What do you think?
Rate this book
Jonathan Edwards And Hell
Nobody likes the doctrine of hell so a far more comfortable option has been redeveloped and supported in recent years: Annhilationism, the idea that the lost are destroyed rather than suffer endless punishment in hell. Morgan summarises the strengths and weaknesses of the major protagonists on both sides and then points to the influential American Theologian, Jonathan Edwards, as an example of how best to answer the theory. Edwards presents a convincing response, one that we today would do well to study.
- GenresTheology
176 pages, Paperback
First published March 1, 2004
11 people want to read
About the author
Chris Morgan
211 books1 followerThere is more than one author by this name on Goodreads.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
September 12, 2021
This book is a thoughtful and respectful offering on the unresolvable debate about eternally-burning hell. Morgan provides a well-documented summary of both the traditional and annihilationist camps, discussing the gaps and contradictions on both sides. He is a firm advocate of ECT, but offers more bibliography than teachings of his own.
Although my brothers are all pastors in the second camp, I am not, so my observations are as a lay person. Three points. Morgan concedes that an evangelical giant like John Stott embraced the annihilationist perspective, admitting that the idea of a God keeping fires of punishment burning forever seems a moral impossibility. If the interested church member counts reputation and sterling scholarly credentials, both sides in this debate are well stocked with godly and humble talent.
My second concern is this. We are all part of the human race, all eight billion of us. Built into our DNA is an essential code of fairness. Rob a bank: that’s worth ten years of incarceration. Tell a lie: slap on the wrist. Indulge a promiscuous thought or hate your neighbor: yes, it’s a sin. It’s serious. It can be deadly. But our community of humanity has a built-in scalable code of evaluation. If you murder a lot of people, it’s innately fair you might lose your own life.
Okay. But now the theologian sweeps it aside with these assertions. No, your sin, each and every one, is infinite. If you steal or lie or get impatient, that’s a violation of eternal consequences. In heaven’s vastly different scale, you can be punished for all eternity for even one of those infinitely evil and rebellious choices. On top of that, because God is infinitely holy and good and transcendent, it’s entirely fair for Him to punish you for ever and ever for the seventy earth-bound years where you lived outside of His will.
Yet there’s more. The entire human race is wired to believe that torture is sick and wrong. Josef Mengele tortured people; he was deemed evil for doing so. We all know this in our gut. But as we approach this issue, again the moral scales of the universe are abruptly inverted. Because it’s God, now torture is not only right and good and admirable and necessary, it’s ideal for that torture to extend for all eternity. “When we’ve been there ten thousand years, bright shining as the sun,” this surreal upheaval of morality is likewise fulfilled: the flames of hell are just getting started.
To cap off this agonizing belief, it is asserted that man does not have innate immortality. So far so good; that is true and attested to in Scripture. However, a holy God will artificially keep sinners alive in the flames so that the torture can continue. And of course, because their cries of agony are themselves sinful and rebellious, that justifies the continuation of hellfire without end. The punishment perpetuates itself in a ghastly cycle that can never end.
Having said this, I join this good Christian pastor at bowing down and admitting that God is God. He is sovereign. He will do what His own holiness dictates is the fair and righteous course as He brings this sinful rebellion to its conclusion. If that involves an eternal hell, I will bow down and accept His ruling. He is the Potter; I am clay.
Although my brothers are all pastors in the second camp, I am not, so my observations are as a lay person. Three points. Morgan concedes that an evangelical giant like John Stott embraced the annihilationist perspective, admitting that the idea of a God keeping fires of punishment burning forever seems a moral impossibility. If the interested church member counts reputation and sterling scholarly credentials, both sides in this debate are well stocked with godly and humble talent.
My second concern is this. We are all part of the human race, all eight billion of us. Built into our DNA is an essential code of fairness. Rob a bank: that’s worth ten years of incarceration. Tell a lie: slap on the wrist. Indulge a promiscuous thought or hate your neighbor: yes, it’s a sin. It’s serious. It can be deadly. But our community of humanity has a built-in scalable code of evaluation. If you murder a lot of people, it’s innately fair you might lose your own life.
Okay. But now the theologian sweeps it aside with these assertions. No, your sin, each and every one, is infinite. If you steal or lie or get impatient, that’s a violation of eternal consequences. In heaven’s vastly different scale, you can be punished for all eternity for even one of those infinitely evil and rebellious choices. On top of that, because God is infinitely holy and good and transcendent, it’s entirely fair for Him to punish you for ever and ever for the seventy earth-bound years where you lived outside of His will.
Yet there’s more. The entire human race is wired to believe that torture is sick and wrong. Josef Mengele tortured people; he was deemed evil for doing so. We all know this in our gut. But as we approach this issue, again the moral scales of the universe are abruptly inverted. Because it’s God, now torture is not only right and good and admirable and necessary, it’s ideal for that torture to extend for all eternity. “When we’ve been there ten thousand years, bright shining as the sun,” this surreal upheaval of morality is likewise fulfilled: the flames of hell are just getting started.
To cap off this agonizing belief, it is asserted that man does not have innate immortality. So far so good; that is true and attested to in Scripture. However, a holy God will artificially keep sinners alive in the flames so that the torture can continue. And of course, because their cries of agony are themselves sinful and rebellious, that justifies the continuation of hellfire without end. The punishment perpetuates itself in a ghastly cycle that can never end.
Having said this, I join this good Christian pastor at bowing down and admitting that God is God. He is sovereign. He will do what His own holiness dictates is the fair and righteous course as He brings this sinful rebellion to its conclusion. If that involves an eternal hell, I will bow down and accept His ruling. He is the Potter; I am clay.
July 31, 2024
A sobering read but an important topic to consider. As other reviews note it’s a comprehensive summary of this debate from a number of angles, and presents Jonathan Edward’s views on the topic. Because it mainly functions to summarise / organise other people’s views, it very much feels like an academic textbook, but it was helpful for getting a bit of an idea of the various arguments.
May 6, 2019
An insightful look into the history of Hell and how it shaped Edwards view of it.
June 16, 2020
The importance of hell in Jonathan Edwards theology, with also some potshots at annihilationism.
July 5, 2011
I found it to be a fairly thorough review of both historical and contemporary arguments for annihilationism, as well as a fairly thorough review of historical and contemporary refutations of the same. It contains a good summary and analysis of the fundamentals and implications of Jonathan Edwards theological response.
I also found it to be a bit repetitive at times.
Recommended for the educated layman and seminary student.
I also found it to be a bit repetitive at times.
Recommended for the educated layman and seminary student.
August 12, 2012
A thorough review of the historical debate over eternal punishment for sin. Morgan does a great job applying this material to the current debate and arguing for the systematic theological approach that Edwards uses to answer those who argue that punishment for sin is not eternal.
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews