What do you think?
Rate this book
Rethinking Hell: Readings in Evangelical Conditionalism
Most evangelical Christians believe that those people who are not saved before they die will be punished in hell forever. But is this what the Bible truly teaches? Do Christians need to rethink their understanding of hell? In the late twentieth century, a growing number of evangelical theologians, biblical scholars, and philosophers began to reject the traditional doctrine of eternal conscious torment in hell in favor of a minority theological perspective called conditional immortality. This view contends that the unsaved are resurrected to face divine judgment, just as Christians have always believed, but due to the fact that immortality is only given to those who are in Christ, the unsaved do not exist forever in hell. Instead, they face the punishment of the ""second death""--an end to their conscious existence. This volume brings together excerpts from a variety of well-respected evangelical thinkers, including John Stott, John Wenham, and E. Earl Ellis, as they articulate the biblical, theological, and philosophical arguments for conditionalism. These readings will give thoughtful Christians strong evidence that there are indeed compelling reasons for rethinking hell. ""As more and more people open their minds to rethink the doctrine of final punishment, this book will be a valuable resource and reference. I wish it had been available when I did my own research. This volume is extensive, inclusive, and impressive in scope and approach. I am delighted to endorse it! A book for our time, it should enjoy great success."" --Edward Fudge, author of The Fire That Consumes ""This volume is to be welcomed and recommended for its usefulness in gathering together some of the most significant contributions from leading scholars and preachers who question whether the eternal conscious punishment of the wicked is a correct interpretation of the biblical teaching."" --I. Howard Marshall, Professor Emeritus of New Testament, University of Aberdeen, Scotland ""Because the case for annihilationism is generally not well understood, this expertly chosen selection from often difficult to find writings, along with helpful introductory essays, will be immensely valuable to the church. Everyone, regardless of their current understanding, can welcome this historical and biblical resource that will make fruitful dialogue more possible than ever."" --Terrance Tiessen, Professor Emeritus of Systematic Theology and Ethics, Providence Theological Seminary, Colorado ""Those who read this book either will be challenged to reconsider their views about the traditional teachings of the church on hell or they will be convinced that the conditionalist view of hell is the right biblical teaching."" --Claude F. Mariottini, author of Rereading the Biblical Text ""Rethinking Hell is a much-needed compendium of classic and contemporary defenses of conditional immortalism--a view that offers a welcome alternative to universalism and the traditional concept of eternal conscious torment. Bringing together about twenty proponents of conditionalism--theologians, biblical scholars, and philosophers--Rethinking Hell is destined to be the definitive sourcebook on the topic for years to come. Highly recommended!"" --James S. Spiegel, author of The Benefits of Providence Christopher M. Date is the principal blogger and podcaster of the Rethinking Hell project and works as a software engineer in the Pacific Northwest. Gregory G. Stump is a graduate of Fuller Theological Seminary and serves as a pastor at a Baptist church in Southern California. Joshua W. Anderson earned an MA in Philosophy from Talbot School of Theology and an MA in Theology from Fuller Theological Seminary; he teaches apologetics and theology at Ecclesia College in Springdale, Arkansas.
368 pages, Hardcover
First published April 15, 2014
64 people are currently reading
198 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews
February 25, 2019
Rethinking Hell is a compendium of readings by evangelical authors who advocate conditionalism. Conditionalism—also known as “conditional immortality” and “annihilationism”—is the belief that hell is “the wicked’s final total destruction,” not their “unending conscious torture,” as Edward W. Fudge states the distinction in his essay. It is a minority position among evangelical Christians, but one that has been gaining ground since the publication of Fudge’s The Fire That Consumes in 1984.
Because conditionalism differs from the traditional understanding of hell as eternal conscious torment, and because traditionalism is far and away the majority position among Christians, including evangelicals and Pentecostals (my theological tribes), it might be helpful to summarize why conditionalists think theirs is the correct biblical interpretation. Glenn A. People’s essay, “Introduction to Evangelical Conditionalism,” outlines its “principle arguments” under four headings:
1. Immortality: “Eternal life in the sense of life without end is not a natural human possession. We are bereft of it because of sin, and God promises to give it to those who are united to Christ. Immortality is therefore not universal or inherent but conditional.” See, for example, 2 Timothy 1:9b–10.
2. A World Without Evil: “The biblical writers anticipate a time when everything that exists will be united under Christ,” for example, Ephesians 1:9–10 and 1 Corinthians 15:24–28. “Creation itself will be brought into a state of sinless perfection to the praise of God’s glory, and the dualistic portrait of eternity with heaven on one side and hell on the other side finds no home in Scripture….”
3. Substitutionary Atonement: “The New Testament is replete with the language of Jesus dying for sin, for sinners, and for us. Whatever else this might mean, it at least means that in Christ’s passion and ultimately his death we see what comes of sin,” for example, 1 Peter 3:18.
4. Destruction: “[E]vangelical conditionalists observe that Scripture uses a range of language and images to refer to the fate of humanity without salvation through Christ: punishment, darkness, fire, death, destruction, being blotted out, and so on. Without any doubt, however, the overwhelming preponderance of the clearest such language speaks of the final death and destruction of the enemies of God.” For example, see Matthew 10:28, 2 Thessalonians 1:9, 2 Peter 2:6.
Arguments 1, 3, and 4 recur through Rethinking Hell’s twenty-two chapters. In addition to these biblical arguments, several of the chapters make historical arguments to the effect that conditionalism was a live option among Christianity’s theologians in the second and third centuries. Only with Augustine in the fourth century does eternal conscious torment become the majority point of view, one shared by Augustine’s descendants in the Middle Ages, the Reformation, and Evangelical Revivalism.
At a philosophical level, conditionalists argue that eternal conscious torment is disportionate punishment, thus violating the character of God and the lex talionis principle of biblical law. Traditionalists typically respond in one of two ways to this: First, that an eternity of punishment is appropriate, since sin is an offense against an infinite God. This is a longstanding reply, memorably articulated by Thomas Aquinas. More recently, a second reply has been offered: an eternity of punishment is warranted because in hell, sinners continue to rebel against God. As C. S. Lewis memorably put it, “The doors of hell are locked from the inside.”
The most common objection to conditionalism is the use of the adjective “eternal” to describe the fate of the wicked. Jesus juxtaposed “eternal life” and “eternal punishment” in Matthew 25:46. Since Augustine, this has been taken to show that the life of the righteous and the punishment of the wicked are both everlasting. The standard conditionalist reply is that the consequences of hell, that is, annihilation, are everlasting, not the experience of hell, that is, punishment. While this understanding may work in many cases, traditionalists argue that it doesn’t work for Revelation 20:10, which speaks of the devil, the beast, and the false prophet being thrown into “the lack of burning sulphur,” where they will be “tormented day and night for ever and ever.” In 20:15, anyone “whose name was not found written in the book of life” was thrown into the lake as well, presumably to suffer the same fate.
I mention these objections and replies to illustrate basic elements in the debate between traditionalists and conditionalists.
Rethinking Hell is a good book, though if you are looking to purchase and read just one book advocating conditional immortality, I would recommend the third edition of Edward W. Fudge’s The Fire That Consumes. Advocates in both camps agree that this is the classic modern statement of the position. Still, this book has its value, even if—or perhaps especially if—you do not agree with its conclusions.
Book Reviewed
Christopher M. Date, Gregory G. Stump, and Joshua W. Anderson, eds., Rethinking Hell: Readings in Evangelical Conditionalism (Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2014).
P.S. If you liked my review, please click “Helpful” on my Amazon review page.
Because conditionalism differs from the traditional understanding of hell as eternal conscious torment, and because traditionalism is far and away the majority position among Christians, including evangelicals and Pentecostals (my theological tribes), it might be helpful to summarize why conditionalists think theirs is the correct biblical interpretation. Glenn A. People’s essay, “Introduction to Evangelical Conditionalism,” outlines its “principle arguments” under four headings:
1. Immortality: “Eternal life in the sense of life without end is not a natural human possession. We are bereft of it because of sin, and God promises to give it to those who are united to Christ. Immortality is therefore not universal or inherent but conditional.” See, for example, 2 Timothy 1:9b–10.
2. A World Without Evil: “The biblical writers anticipate a time when everything that exists will be united under Christ,” for example, Ephesians 1:9–10 and 1 Corinthians 15:24–28. “Creation itself will be brought into a state of sinless perfection to the praise of God’s glory, and the dualistic portrait of eternity with heaven on one side and hell on the other side finds no home in Scripture….”
3. Substitutionary Atonement: “The New Testament is replete with the language of Jesus dying for sin, for sinners, and for us. Whatever else this might mean, it at least means that in Christ’s passion and ultimately his death we see what comes of sin,” for example, 1 Peter 3:18.
4. Destruction: “[E]vangelical conditionalists observe that Scripture uses a range of language and images to refer to the fate of humanity without salvation through Christ: punishment, darkness, fire, death, destruction, being blotted out, and so on. Without any doubt, however, the overwhelming preponderance of the clearest such language speaks of the final death and destruction of the enemies of God.” For example, see Matthew 10:28, 2 Thessalonians 1:9, 2 Peter 2:6.
Arguments 1, 3, and 4 recur through Rethinking Hell’s twenty-two chapters. In addition to these biblical arguments, several of the chapters make historical arguments to the effect that conditionalism was a live option among Christianity’s theologians in the second and third centuries. Only with Augustine in the fourth century does eternal conscious torment become the majority point of view, one shared by Augustine’s descendants in the Middle Ages, the Reformation, and Evangelical Revivalism.
At a philosophical level, conditionalists argue that eternal conscious torment is disportionate punishment, thus violating the character of God and the lex talionis principle of biblical law. Traditionalists typically respond in one of two ways to this: First, that an eternity of punishment is appropriate, since sin is an offense against an infinite God. This is a longstanding reply, memorably articulated by Thomas Aquinas. More recently, a second reply has been offered: an eternity of punishment is warranted because in hell, sinners continue to rebel against God. As C. S. Lewis memorably put it, “The doors of hell are locked from the inside.”
The most common objection to conditionalism is the use of the adjective “eternal” to describe the fate of the wicked. Jesus juxtaposed “eternal life” and “eternal punishment” in Matthew 25:46. Since Augustine, this has been taken to show that the life of the righteous and the punishment of the wicked are both everlasting. The standard conditionalist reply is that the consequences of hell, that is, annihilation, are everlasting, not the experience of hell, that is, punishment. While this understanding may work in many cases, traditionalists argue that it doesn’t work for Revelation 20:10, which speaks of the devil, the beast, and the false prophet being thrown into “the lack of burning sulphur,” where they will be “tormented day and night for ever and ever.” In 20:15, anyone “whose name was not found written in the book of life” was thrown into the lake as well, presumably to suffer the same fate.
I mention these objections and replies to illustrate basic elements in the debate between traditionalists and conditionalists.
Rethinking Hell is a good book, though if you are looking to purchase and read just one book advocating conditional immortality, I would recommend the third edition of Edward W. Fudge’s The Fire That Consumes. Advocates in both camps agree that this is the classic modern statement of the position. Still, this book has its value, even if—or perhaps especially if—you do not agree with its conclusions.
Book Reviewed
Christopher M. Date, Gregory G. Stump, and Joshua W. Anderson, eds., Rethinking Hell: Readings in Evangelical Conditionalism (Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2014).
P.S. If you liked my review, please click “Helpful” on my Amazon review page.
July 7, 2016
I've always heard that annihilation did not include punishment, and so I never gave it a second thought. Apparently I've been served a straw man. This work is strongly argued across biblical, historical and philosophical ranks. Weaknesses are pointed out and caution is encouraged, but even still this view seems entirely possible if not slightly more probable than the traditional interpretation of hell. It seems to me that if a view is biblically 50/50 and while keeping tradition under advisement, the philosophical arguments top the scales slightly in favor of annihilation (proportionality, pointlessness, marred creation, and nature of God). If hold the view with an open hand and would still consider myself agnostic, there is no response from the other side for example, but i would lean annihilation after reading this book.
July 5, 2024
AN EXCELLENT COLLECTION OF WRITINGS SUGGESTING THE ANNIHILATION OF THE WICKED
Coeditor Chris Date explained in his Introduction to this 2014 book, “few such [conditionalist] scholars in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries have written book-length defenses of conditionalism… It is therefore not always easy to direct curious traditionalists … to these authors’ published support for conditionalism… [This book] is meant to serve as a resource to help solve that problem by compiling some of what these various conditionalist scholars have written into one convenient publication…” (Pg. xxvii) Writings are included by such authors as Edward Fudge, Stephen Travis, John Stott, Clark Pinnock, John Wenham, Basil Atkinson, Harold Guillebaud, Philip E. Hughes LeRoy Froom, Ben Witherington III, etc.
Glenn Peoples observes, “it becomes all the more egregious that so many proponents of the traditional view of hell take their view to represent anything like a ‘literal’ interpretation of what Scripture says on the subject. Of the scant few passages that might appear to give credence to a traditional view, the contexts in which they appear are not the places one would normally expect to find important, direct teaching on the nature of the world to come—and certainly not ‘literal’ teaching, as that term is typically used… in the name of a more compelling case we are offered a paltry list of vague references, parables of questionable interpretation, and figurative imagery… Indeed the only passages of Scripture that have even the APPEARANCE of prolonged suffering after death for the lost are firstly the tale of Lazarus and the Rich Man… and secondly some highly symbolic episodes in John’s visionary experience in the book of Revelation.” (Pg. 23)
Edward Fudge says of Revelation 20:7-10, “if the beast and false prophet are personifications of civil and religious powers opposing Christ, a literal interpretation of conscious unending torment would be impossible. If one’s prophetic schema sees these as actual persons yet to come, we only note that the text says nothing about human beings ‘tormented day and night forever and ever.’ … In view of the overwhelming mass of material otherwise found throughout Scripture, however, one ought to remember the general hermeneutical rule that calls for interpreting the uncommon in light of the common and the obscure in light of the more clearly revealed.” (Pg. 40)
Clark Pinnock famously comments, “I consider the concept of hell as endless torment in body and mind an outrageous doctrine, a theological and moral enormity, a bad doctrine of the tradition that needs to be changed. How can Christians possibly project a deity of such cruelty and vindictiveness whose ways include inflicting everlasting torture upon his creatures, however sinful they may have been? Surely a God who would do such a thing is more nearly like Satan than like God, at least by any ordinary moral standards, and by the gospel itself… torturing people without end is not what our God does. Does the one who told us to love our enemies intend to wreak vengeance on his own enemies for all eternity?” (Pg. 60)
He continues, “What I would ask my readers to do is to entertain the possibility that the Christian tradition has gone wrong in regard to hell as everlasting, conscious torment. It should not be too much to ask since many of them already hold that Augustine got certain other things wrong on the doctrine of the millennium, on the practice of infant baptism, and on God’s sovereign/arbitrary reprobation of the wicked.” (Pg. 63) He adds, “I am convinced that the Hellenistic belief in the immortality of the soul has done more than anything else … to give credibility to the doctrine of the everlasting conscious punishment of the wicked. This belief, not Holy Scripture, is what gives this doctrine the credibility it does not deserve.” (Pg. 66)
But he also acknowledges, “I admit that the interpretation of everlasting, conscious torment can be read out of [Mt. 25:46] if one wishes to do so. Such a meaning is not at all impossible from the wording, especially if one smuggles the term ‘conscious’ into it… Jesus does not define the nature of eternal life or eternal death in this text. He just says there will be two destinies and leaves it there… But did not the rich man suffer torment in flames in a famous parable of Jesus? [Lk 6:19-31]… Yes… But one should keep … in mind here: first, the mention of Abraham’s bosom (v. 22) should alert us to the fact that we are dealing with imagery, not literal description; and second… the story refers to the intermediate state between death and the resurrection and is not really relevant to our subject… it is likely that what is being described [in Rev 14:11] is the moment of their judgment, not their everlasting condition, with the smoke going up forever being the testimony to their final destruction. In … [20:10] it is the devil, the beast, and the false prophet… and they cannot be equated with ordinary human beings… Yet I would not say that either side wins the argument hands down largely because the Bible does not seem concerned to deal with this question as precisely as we want it to.” (Pg. 70-71)
John Wenham notes, “There are three passages that speak of unquenchable fire, two in the teaching of John the Baptist… and one from our Lord… (Mk 9:43). The chaff of course is burnt up by the irresistible fire---there is nothing to suggest that the fire goes on burning after it has destroyed the rubbish… There is nothing in any of these ten texts that even suggests (let alone requires) an interpretation contrary to the natural interpretation of the great mass of texts telling of death, destruction, perishing, and consumption by fire. Nor has the imagery of outer darkness and grinding of teeth any bearing on the question of endlessness.” (Pg. 84-85)
But he admits, “[Revelation 14:11] is the most difficult passage that the conditionalist has to deal with. I freely confess that I have come to no firm conclusions about the proper interpretation of the book of revelation… I am nonetheless chary about basing fundamental doctrine upon its symbolism… these fourteen passages whose natural meaning we are attempting to evade reduces to perhaps one, and that is far from insuperable, representing less than a half of one percent of the New Testament passages on the doom of the lost. So both Old and New Testaments taken in their natural sense seem to be almost entirely… on the conditionalist side.” (Pg. 86-87)
Basil Atkinson points out, “Though Scripture teaches… the extinction of the unrepentant sinners in eternal destruction, it does not lead us to think of an instantaneous snuffing out of their lives without exaction of full and complete retribution for wrong done to others by hateful and wicked lives … included in future punishment is a period of suffering that varies in degree and precedes the fulfillment of the punishment in everlasting destruction. The length of this period of suffering, light or heavy as it may be, is not stated or mentioned in Scripture.” (Pg. 102-103)
Ralph Bowles suggests about Revelation 14:11, “‘No rest day or night’ is another way of saying that God’s wrath is poured out in full strength when the judgment is operating; it is quenchless, unremitting and overwhelming. In modern warfare terms, it is the equivalent of intense, day and night, bombing; there is no break until it obliterates the enemy. The meaning of Rev 14:11 is in harmony with the passage in Isaiah 34 that lies behind it.” (Pg. 146) He adds, “It should concern all Bible students to note how few proof-texts can be cited in support of eternal torment, how much weight is placed on two texts from the Revelation to John (14:11; 20:10); and how other core texts come mainly from parables of Jesus. We are usually wary of interpreters who base their doctrines on … the Revelation, or from the parables of Jesus, without the control of didactic passages.” (Pg. 151)
Harold Guillebaud says of Mark 9:43-48, “we must observe that our Lord is drawing his imagery from Isa 66:24… The words ‘they shall be an abhorring to all flesh’ point to the effect of the judgment. The spectacle of corpses (which of course cannot suffer) in a perpetual process of corruption and burning would create horror and loathing in all who beheld… May not this be the key to the meaning of our Lord’s words in Mark 9?... The comparison with the text of Isaiah seems to show that our Lord is warning those who cling to evil that their fate will be not only to perish by fire, but to become thereafter an eternal memorial of God’s judgment… Our Lord’s words no more suggest the perpetual existence of human beings in conscious torment than the corpses in Isaiah’s picture suggest such a thing.” (Pg. 167-168)
Philip Hughes suggests, “cities are said to ‘serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire’ [Jude 7]. Even though this was not the final judgment, the obliterating fire is described as ‘eternal’ fire. The reason for this, no doubt, is that it was DIVINE fire, the fire of judgment sent by the Lord… Is this what is meant by ‘everlasting punishment’ (Matt 25:46) and by the assertion regarding those who suffer it that ‘the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever (Rev 14:11)?” (Pg. 191)
Henry Constable notes, “Nothing is really gained by rejecting the literal view or changing the BODILLY pains … into suffering and anguish of the mind… if they are not to be understood literally they must yet be understood as giving us the truest and best ideas possible of the real anguish and misery of hell… The real question is, not whether they are literal or figurative, but whether the pains they point to are pains to be endured forever, or which sooner or later produce a destruction of the sentient being, from which there is no recovery.” (Pg. 203) He adds, “Is a life of endless agony, ever increasing, what Jesus meant by a ‘few stripes’? [Lk 11:48] God forbid that we should dare to tamper with his words.” (Pg. 206)
Christopher Marshall states, “Is it even possible for a finite creature to cause infinite harm to God or to God’s creation? One common reply is to argue that … sin against God is infinitely serious and merits infinite punishment… Arguably it is morally more repugnant to harm a weaker party than a stronger one. That the situation is different with an ontologically superior being---namely, God---must simply be asserted as self-evident; it cannot be logically proven.” (Pg. 215)
This is a genuinely EXCELLENT collection of conditionalist writings, and indeed gathers into one place a number of writings that otherwise were scattered in obscure theological journals, chapters of books, etc. It will be absolutely “MUST READING” for anyone seriously studying Annihilation/Conditional Immortality and the doctrine of Hell---whether one favors, or rejects, Conditionalism.
Coeditor Chris Date explained in his Introduction to this 2014 book, “few such [conditionalist] scholars in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries have written book-length defenses of conditionalism… It is therefore not always easy to direct curious traditionalists … to these authors’ published support for conditionalism… [This book] is meant to serve as a resource to help solve that problem by compiling some of what these various conditionalist scholars have written into one convenient publication…” (Pg. xxvii) Writings are included by such authors as Edward Fudge, Stephen Travis, John Stott, Clark Pinnock, John Wenham, Basil Atkinson, Harold Guillebaud, Philip E. Hughes LeRoy Froom, Ben Witherington III, etc.
Glenn Peoples observes, “it becomes all the more egregious that so many proponents of the traditional view of hell take their view to represent anything like a ‘literal’ interpretation of what Scripture says on the subject. Of the scant few passages that might appear to give credence to a traditional view, the contexts in which they appear are not the places one would normally expect to find important, direct teaching on the nature of the world to come—and certainly not ‘literal’ teaching, as that term is typically used… in the name of a more compelling case we are offered a paltry list of vague references, parables of questionable interpretation, and figurative imagery… Indeed the only passages of Scripture that have even the APPEARANCE of prolonged suffering after death for the lost are firstly the tale of Lazarus and the Rich Man… and secondly some highly symbolic episodes in John’s visionary experience in the book of Revelation.” (Pg. 23)
Edward Fudge says of Revelation 20:7-10, “if the beast and false prophet are personifications of civil and religious powers opposing Christ, a literal interpretation of conscious unending torment would be impossible. If one’s prophetic schema sees these as actual persons yet to come, we only note that the text says nothing about human beings ‘tormented day and night forever and ever.’ … In view of the overwhelming mass of material otherwise found throughout Scripture, however, one ought to remember the general hermeneutical rule that calls for interpreting the uncommon in light of the common and the obscure in light of the more clearly revealed.” (Pg. 40)
Clark Pinnock famously comments, “I consider the concept of hell as endless torment in body and mind an outrageous doctrine, a theological and moral enormity, a bad doctrine of the tradition that needs to be changed. How can Christians possibly project a deity of such cruelty and vindictiveness whose ways include inflicting everlasting torture upon his creatures, however sinful they may have been? Surely a God who would do such a thing is more nearly like Satan than like God, at least by any ordinary moral standards, and by the gospel itself… torturing people without end is not what our God does. Does the one who told us to love our enemies intend to wreak vengeance on his own enemies for all eternity?” (Pg. 60)
He continues, “What I would ask my readers to do is to entertain the possibility that the Christian tradition has gone wrong in regard to hell as everlasting, conscious torment. It should not be too much to ask since many of them already hold that Augustine got certain other things wrong on the doctrine of the millennium, on the practice of infant baptism, and on God’s sovereign/arbitrary reprobation of the wicked.” (Pg. 63) He adds, “I am convinced that the Hellenistic belief in the immortality of the soul has done more than anything else … to give credibility to the doctrine of the everlasting conscious punishment of the wicked. This belief, not Holy Scripture, is what gives this doctrine the credibility it does not deserve.” (Pg. 66)
But he also acknowledges, “I admit that the interpretation of everlasting, conscious torment can be read out of [Mt. 25:46] if one wishes to do so. Such a meaning is not at all impossible from the wording, especially if one smuggles the term ‘conscious’ into it… Jesus does not define the nature of eternal life or eternal death in this text. He just says there will be two destinies and leaves it there… But did not the rich man suffer torment in flames in a famous parable of Jesus? [Lk 6:19-31]… Yes… But one should keep … in mind here: first, the mention of Abraham’s bosom (v. 22) should alert us to the fact that we are dealing with imagery, not literal description; and second… the story refers to the intermediate state between death and the resurrection and is not really relevant to our subject… it is likely that what is being described [in Rev 14:11] is the moment of their judgment, not their everlasting condition, with the smoke going up forever being the testimony to their final destruction. In … [20:10] it is the devil, the beast, and the false prophet… and they cannot be equated with ordinary human beings… Yet I would not say that either side wins the argument hands down largely because the Bible does not seem concerned to deal with this question as precisely as we want it to.” (Pg. 70-71)
John Wenham notes, “There are three passages that speak of unquenchable fire, two in the teaching of John the Baptist… and one from our Lord… (Mk 9:43). The chaff of course is burnt up by the irresistible fire---there is nothing to suggest that the fire goes on burning after it has destroyed the rubbish… There is nothing in any of these ten texts that even suggests (let alone requires) an interpretation contrary to the natural interpretation of the great mass of texts telling of death, destruction, perishing, and consumption by fire. Nor has the imagery of outer darkness and grinding of teeth any bearing on the question of endlessness.” (Pg. 84-85)
But he admits, “[Revelation 14:11] is the most difficult passage that the conditionalist has to deal with. I freely confess that I have come to no firm conclusions about the proper interpretation of the book of revelation… I am nonetheless chary about basing fundamental doctrine upon its symbolism… these fourteen passages whose natural meaning we are attempting to evade reduces to perhaps one, and that is far from insuperable, representing less than a half of one percent of the New Testament passages on the doom of the lost. So both Old and New Testaments taken in their natural sense seem to be almost entirely… on the conditionalist side.” (Pg. 86-87)
Basil Atkinson points out, “Though Scripture teaches… the extinction of the unrepentant sinners in eternal destruction, it does not lead us to think of an instantaneous snuffing out of their lives without exaction of full and complete retribution for wrong done to others by hateful and wicked lives … included in future punishment is a period of suffering that varies in degree and precedes the fulfillment of the punishment in everlasting destruction. The length of this period of suffering, light or heavy as it may be, is not stated or mentioned in Scripture.” (Pg. 102-103)
Ralph Bowles suggests about Revelation 14:11, “‘No rest day or night’ is another way of saying that God’s wrath is poured out in full strength when the judgment is operating; it is quenchless, unremitting and overwhelming. In modern warfare terms, it is the equivalent of intense, day and night, bombing; there is no break until it obliterates the enemy. The meaning of Rev 14:11 is in harmony with the passage in Isaiah 34 that lies behind it.” (Pg. 146) He adds, “It should concern all Bible students to note how few proof-texts can be cited in support of eternal torment, how much weight is placed on two texts from the Revelation to John (14:11; 20:10); and how other core texts come mainly from parables of Jesus. We are usually wary of interpreters who base their doctrines on … the Revelation, or from the parables of Jesus, without the control of didactic passages.” (Pg. 151)
Harold Guillebaud says of Mark 9:43-48, “we must observe that our Lord is drawing his imagery from Isa 66:24… The words ‘they shall be an abhorring to all flesh’ point to the effect of the judgment. The spectacle of corpses (which of course cannot suffer) in a perpetual process of corruption and burning would create horror and loathing in all who beheld… May not this be the key to the meaning of our Lord’s words in Mark 9?... The comparison with the text of Isaiah seems to show that our Lord is warning those who cling to evil that their fate will be not only to perish by fire, but to become thereafter an eternal memorial of God’s judgment… Our Lord’s words no more suggest the perpetual existence of human beings in conscious torment than the corpses in Isaiah’s picture suggest such a thing.” (Pg. 167-168)
Philip Hughes suggests, “cities are said to ‘serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire’ [Jude 7]. Even though this was not the final judgment, the obliterating fire is described as ‘eternal’ fire. The reason for this, no doubt, is that it was DIVINE fire, the fire of judgment sent by the Lord… Is this what is meant by ‘everlasting punishment’ (Matt 25:46) and by the assertion regarding those who suffer it that ‘the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever (Rev 14:11)?” (Pg. 191)
Henry Constable notes, “Nothing is really gained by rejecting the literal view or changing the BODILLY pains … into suffering and anguish of the mind… if they are not to be understood literally they must yet be understood as giving us the truest and best ideas possible of the real anguish and misery of hell… The real question is, not whether they are literal or figurative, but whether the pains they point to are pains to be endured forever, or which sooner or later produce a destruction of the sentient being, from which there is no recovery.” (Pg. 203) He adds, “Is a life of endless agony, ever increasing, what Jesus meant by a ‘few stripes’? [Lk 11:48] God forbid that we should dare to tamper with his words.” (Pg. 206)
Christopher Marshall states, “Is it even possible for a finite creature to cause infinite harm to God or to God’s creation? One common reply is to argue that … sin against God is infinitely serious and merits infinite punishment… Arguably it is morally more repugnant to harm a weaker party than a stronger one. That the situation is different with an ontologically superior being---namely, God---must simply be asserted as self-evident; it cannot be logically proven.” (Pg. 215)
This is a genuinely EXCELLENT collection of conditionalist writings, and indeed gathers into one place a number of writings that otherwise were scattered in obscure theological journals, chapters of books, etc. It will be absolutely “MUST READING” for anyone seriously studying Annihilation/Conditional Immortality and the doctrine of Hell---whether one favors, or rejects, Conditionalism.
October 11, 2014
Edward Fudge’s book “The Fire That Consumes” is the single strongest case for condition immortality (or annihilationism). This book, however, has moved into second place in regards to the literature on the nature and duration of final punishment. I will get the negatives out of the way first.
NEGATIVES:
There is some overlap, as is to be expected when you are dealing with biblical texts. Some may find this difficult to wade through, but perhaps a better way to see it as through and exhaustive. Almost every text is examined and every argument at least considered. This repetition illustrates the consistency of annihilationist exegesis.
This doesn’t reflect the book, but I would’ve enjoyed more interaction with universalism. But, safe to say, the book does just fine.
POSITIVES:
The positives, I more or less mentioned in the beginning.
It is exhaustive.
It takes into account the Old Testament imagery and literature in a way that unites the testaments instead of dividing them.
It presents a robust evangelical engagement with Scripture and esteems the authority of God’s word.
It is charitable (but certainly passionate c.f. Pinnock) in its disagreements with traditionalism.
And I’m mentioned in the acknowledgements. So that’s pretty cool too.
Rethinking Hell. Start with Fudge and this.
NEGATIVES:
There is some overlap, as is to be expected when you are dealing with biblical texts. Some may find this difficult to wade through, but perhaps a better way to see it as through and exhaustive. Almost every text is examined and every argument at least considered. This repetition illustrates the consistency of annihilationist exegesis.
This doesn’t reflect the book, but I would’ve enjoyed more interaction with universalism. But, safe to say, the book does just fine.
POSITIVES:
The positives, I more or less mentioned in the beginning.
It is exhaustive.
It takes into account the Old Testament imagery and literature in a way that unites the testaments instead of dividing them.
It presents a robust evangelical engagement with Scripture and esteems the authority of God’s word.
It is charitable (but certainly passionate c.f. Pinnock) in its disagreements with traditionalism.
And I’m mentioned in the acknowledgements. So that’s pretty cool too.
Rethinking Hell. Start with Fudge and this.
January 13, 2019
The topic of hell and the nature of the eternal fate of both believers and unbelievers is a controversial one, although it need not be so. As a matter of theology it is not primary to the Christian faith, such as matters of God's ontological triune nature, the question of the divine inspiration of Scripture and matters of human sin nature, however it is an important secondary issue and one that is important to be informed about.
There has in the last century and increasingly even now been a reconsidering of the traditional view of hell, that is one of eternal conscious torment, in favor of a view that suggests that the unsaved will be utterly destroyed as part of their punishment and cease to exist. This book is a collection of essays from influential authors from a diverse Christian background who want to rethink how Christians think about hell and the nature of the fate of the unsaved.
The idea that people will be tormented forever in hell has, in my estimation, become an axiom for many Christians. It is unquestioningly taken for granted as a Biblical Truth and modern media rarely helps. This book takes the traditional view to task by demonstrating that many of the texts that are supposedly thought of being in favor of the traditional view are in fact in favor of a view of the destruction of non believers. This alternate view is often known as annihilationism or conditionalism and it is the belief that the fate of the unsaved is one of utter destruction, furthermore that the language used by the Bible is actually largely in favor of this alternative view. Now I am not going to present the arguments for this position as stated in this book as I would recommend that anyone remotely interested in the topic should read it, my review here is simply to say what the book is and why I think it is worth reading.
The authors of the book have done the hard work for the reader of collecting all of the essays, some of which are quite difficult to get. These essays primarily focus on the New Testament (as this is where most of the relevant discussion is), but it also discusses the relevant Old Testament texts, the apocrypha and the Early Church Fathers. It presents its arguments on the basis of exegesis, the original language as well as theological and philosophical basis.
The result of this book, in my mind is to provide a compelling argument in favor of the conditional immortality view and at the very least to show it is a legitimate alternative to the traditional view of eternal conscious torment. Because of this I do think that there is no justification for severe backlash that there has been from some who hold the traditional view, even going so far as to say that one who holds this alternative view is not a Christian/saved.
However, there are a few negatives to this book that are worth mentioning.
It is quite repetitive, often because the essays retread some of the same arguments.
Not all of the arguments presented are as compelling as some of the others and some of the essays are not as strong, though many are of exceptional quality.
Finally, though the book is not particularly technical, I would not be surprised if, at times the book is a little overwhelming to the standard lay person.
Nonetheless it is a very important book and I would consider it to be the go to starting point to enter into this important debate.
I would rate it 4.5 stars if I could, but I can't and I choose to round up rather than down, though it was a close call.
There has in the last century and increasingly even now been a reconsidering of the traditional view of hell, that is one of eternal conscious torment, in favor of a view that suggests that the unsaved will be utterly destroyed as part of their punishment and cease to exist. This book is a collection of essays from influential authors from a diverse Christian background who want to rethink how Christians think about hell and the nature of the fate of the unsaved.
The idea that people will be tormented forever in hell has, in my estimation, become an axiom for many Christians. It is unquestioningly taken for granted as a Biblical Truth and modern media rarely helps. This book takes the traditional view to task by demonstrating that many of the texts that are supposedly thought of being in favor of the traditional view are in fact in favor of a view of the destruction of non believers. This alternate view is often known as annihilationism or conditionalism and it is the belief that the fate of the unsaved is one of utter destruction, furthermore that the language used by the Bible is actually largely in favor of this alternative view. Now I am not going to present the arguments for this position as stated in this book as I would recommend that anyone remotely interested in the topic should read it, my review here is simply to say what the book is and why I think it is worth reading.
The authors of the book have done the hard work for the reader of collecting all of the essays, some of which are quite difficult to get. These essays primarily focus on the New Testament (as this is where most of the relevant discussion is), but it also discusses the relevant Old Testament texts, the apocrypha and the Early Church Fathers. It presents its arguments on the basis of exegesis, the original language as well as theological and philosophical basis.
The result of this book, in my mind is to provide a compelling argument in favor of the conditional immortality view and at the very least to show it is a legitimate alternative to the traditional view of eternal conscious torment. Because of this I do think that there is no justification for severe backlash that there has been from some who hold the traditional view, even going so far as to say that one who holds this alternative view is not a Christian/saved.
However, there are a few negatives to this book that are worth mentioning.
It is quite repetitive, often because the essays retread some of the same arguments.
Not all of the arguments presented are as compelling as some of the others and some of the essays are not as strong, though many are of exceptional quality.
Finally, though the book is not particularly technical, I would not be surprised if, at times the book is a little overwhelming to the standard lay person.
Nonetheless it is a very important book and I would consider it to be the go to starting point to enter into this important debate.
I would rate it 4.5 stars if I could, but I can't and I choose to round up rather than down, though it was a close call.
July 10, 2014
Should Christians "re-think" the doctrine of hell? The editors of this new volume certainly think so. (At the outset, I should disclose I personally know two the editors: Greg Stump was my pastor at the church I attended in California, and Josh Anderson was a friend and fellow student at Talbot School of Theology). Theirs is a compendium of articles written over the last hundred years or so that claim three things: (1) the human soul is not naturally immortal, (2) the duration of punishment suffered by the wicked is finite, and (3) the effect of the final punishment on the wicked is the cessation of their existence. The authors of these articles, hailing from vastly different neighborhoods of evangelicalism and the broader Christian world, argue for each of these claims via biblical exegesis, historical survey, theological consideration, and philosophic argument. That these three claims (that go by the names "annihilationism," "conditionalism," or "conditional immortality") could garner support from such a diverse cross-section of believers merits serious attention (I will refer to this view as "conditionalism" hereafter).*
The case for conditionalism can begin in different places. One might be motivated by the biblical language of "destruction" and read the metaphors of "unquenchable fire" and "undying worms" as referring to powers that bring about the end of one's existence. Or one might begin with considerations about the human soul and the asymmetry of its properties in the afterlife: the righteous are given the gift of immortality while the wicked are brought to the end of their mortality which counts as the everlasting effect of divine punishment. Another starting place could be the sense of disproportionality the doctrine of eternal conscious torment requires: no finite sin could merit infinite punishment. Still another could be a moral or aesthetic judgment about salvation history: a really good or beautiful world, the kind that God would create and re-make, would not include a place where there is everlasting misery.
No matter where one begins, one can marshall biblical evidence to support one's case. Texts that speak of destruction and death seem to indicate an end of existence rather than eternal endurance (Matthew 7:13-14; 10:28; Luke 13:3; 17:29-30; John 3:16; Romans 6:23; 2 Thessalonians 1:8-9; Heb 10:39 2 Peter 2:6), and those that are marshalled in support of eternal conscious torment can be better read as an unendurable punishment that causes the eternal effect of non-existence. Texts that support the idea that immortality is contingent upon God's grace, and not an essential property of the human soul are found in Genesis 3:22-23, Revelation 2:7, 2 Timothy 1:10, and 1 Corinthians 15:50-53. And most interestingly, the New Testament speaks of a proportionality condition with respect to punishment in Luke 12:47-48.
If conditionalism is right, then why has the view of eternal conscious torment been so dominant throughout church history? Answer: early on the the Church Fathers were influenced by Platonic philosophy, which taught the soul was naturally immortal. This influence reached its apogee with Augustine who argued that eternal conscious torment was the only interpretive option available since the soul could not be annihilated. Not even an omnipotent God could undo his own handiwork: once made, the human soul cannot be unmade; thus,the full power of God's wrath could only be expressed in unending torment.
There are objections to conditionalism, of course, most which focus on matters of biblical interpretation, and I will not rehearse them here. Since I am trained as a philosopher, I will focus on some of the philosophical motivations for the view. With respect to proportionality, the objection that finite sins do not merit infinite punishment is ambiguous. In what sense are sins finite? Is it in terms of the amount of time it takes to commit them? If so, why couldn't this undermine conditionalism as much as it does traditionalism? After all, the consequences of sins are eternal in both. Interestingly, this does not go unobserved by a contributor in this volume who argues that a good God could never perform divine capital punishment on sinners, and opts for a view where one goes out of existence as a result of one's own spurning divine grace. According to this author, God is not in the business of meeting out punishment in the afterlife, which seems implausible given the biblical evidence cited above.
Perhaps the finite/infinite distinction is to be understood in terms of harm: no sin could do infinite harm; therefore, it is not worthy of infinite punishment. But this is far from obvious. Suppose Smith would have repented at time t2, had Jones not murdered him at t1. Since Smith is forever shut out from the presence of God, Jones's sin causes Smith an infinite loss. Assuming Jones does not repent, why shouldn't Jones be suffer this same infinite loss too? Thus, the proportionality objection proves too little and the goodness-of-God objection proves too much. Conditionalism should probably just stick to the biblical arguments and not wander into these rhetorically empty maneuvers.
One of the more interesting suggestions that deserves more attention is how the death of Jesus relates to the kind of punishment the wicked might face. Glenn Peoples writes, "In identifying with sinners and standing in their place, Jesus bore what they would have borne. Abandonment by God, yes. Suffering, yes. But crucially, death." As a theological consideration, I have often wondered if this where we should look to understand the sort of fate we might face if we refuse Christ as our substitute. Of course, this would assume a version of penal-substitutionary atonement that is not definite, an assumption that many are not eager to embrace.
While the book becomes repetitive after about 200 pages, one cannot help but feel challenged by the depth and breadth of biblical exegesis marshalled in support of a view of hell that is growing in influence. Recommended.
_________________________
*Here is a short list of the adherents:
John Stott (the British version of Billy Graham - conservative Anglican)
John Wenham (a widely cited defender of biblical inerrancy - conservative Anglican)
John Stackhouse (the successor of J.I. Packer at Regent University)
Clark Pinnock (the bad boy of the evangelical theology - open theist)
Basil Atkinson (helped start Inter-Varsity Fellowship - evangelical at Cambridge)
Earl Ellis (Baptist theologian at Southwestern - conservative evangelical)
Anthony Thiselton (conservative hermeneutics expert at Nottingham)
Philip E. Hughes (Calvinist theologian who taught at Westminster - Anglican)
Richard Swinburne (Oxford philosopher of religion - in a league of his own).
Irenaeus (Church Father, disciple of Polycarp)
The case for conditionalism can begin in different places. One might be motivated by the biblical language of "destruction" and read the metaphors of "unquenchable fire" and "undying worms" as referring to powers that bring about the end of one's existence. Or one might begin with considerations about the human soul and the asymmetry of its properties in the afterlife: the righteous are given the gift of immortality while the wicked are brought to the end of their mortality which counts as the everlasting effect of divine punishment. Another starting place could be the sense of disproportionality the doctrine of eternal conscious torment requires: no finite sin could merit infinite punishment. Still another could be a moral or aesthetic judgment about salvation history: a really good or beautiful world, the kind that God would create and re-make, would not include a place where there is everlasting misery.
No matter where one begins, one can marshall biblical evidence to support one's case. Texts that speak of destruction and death seem to indicate an end of existence rather than eternal endurance (Matthew 7:13-14; 10:28; Luke 13:3; 17:29-30; John 3:16; Romans 6:23; 2 Thessalonians 1:8-9; Heb 10:39 2 Peter 2:6), and those that are marshalled in support of eternal conscious torment can be better read as an unendurable punishment that causes the eternal effect of non-existence. Texts that support the idea that immortality is contingent upon God's grace, and not an essential property of the human soul are found in Genesis 3:22-23, Revelation 2:7, 2 Timothy 1:10, and 1 Corinthians 15:50-53. And most interestingly, the New Testament speaks of a proportionality condition with respect to punishment in Luke 12:47-48.
If conditionalism is right, then why has the view of eternal conscious torment been so dominant throughout church history? Answer: early on the the Church Fathers were influenced by Platonic philosophy, which taught the soul was naturally immortal. This influence reached its apogee with Augustine who argued that eternal conscious torment was the only interpretive option available since the soul could not be annihilated. Not even an omnipotent God could undo his own handiwork: once made, the human soul cannot be unmade; thus,the full power of God's wrath could only be expressed in unending torment.
There are objections to conditionalism, of course, most which focus on matters of biblical interpretation, and I will not rehearse them here. Since I am trained as a philosopher, I will focus on some of the philosophical motivations for the view. With respect to proportionality, the objection that finite sins do not merit infinite punishment is ambiguous. In what sense are sins finite? Is it in terms of the amount of time it takes to commit them? If so, why couldn't this undermine conditionalism as much as it does traditionalism? After all, the consequences of sins are eternal in both. Interestingly, this does not go unobserved by a contributor in this volume who argues that a good God could never perform divine capital punishment on sinners, and opts for a view where one goes out of existence as a result of one's own spurning divine grace. According to this author, God is not in the business of meeting out punishment in the afterlife, which seems implausible given the biblical evidence cited above.
Perhaps the finite/infinite distinction is to be understood in terms of harm: no sin could do infinite harm; therefore, it is not worthy of infinite punishment. But this is far from obvious. Suppose Smith would have repented at time t2, had Jones not murdered him at t1. Since Smith is forever shut out from the presence of God, Jones's sin causes Smith an infinite loss. Assuming Jones does not repent, why shouldn't Jones be suffer this same infinite loss too? Thus, the proportionality objection proves too little and the goodness-of-God objection proves too much. Conditionalism should probably just stick to the biblical arguments and not wander into these rhetorically empty maneuvers.
One of the more interesting suggestions that deserves more attention is how the death of Jesus relates to the kind of punishment the wicked might face. Glenn Peoples writes, "In identifying with sinners and standing in their place, Jesus bore what they would have borne. Abandonment by God, yes. Suffering, yes. But crucially, death." As a theological consideration, I have often wondered if this where we should look to understand the sort of fate we might face if we refuse Christ as our substitute. Of course, this would assume a version of penal-substitutionary atonement that is not definite, an assumption that many are not eager to embrace.
While the book becomes repetitive after about 200 pages, one cannot help but feel challenged by the depth and breadth of biblical exegesis marshalled in support of a view of hell that is growing in influence. Recommended.
_________________________
*Here is a short list of the adherents:
John Stott (the British version of Billy Graham - conservative Anglican)
John Wenham (a widely cited defender of biblical inerrancy - conservative Anglican)
John Stackhouse (the successor of J.I. Packer at Regent University)
Clark Pinnock (the bad boy of the evangelical theology - open theist)
Basil Atkinson (helped start Inter-Varsity Fellowship - evangelical at Cambridge)
Earl Ellis (Baptist theologian at Southwestern - conservative evangelical)
Anthony Thiselton (conservative hermeneutics expert at Nottingham)
Philip E. Hughes (Calvinist theologian who taught at Westminster - Anglican)
Richard Swinburne (Oxford philosopher of religion - in a league of his own).
Irenaeus (Church Father, disciple of Polycarp)
November 24, 2017
Thanking The Jesus of The Bible, not the Jesus of "Rethinking Hell" who will not have all men saved. Amazing how many people worship the beast of a Jesus who differs from The Jesus of The Bible. Thanking The Jesus of The Bible for the food You so graciously provide all of creation (Psalm 145:15). For your desire to have all men saved (1 Timothy 2:4). For your promise that a time is coming when all who are in their graves shall hear (John 5:28), and for your Word that promises faith comes by hearing (Romans 10:17). For eternal life that is without end (Isaiah 9:7 KJV), and for eternal condemnation that ends when faith comes to believe, and to cross over from condemnation to life (John 5:24) by Way of The Eternal Gospel of Christ (Revelation 14:6). For The Savior of All, especially of those who believe (1 Timothy 4:10). For an end to sin (Daniel 9:24). For a helper to help put off the old self that is being corrupted by deceitful desires, to be made new (Ephesians 4:22). For a time when all of creation shall be free from corruption (Romans 8:21), made new (Revelation 21:5). For The Truth that sets us free from sinning unto death and never having forgiveness (Mark 3:29), even freeing lost souls from captivity below the earth (Phiippians 2:10), to bow to Jesus, to be lifted up (Psalm 145:14-15), and made new. For your perfection and for your ability to make all things perfect (Philippians 3:21 & Ecclesiastes 3:11).
March 8, 2021
A collection of writings about conditionalism– or the idea that immortality is conditional based on God’s grace and so only believers are immortal and all other people will be ultimately destroyed.
I picked this up recently because a member of my church was reading a book about conditionalism and I wanted to be versed in the view point. It presents the case well from many different authors. The arguments are clear and concise and it definitely worth the time to engage in this debate.
I picked this up recently because a member of my church was reading a book about conditionalism and I wanted to be versed in the view point. It presents the case well from many different authors. The arguments are clear and concise and it definitely worth the time to engage in this debate.
February 15, 2019
Excellent. Broad. A great pointer to the fantastically strong argument for conditional immortality both biblically and philosophically.
November 12, 2024
Amazing collection of writings. I can’t recommend enough.
May 29, 2016
The nature and duration of Hell have been a point of theological controversy for centuries. The majority of Christians today understand Hell as a place where, upon death, the unsaved are eternally damned to be tormented and punished day and night. This is a tough pill to swallow. More recently, with the work of Edward Fudge (though Fudge was certainly not the first to rethink these issues) and others, many Christians today have begun reconsidering the doctrine of Hell. The above-mentioned pill gets easier to swallow as opinions grow further and further from Christian orthodoxy. Still, for many, a balance of biblical and theological faithfulness has come to rest on a positioned known as Conditional Immortality (or Annihilationism).
Rethinking Hell: Readings in Evangelical Conditionalism edited by Christopher M. Date, Gregory G. Stump, and Joshua W. Anderson brings together a fascinating collection of excerpts from well-respected evangelical thinkers concerning the nature of Hell and Conditional Immortality. The contributors of this volume include Edward W. Fudge, John R. W. Stott, Clark Pinnock, John W. Wenham, E. Earle Ellis, Anthony C. Thiselton, Roger E. Olson, Ben Witherington III, and much more. While it should be said that there is nothing presented in this volume that is inherently new, either by way of argument or article, the convenience of having such an exemplar roster of contributors under a single roof and the scope of material presented makes this volume indispensable to the ongoing conversation.
The book is comprised of six major sections: (1) Rethinking Hell, (2) Influential Defenses of Conditionalism, (3) Biblical Support for Conditionalism, (4) Philosophical Support for Conditionalism, (5) Historical Considerations, and (6) Conditionalism and Evangelicalism. These six sections provide a good sense of the overall scope of the book. Moreover, there are a number of standout articles in this volume that are worth mentioning, including, “New Testament Teaching on Hell” by E. Earle Ellis, “Claims about ‘Hell’ and Wrath” by Anthony C. Thiselton, and “Conditionalism in the Early Church” by LeRoy E. Froom. I could easily list more articles but these are definitely among the top three. The only hesitancy that I have with this volume, apart from not being fully persuaded by the Conditionalist claims, is the overstated identification with Evangelicalism. Many of these authors should not be considered as evangelicals. But, then again, what is the definition of evangelicalism today anyways?
Rethinking Hell: Readings in Evangelical Conditionalism edited by Christopher M. Date, Gregory G. Stump, and Joshua W. Anderson is an excellent introduction to Conditionalism. The editors have brought together some of the most influential articles from some of the most well-respected contributors to the conversation. This is a volume that will challenge your understanding and make you think long and hard about your traditions. It presents an important conversation that needs to take place more often, and I believe that this book will help that need become a reality. It comes highly recommended!
I received a review copy of this book in exchange for an honest review. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.
Rethinking Hell: Readings in Evangelical Conditionalism edited by Christopher M. Date, Gregory G. Stump, and Joshua W. Anderson brings together a fascinating collection of excerpts from well-respected evangelical thinkers concerning the nature of Hell and Conditional Immortality. The contributors of this volume include Edward W. Fudge, John R. W. Stott, Clark Pinnock, John W. Wenham, E. Earle Ellis, Anthony C. Thiselton, Roger E. Olson, Ben Witherington III, and much more. While it should be said that there is nothing presented in this volume that is inherently new, either by way of argument or article, the convenience of having such an exemplar roster of contributors under a single roof and the scope of material presented makes this volume indispensable to the ongoing conversation.
The book is comprised of six major sections: (1) Rethinking Hell, (2) Influential Defenses of Conditionalism, (3) Biblical Support for Conditionalism, (4) Philosophical Support for Conditionalism, (5) Historical Considerations, and (6) Conditionalism and Evangelicalism. These six sections provide a good sense of the overall scope of the book. Moreover, there are a number of standout articles in this volume that are worth mentioning, including, “New Testament Teaching on Hell” by E. Earle Ellis, “Claims about ‘Hell’ and Wrath” by Anthony C. Thiselton, and “Conditionalism in the Early Church” by LeRoy E. Froom. I could easily list more articles but these are definitely among the top three. The only hesitancy that I have with this volume, apart from not being fully persuaded by the Conditionalist claims, is the overstated identification with Evangelicalism. Many of these authors should not be considered as evangelicals. But, then again, what is the definition of evangelicalism today anyways?
Rethinking Hell: Readings in Evangelical Conditionalism edited by Christopher M. Date, Gregory G. Stump, and Joshua W. Anderson is an excellent introduction to Conditionalism. The editors have brought together some of the most influential articles from some of the most well-respected contributors to the conversation. This is a volume that will challenge your understanding and make you think long and hard about your traditions. It presents an important conversation that needs to take place more often, and I believe that this book will help that need become a reality. It comes highly recommended!
I received a review copy of this book in exchange for an honest review. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.
January 10, 2016
In “Rethinking Hell,” the editors have done a great service in bringing together in one volume the best published defenses of conditional immortality (a.k.a. conditionalism and/or annihilationism) as opposed to eternal conscious torment. The resulting minor downside is that the material is somewhat repetitive.
Included are essays and book excerpts on theological, biblical, and philosophical support for conditionalism, historical considerations, and some current evangelical views on conditionalism by friendly but unconvinced theologians (Roger E. Olson and Ben Witherington III).
The issue pretty much comes down to the biblical meaning of “eternal” or “everlasting,” whether the intrinsic immortality of the soul is actually a biblical concept, and the nature of divine justice. All three topics are thoroughly covered in the essays.
I found this book to be a very good biblically based introduction to the topic of annihilationism. It is especially mind-opening for any readers (myself included) who have had little or no previous exposure to non-traditional views of hell.
Included are essays and book excerpts on theological, biblical, and philosophical support for conditionalism, historical considerations, and some current evangelical views on conditionalism by friendly but unconvinced theologians (Roger E. Olson and Ben Witherington III).
The issue pretty much comes down to the biblical meaning of “eternal” or “everlasting,” whether the intrinsic immortality of the soul is actually a biblical concept, and the nature of divine justice. All three topics are thoroughly covered in the essays.
I found this book to be a very good biblically based introduction to the topic of annihilationism. It is especially mind-opening for any readers (myself included) who have had little or no previous exposure to non-traditional views of hell.
January 8, 2015
A great book. Fascinating topic very well researched and supported. Gave it 4 stars because as a collection of essays it at times becomes repetitive. Needs far more discussion within the broader church.
June 11, 2014
Excellent collection of articles, essays and book excerpts on conditional immortality. I would recommend reading this before Fudge's work, because you can read or in bitesize chunks.
March 9, 2015
A fantastic set of essays defending conditional immortality and annihilationism. The only downside to this book is that it can start to get a little repetitive in the last third of the book.
July 4, 2019
Theologically this is where I land when it comes to the topic of Hell. I felt this book presented a very strong case for conditionalism/annihilation
February 20, 2016
A bit repetitive, but good.
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews