perpetual hell was created out of this syncretism. It reasoned not from the nature of sin or the nature of God but from Plato’s doctrine of the nature of man.

Since Augustine (whom Allen quotes as an authority) accepted Plato’s idea of innate immortality of the soul, he reasoned that hell must be perpetual because the soul of man cannot die. It was for that reason that he rejected the idea of a hell of limited duration as “the height of absurdity.” But if one accepts the clear statements of scripture that God alone has immortality,¹³ and God will punish sinners by destroying them,¹⁴ so that they exist no more,¹⁵ it becomes clear that Plato’s innate immortality theory cannot be accepted on the same basis as scripture. They contradict each other.

Perhaps that is why Allen does not argue for human immortality, but chooses rather to defend perpetual hell on the basis of the sinfulness of sin and the holiness of God. But, even there, the argumentation fails. Allen argues that because God is infinite, then sins against him require infinite punishment. If that were so, then how could Jesus atone for the sins of all humanity by merely dying on the cross and remaining dead for a few days? Surely if the punishment for any sin against God requires perpetual suffering, then Christ should still be on the cross!

The Bible clearly states what God requires to pay for sins. The wages of sin is death¹⁶ – not perpetual suffering. Not satisfied with this clear description of just punishment for sin, proponents of the concept of perpetual hell simply redefine death – as eternal separation from God. This can only be the case if the person who dies cannot really die. Again, we see that the theology behind the perpetual hell idea is not really based on the nature of God, but is derived from Greek dualism and its understanding of the nature of humanity.

Neither does the concept of a holy God require a perpetual hell. In fact, God’s holiness requires that sin and unrighteousness be destroyed – not kept alive and tormented eternally. There was a point in time in eternity past, when there was no sin – no rebellion. Everything was good in God’s universe. Then sin entered heaven through the rebellion of Satan and eventually came to humanity and earth by Adam and Eve’s transgression.

Ever since sin entered God’s realm, he has been at work to destroy it. There is nothing within his character that requires that he tolerate it. He has a plan that includes the undoing of the curse of sin, and the undoing of the consequences – including death. God’s holiness demands that the plan be carried out. The sin which has infected his universe will be eradicated, and all that is under him will again be his. The doctrine of an endless hell requires God to capitulate. It robs God of his sovereignty – insisting that sin is just as eternal as he is, and there is finally nothing that he can do about it.

Those who accept this notion are imprisoned by a pagan theology that finds no place in the Bible. Until they come to reject the concept of the immortal soul they will always have to place the immortal souls of dead sinners somewhere. A perpetual hell seems the logical place.

4) Allen asserts that we refuse to embrace the hard doctrines of the Bible.

Allen implies that those who accept the concept of a perpetual hell have embraced “the hard doctrines of the Bible” and that is evidence that their faith is “true” and “God-given.” The assumption, of course, is that the Bible teaches this hard doctrine. If the Bible actually teaches that hell will be perpetual, then all believers should accept it as truth, no matter how hard or easy it is.

Annihilationists argue that the doctrine of endless torture is not clearly taught in the Bible. We argue that those passages which appear to teach it are being misread. Many of our writings examine those texts because our concern is that this hard doctrine is hard because it really does not fit the evidence.

It is true that some of the doctrines the Bible clearly teaches are difficult to get a handle on. Anyone who has struggled with the implications of God’s sovereignty and how it affects man’s will can attest to this fact. God is complicated and we should not expect his word to be always easy to understand.

It is also true that accepting the things we learn in scripture is evidence that our faith is genuine. The Holy Spirit works in the hearts and minds of believers, giving them insight into what God means by what he said in scripture. We call this the illumination of the Holy Spirit. Without His guidance, believers would be prone to all kinds of deceptions and false theologies.

History has shown, however, that the illumination of the Holy Spirit does not guarantee that all Bible-believing Christians will agree with each other, or that a doctrine that is popular is also biblical. In fact, many doctrines over the ages which were extremely well-received by the Church have been proven to be unbiblical and discarded.

The doctrine of perpetual hell, which grants eternal life to sinners and requires that they spend eternity alive “outside of the mercy of God” should be discarded. While it is obviously a hard doctrine – and “an absolutely horrible, terrifying doctrine” – it has always had its dissenters who are convinced that it is not a biblical doctrine. There is no advantage to holding to an unbiblical doctrine. Holding to an unbiblical doctrine cannot be evidence of the veracity of one’s faith.

An Alternative

Annihilationists believe in a literal hell which will appear at the end of the age. It is the lake of fire of Revelation, and it will burn as hot as it needs to burn. It will be a place of weeping and gnashing of teeth.¹⁷ It will include all those who regret their not coming to faith, and all those who defy God’s right to judge them to the very end. It is the place of final justice. All wrongs will be dealt with. In the end, God will be vindicated. Everyone in hell will understand that it is their own sins and rebellion that put them there. It will last as long as it needs to last for every deserved punishment to be meted out. It is the final historical event of the present age.(( Revelation 21:8.)) In it, God will destroy the lost completely, soul and body.¹⁸

Then, a new age will begin, after Christ destroys all God’s enemies – even the last enemy – death itself.

Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For “God has put all things in subjection under his feet.” But when it says, “all things are put in subjection,” it is plain that he is excepted who put all things in subjection under him. When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things in subjection under him, that God may be all in all.¹⁹

After hell ends, then there will be a new heaven and a new earth because the old order of things will have passed away.²⁰ Hell is aionios in both major senses in which the term is used in the Bible. It is from God, the perpetual one, who had no beginning and will have no end. Hell is also permanent, an event having a beginning, and a definitive end, and from which there will be no deliverance.

God is perpetual. He never had a beginning, and will never have an end. Human beings have a beginning. We are not infinite. God in his grace offers eternal life to those who believe in his Son. We have the opportunity to become perpetual. By trusting in Christ as our Savior and Lord, we take hold of his promise of eternal life. He intends to keep that promise by granting us immortality at his return.

He has not promised immortality to unbelievers. Their fate is to be destroyed permanently in hell. To make hell an endless process requires that unbelievers as well have immortality. That is not honoring to God nor is it taught in the scriptures.

The title of Allen’s post is “Is Hell Really Endless.” The word endless only appears once in the Bible, and refers to teachings “which promote speculations rather than the stewardship from God that is by faith.”²¹ The Bible never uses the term endless to describe hell. Instead, the Bible says:

• “Neither their silver nor their gold shall be able to deliver them on the day of the wrath of the LORD. In the fire of his jealousy, all the earth shall be consumed; for a full and sudden end he will make of all the inhabitants of the earth.”²²
• “And if Satan has risen up against himself and is divided, he cannot stand, but is coming to an end.”²³
• “But what fruit were you getting at that time from the things of which you are now ashamed? The end of those things is death.”²⁴
• “Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power.²⁵
• “So it is no surprise if his servants, also, disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their deeds.”²⁶
• “Their end is destruction, their god is their belly, and they glory in their shame, with minds set on earthly things.”²⁷
• “The end of all things is at hand; therefore be self-controlled and sober-minded for the sake of your prayers.”²⁸

The only permanent things in this universe are events that happen in history, God himself and the beings he has decided to rescue from this age into the next. Hell will not be perpetual, like God’s life. It will be a permanent event in history, but not a perpetual process.

1. All quotes not otherwise referenced are from Allen’s post.
2. This is not a term we often use or appreciate. The term most of us use is conditionalist, because we argue that human immortality is conditional. Since the unsaved will not be made immortal, they cannot exist forever in a burning hell.
3. Matthew 19:29; Mark 10:17, 30; Luke 10:25; 18:18, 30; John 3:15, 16, 36; 4:14, 36; 6:27, 40, 47, 54, 68; 10:28; 12:25, 50; 17:2, 3; Acts 13:46, 48; Romans 2:7; 5:21; 6:22, 23; Galatians 6:8; 1 Timothy 1:16; 6:2; Titus 1:2; 3:7; Hebrews 9:15; 1 John 2:25; 5:11; Jude 21.
4. 2 Peter 2:9 NET: “the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from their trials, and to reserve the unrighteous forpunishment at the day of judgment.”
5. Isa. 13:6, 9; Jer. 46:10; Ezek. 13:5; 30:3; Joel 1:15; 2:1, 11, 31; 3:14; Amos 5:18, 20; Obad. 1:15; Zeph. 1:7, 14; Mal. 4:5; Acts 2:20; 1 Cor. 5:5; 1 Thess. 5:2; 2 Thess. 2:2; 2 Pet. 3:10.
6. Matt. 10:15; 11:22, 24; 12:36; 2 Pet. 2:9; 3:7; 1 John 4:17.
7. Romans 16:26; 1 Timothy 6:16; Hebrews 9:14;
8. Revelation 14:6.
9. Romans 16:25.
10. 2 Timothy 1:9.
11. Titus 1:2.
12. Psalm 30:5.
13. 1 Timothy 6:16.
14. Matt. 10:28; 22:7; Luke 17: 27, 29; 20:16; 1 Cor. 3:17; 6:13; 15:24, 26; Heb. 10:39; 2 Peter 2:12; Rev. 11:18.
15. Psalm 104:35; Ezekiel 26:21; 27:36; 28:19.
16. Romans 6:23.
17. Matthew 8:12; 13:42, 50; 22:13; 24:51; 25:30; Luke 13:28.
18. Matthew 10:28.
19. 1 Corinthians 15:24-28.
20. Revelation 21:1-4.
21. 1 Timothy 1:4.
22. Zephaniah 1:18.
23. Mark 3:26.
24. Romans 6:21.
25. 1 Corinthians 15:24.
26. 2 Corinthians 11:15.
27. Philippians 3:19.
28. 1 Peter 4:7.

* * *

First, whoever claims to speak for God is obligated to do so accurately. Scripture is filled with warnings to anyone who abuses this trust or takes it lightly. The subject of final punishment is particularly hazardous because it is inextricably tied to God’s own reputation and character. Undeniably, our natural instincts are unable to discern God’s character and are unfit to judge it. But in this situation, God himself declares his character and challenges us to imitate him. Jesus adds that whoever looks at him sees the Father also. Further, believers are said to possess moral intuition, and they are expected by practice to heighten its sensitivity and usefulness.

We read in John 3:16 that God loved the world so much that he gave his one and only Son, so believers will not perish but have eternal life. In that light, it is fair to ask if that same God now intends to toss billions of those same people into something resembling a lake of volcanic lava, then actively intervene to prevent their demise so they will suffer unspeakable pain forever. If God intends nothing of the kind, could one possibly invent a more scandalous lie with which to besmirch his holy, righteous, loving and just character?

Every day devout, God-fearing believers are studying their Bibles afresh and rejecting the traditional theory of conscious unending torment–including some of the most highly-respected scholars (Richard Bauckham, N. T. Wright), commentators (F. F.

Bruce), and preachers (John Stott) in the world.

————————

For an idea why, Edward Fudge invites you to read the first 32 pages of The Fire That Consumes. To download this valuable excerpt, go to www.EdwardFudge.com/excerptTFTC3.pdf

Pastor Paul Sellman has produced a significant study in biblical theology for the modern context. Much like John Stott and Edward Fudge, Sellman came to his study of the issues of life, death and destiny convinced that people go to their rewards at death. His study of the scriptures has revealed a different outlook. He now sees that death is not the answer to humanity’s problem, it is part of that problem. The solution to humanity’s problem is Jesus Christ, whose return will mean the end of evil, and an eternal new beginning for the saved.
The genius of Sellman’s approach to this controversial subject is his way of simplifying these very complex issues. He asks his readers to put aside their preconceived notions and to imagine all history as being represented by two ages: this age, and the age to come.
This age is the age of mortality because humanity rebelled against God in Eden, thus lost the opportunity to take of the tree of life and live forever. The age to come is an age of restoration where God renews heaven and earth with life eternal as it was meant to be. The crucial event which will put an end to this age of mortality and usher in the age of eternal life is what the Bible calls the Day of the Lord.
Sellman shows from scripture that this Day of the Lord is an event taught in both Testaments. It is the Day of Jesus Christ and the Day of his return, and Resurrection Day, and Judgment Day. It is the essential event in all history, since it divides the two ages. It corrects the problems of this age, and explains the destiny of those who will by God’s grace make it into the next.
Sellman attacks some of the theological traditions within popular Christianity that tend to obscure this way of looking at things. Chief among these traditions is the concept borrowed from Greek philosophy that all human souls are already immortal. Sellman argues that this is “an unbiblical presupposition” (152) which has led Christians who read the Bible to “see something that isn’t there” (172). He calls this view “the great heresy of all existence” (195). Immortality was lost in Eden, and will not be gained back “until the rebellion that lost it is ended” (197).
To Sellman, “good theology is based upon what is clearly taught, and then filled in by the less certain elements” (91). What is clearly taught in scripture is humanity’s need for eternal life in this age; God’s plan to fill that need in the age to come; and the Day of the Lord which will make God’s plan reality.
So, until that great event of the Day of the Lord arrives, those who die wait unconscious in their graves for resurrection – either to eternal life or to the second death. That is why the Bible calls Christians who have died asleep in Christ.
It is impossible for a reviewer to like everything about a book — so there are a few changes that might improve this work in its next edition. Here is a short list of suggestions:
The frequent use of the first person is a style matter, but it seems to detract from the scholarly nature of the study.
Quotes from the Bible are everywhere in this work, but the font, italics, and justification combined in quotations tend to make some of the text run together.
Sellman steers away from a number of technical and complicated issues and avoids getting carried away in discussing particularly problematic texts. This is a good thing, but might be seen by opponents of his position as “chickening out.” A few well-placed reference notes to popular works (like that of Stott and Edwards) which do get into those texts might help.
The Tree of Life is not yet available in electronic book format. If it were, this review would have been written sooner!

The Tree of Life is a skilful and contemporary approach to questions that God’s people have been asking since the time of the patriarchs. It is the kind of book that pastors can pass on to new church members, who are just getting to know about the issues of life, death, and destiny. It helps to explain the way things are, and whet our appetites for the way things will be.

continued from Part 2

A more serious weakness in the approach of contributors to Hell Under Fire is that they approach the Bible with this question is view: What does the Bible – the Old Testament, Jesus, Paul, the Book of Revelation – say about hell?  Now, that whole approach is very restrictive.  It simply excludes a heap of biblical evidence.  What they should be asking is: What does the Bible – the Old Testament and the New – say about the final fate of the lost?  Because that is the real issue and because, in fact, the idea of “hell” is only one of many ways in which the Bible talks about this subject.  But if you direct attention only to passages which relate recognisably to the idea of “hell”, and particularly to the very small set of such texts which appear, at first glance, to support eternal suffering, you acquire, and create, the impression that this is the normative biblical approach.

As I say, the fundamental question is surely not, “What does the Bible teach about hell?” but “What does the Bible teach about the final fate of the lost?” Once we put that question, we are very likely to recall immediately that what the Bible normally says is, that they will die:  “The wages of sin is death…” (Rom 6:23).  Or that they will be destroyed, or perish: “God so love the world that he gave his one and only Son so that whosoever believes in him should not perish…” (John 3:16).  Not that these Traditionalists are unaware of such texts, but they fail to draw attention to how common texts like these are in Scripture, and utterly fail to recognise their significance as the normative Scripture-based context within which the texts about hell ought to be interpreted.

Now, it is true that these words “death” and “destruction” do receive some attention in Hell Under Fire.  Unfortunately, however, contributors seek to avoid the plain sense of these words by a standard Traditionalist strategy: they claim that, when referring to the fate of the lost, these words do not mean what they appear to mean: that, rather than denoting an end to conscious, functioning existence, they merely denote a change to a new, less desirable state of conscious, functioning existence.  This simply will not do.

The fact is, the Bible itself regularly makes clear what it means by death.  I’ve already referred to Genesis 3:19: “You are dust and to dust you shall return.”  Death is set forth in Scripture, not as another form of life, but as the opposite to life.  “Look,” says Moses in Deuteronomy, “I set before you life – and death.  Choose life” (30:19).  The penalty for sin which Jesus Christ bore for us all on the cross was death, not eternal suffering.  In Hell Under Fire, attempts are made to counter this point by arguing that, as Christ was the infinite Son of God, the penalty He bore was correspondingly infinite and therefore equivalent to eternal torment. ¹ Well, this is mere speculation, not Bible teaching.  In fact, in Hell Under Fire itself  Prof. Ferguson gives a very fine biblical account of what Jesus endured at the cross (pp229-231), but finds not a single text to support this idea!  What the Bible does teach is that the penalty for sin is paid by sacrifice, as indeed the whole Old Testament teaches.  Now sacrifice is not an eternity of suffering: it is life given up and life taken: it is death.  And what the Bible teaches everywhere is that we saved by Christ’s “blood”, that is, by His sacrificial death (Rom 3:25, 5:9; Eph 1:7; Heb 9:14, 10:19; Rev 1:5).  Indeed, it is Traditionalists, not Conditionalists, who jeopardise the biblical doctrine of the atonement, and much else besides.

What about “destruction”?  This term, and the related term “perish”, occur regularly in our English Bibles, to translate actually quite a few different Hebrew and Greek words for the final fate of the lost.  And it is so obvious that “destruction” amounts to annihilation, that James Packer, in Hell Under Fire, even defines Annihilationism as “the belief that those who die apart from saving faith…will be destroyed” (p196)!  Well, that’s what the Bible says!

Do “destruction” and “perish” really what they say?  Of course they do.  This is not a matter of naive literalism on my part.  The Bible itself frequently makes the import of its use of terms like “perish” and “destruction” absolutely clear in context.  Sometimes this is done by means of imagery.  Job 20:7: “The wicked will perish for ever like his own dung” – not pretty, but you know what is meant, and it’s not everlasting conscious existence!  Psalm 37:20: “…the wicked perish…they vanish – like smoke they vanish away”!  Sometimes the meaning is clarified in other ways.  Jesus once said: “Unless you repent, you will all likewise perish” (Luke 13:5).  Like what?  He’s referring to people upon whom a tower fell and to others who were killed by the Romans.  What happened to them?  They died!  What does it mean, to “perish”?  It means what it says!  It means, to come to an end.

Sometimes the context states everything very straight forwardly.  Psalm 104:35: “May sinners be destroyed from the earth: may the wicked be no more”.  Sorry, Traditionalists: that’s “annihilation”!  Isaiah 41:11: “Those who strive against God shall be as nothing and shall perish.”  Psalm 37, which says so often that the wicked will be destroyed, also says (v10): “the wicked will be no more”.

Jesus says: “Fear God who can destroy both soul and body in hell” (Matt. 10:28).  Is that really ambiguous?  If the same word, “destroy”, is applied in the same sentence, without qualification, to both “soul” and “body”, will it not mean the same thing in both cases?  The Greek philosopher Plato, who believed in the immortality of the soul, said that the soul cannot be destroyed (Phaedo 14, 24, 36).  Jesus says: Yes it can.  And that is what hell is for: the destruction – the bringing to an end – of the whole person: as John Stott said, “an extinction of being”.²

What people associate most of all with hell, of course, is fire.  Well, the fact is that in the Bible fire is regularly and unambiguously and emphatically associated with – annihilation.  Malachi 4 tells us that God’s judgment day will burn like an oven, with the result that evildoers will be completely burnt up, like chaff or straw (v1).  Similarly, in Matthew’s Gospel, John the Baptist says the chaff will be burned up with fire.  How is this ambiguous?  Oh yes, John says the fire will be “unquenchable”.  But this expression is completely intelligible against the background of Old Testament usage: for example, Jeremiah 17:27, where God says He will “kindle a fire” that shall “devour the palaces of Jerusalem and shall not be quenched”.  Are the palaces of Jerusalem still burning?  No, “unquenchable” means, in fact, the opposite of an ongoing fire: it means that the fire will not be prevented from completing its work of total destruction!

But, having read Hell Under Fire, I find that Traditionalists are generally unwilling to take the Old Testament background or witness into account much at all.  And often when they do, the result is misleading and misinformed.  For example, Robert W. Yarborough, who contributes the essay “Jesus on Hell”, claims that the last verse of the Book of Isaiah clearly teaches the notion of eternal

punishment (pp74, 82).  Yarborough is referring especially to the famous phrase: “their worm shall not die and their fire shall not be quenched”.  There you are, says Yarborough: eternal suffering.³ And yet even in this same volume, Hell Under Fire, in the essay entitled “The Old Testament on Hell”, the Old Testament spokesman Daniel I. Block says no!  Rather, as Block rightly points out, the image here is “that of a pile of corpses…ignominiously dumped in a heap and torched” (p61).  And yet this text, of course, is clearly what is in the mind of Jesus, when he says of those cast into hell, that “their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched” (Mark 9:48).  What worms feed on is the dead, not the living!

Well, with the best will in the world, the Old Testament contributor cannot find any teaching in the whole Old Testament to support Traditionalism.  And with the very best will in the world, this whole collection of militant Traditionalists can find hardly any support in the New Testament either.  And the truly astonishing thing, they admit this!  To their credit, they’re too honest to deny it!   The Old Testament man finds hardly any “hints”, even (p59), in that whole corpus!  Douglas J. Moo, who contributes the essay called “Paul on Hell”, concedes: “…rarely, if ever, does Paul devote himself to explicit teaching about hell as a central purpose within his letters” (p95).  Indeed, Moo hangs his whole case on II Thessalonians 1:8-9, which speaks, not of “eternal suffering” at all, but of “eternal destruction”!   In fact Moo himself concedes that “the decisive data” against Annihilationism “do not occur in Paul” (pp102f) and “one looks in vain for any clear Pauline affirmations” of eternal suffering (p109).

Where, then?  It is repeatedly said by Traditionalists that Jesus is the one who most clearly and consistently spoke of a hell of eternal suffering.⁴ And yet, in his essay entitled “Jesus on Hell”, Prof. Yarborough himself can point to only two texts as unambiguous evidence: Matt 18:8-9 and Mark 9:47-48 – and we have just shown that the Mark 9 text teaches no such thing.  Nor does Matthew 18:8-9.  It speaks of “eternal fire”; but then so does Jude 7 and Jude 7 is speaking about the judgment that overtook Sodom and Gomorrah, not about everlasting suffering.  An “eternal fire” is everlasting in its effects, not necessarily in its duration.

So then where, if anywhere at all, does Scripture clearly and unambiguously teach that lost human beings will suffer forever in hell?  Surely, given that it is absolutely vital, and only fair, that we should be confronted unmistakably with this truly awesome reality, if it is true – we should find it clearly and unambiguously spelt out in God’s Word?  But the answer is, nowhere.

The very best that Traditionalists can do, is point us to two texts in the Book of Revelation: Rev 14:9-12 and Rev 20:10.  It is Gregory K. Beale who contributes the essay “The Revelation on Hell”.  Well, on Rev 14:9-12, even Prof. Beale concedes that the Old Testament background to this passage “could support” annihilationism and that both the grammar and the imagery in this passage “could indicate a great judgment that will be remembered forever, not one in which people will suffer forever” (pp114-116).

I’m still waiting for unambiguous testimony.  Rev 18:21 sounds pretty unambiguous and that says that Babylon “shall be found no more”.  Hang on: that’s annihilation!  Rev 20:14 and 21:8 describe hell as “the second death”.  That sounds clear enough.  So what about Rev 20:10?  Rev 20:10 does speak of being tormented “for ever and ever”.  It is the only text in the entire Bible that does so and it refers, not to people, but to Satan, the Beast and the False Prophet.  Two of those entities are symbolic and one is – well – Satan.  How relevant is this text?  It does not refer to people.  And it’s the only text in the entire Bible that speaks of being tormented forever and ever.  Over the centuries, orthodox Christian theologians have been warning us until blue in the face

not to build doctrine of any kind upon a mere handful texts.⁵

Are we now, in the face of the consistent witness of Scripture, going to build a doctrine as astounding, controversial and frankly scandalous as eternal torment upon one text, one text of questionable significance and relevance, drawn from the most controversial book in the entire Bible?

No.  The wages of sin is death.  That’s what the whole Bible says and – as you’d expect – it makes sense, as well!  Sin doesn’t make sense, but God’s judgment does.  However, the gift of God is eternal life in Jesus Christ our Lord (Rom 6:23).  That doesn’t make sense either!  That’s a sheer gift.   And I hope to spend all eternity thanking God for it.

Warren and his wife Jackie have been in church ministry since 1981.  Before entering theological college Warren taught English at tertiary and secondary levels.  He spent 14 years at a church on Auckland’s North Shore, which began as Forrest Hill Church of Christ and became Sunnynook Baptist Church!  After 2 years as Director of Oro Bible College in the Philippines, he has been Pastor of Remuera Baptist Church, Auckland, since 1997.  He has also lectured at Laidlaw College (formerly Bible College of NZ) in various theological and pastoral subjects, and is  currently a board member of CIANZ.  Jackie has taught Maths for many years.  Jackie and Warren have three grown sons, all overseas at present.

1. “E.g. Christopher W. Morgan, quoting David Wells, pp212-213, Sinclair B. Ferguson, p232
2. D. L. Edwards and J. R. W. Stott, Essentials, London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1988, p.315.
3. See also Douglas J. Moo, “Paul on Hell”, p95.
4. e.g. D. A. Carson, quoted with approval by Christopher W. Morgan, pp214-215; also Sinclair B. Ferguson, p239.
5. “Incidentally, Robert A. Peterson concedes that the only text that could support “the conscious suffering of the wicked in the intermediate state” is Luke 16:19-31 And that’s a parable!