DRTIMWHITE.COM

“A recent Newsweek article says, ‘Today, hell is theology’s H-word, a subject too trite for serious scholarship’” (Erwin Lutzer. One Minute After You Die. Chicago: Moody Press, 1997, 97). As politically incorrect as this subject is here are evangelical arguments for annihilation and Scriptural refutations.

1. There are passages (Phil 3:19; 2 Peter 3:7; 1 Thess 5:3 and 2 Thess 1:9) that teach the total destruction of the sinner.

Stott says “It would seem strange if people who are said to suffer destruction are in fact not destroyed” (David L. Edwards and John Stott. Essentials: A Liberal-Evangelical Dialogue. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1988, 316). The original words translated “destruction” do not mean total annihilation. The word in Phil 3:19 and 2 Peter 3:7 is apoleia which is the word in used to describe the lost coin in Luke 15. The lost coin did not cease to exist but it did cease to be usable or valuable to the owner. The sinner in hell has a wasted existence when he could have glorified his creator and owner for eternity. He is lost or out of place but not annihilated.

“In 1 Thess 5:3 and 2 Thess 1:9 another word, olethros, is used of the destruction of the wicked, but again this word does not imply that something will cease to exist, for it is used in 1 Cor 5:5 of delivering a man to Satan (putting him out of the church) for the destruction of the flesh—but certainly his flesh did not cease to exist when he was put out of the church, even though he may have suffered in his body (this would be true whether we take ‘flesh’ to mean his physical body or his sinful nature)” (Grudem, 1150).

2. “Eternal punishment” (Mt. 25:46) does not refer to eternal conscious suffering but the eternal consequences of no restoration after annihilation.

In other words the annihilation is irreversible. This is the position of Edward Fudge in The Fire That Consumes and Basil F. Atkinson: “When the adjective (eternal) is used in Greek with nouns of action it has reference to the result of the action, not the process. Thus the phrase ‘everlasting punishment’ is comparable to ‘everlasting salvation.’ No one supposes that we are being saved forever. We were saved once and for all by Christ with eternal results” (Atkinson. Life and Immortality Taunton: Goodman, 1962, 101).

Salvation, however, is not limited to past deliverance. In addition to past deliverance (Eph. 2:8; Titus 3:5), salvation includes present (Heb. 7:25) and future deliverance (Romans 5:9-10; 8:23).
Most of the conservative annihilationists like Stott believe in a personal Devil. In the Mt. 25 passage, verse 41 says, “Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me you cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels.” If a personal Devil will suffer eternally and consciously then certainly will those who choose to follow him?

3. Sinners suffering eternally and consciously conflicts with the love of God.

This is Clark Pinnock’s view, as the following quote reveals.

Let me say at the outset that 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 which 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. Does the one who told us to love our enemies intend to wreak vengeance on his own enemies for all eternity? As H. Kung appropriately asks, ‘What would we think of a human being who satisfied his thirst for revenge so implacably and insatiably?’ Everlasting torment is intolerable from a moral point of view because it makes God into a bloodthirsty monster who maintains an everlasting Auschwitz for victims whom he does not even allow to die” (Clark Pinnock, The Destruction of the Finally Impenitent,” CThRev 4 Spring 1990, 246-253).

Most conservative annihilationists believe in the justice of God which demands that sin and the sinner be punished. If the conscious suffering of the unrighteous violates God’s love then there has to be instant annihilation of the wicked in hell. If this is the case then there is no punishment nor justice. The Hitlers and Stalins get away with murder and experience the same end as the Ghandis. The Word of God teaches there are degrees of suffering and punishment according to the deeds performed (Luke 12:42-48; Rev. 20:11-12). If there is no conscious suffering in Hell then there is no justice in the universe.

4. Eternal punishment is not fair.

The punishment is not equal to the crime, says the annihiliationist. It is like capital punishment for jaywalking. Our response is, because God is just so will be His punishment. This is the point of Jesus’ parable in Luke 12:42-48. Those who deserve more stripes will receive them. “But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more” (12:48).

Another reason the eternal punishment of the sinner is fair is because of the impenitence of the wicked throughout the endless ages. This scenario is suggested in Revelation 22:10-11: “And he says unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand. He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.” “If the holy and those who do right continue to be holy and to do right, in anticipation of the perfect holiness and rightness to be lived and practiced throughout all eternity, should we not also conclude that the vile continue their vileness in anticipation of the vileness they live an practice throughout all eternity?” (D. A. Carson, The Gagging of God, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996, 533).

In Revelation 16:10-11, sinners writhing under God’s punishment, blaspheme the God who is judging them and refuse to repent. Why should we think sinners will act differently in eternity?

“In Proverbs we read of the insatiable desires of the netherworld and a man’s lust. ‘Sheol and Abaddon are never satisfied, nor are the eyes of man satisfied’ (27:20). An alcoholic will thirst for a drop of liquor in hell but will not get it; a drug addict will crave a shot of heroin; the immoral man will burn with sexual desire but will never be gratified. The body will be aflame with lusts, but the fire will never be quenched. It’s as if God is saying, ‘On earth you did not let Me satisfy you but turned to your own lusts; now you will find that those lust can only drive you to despair. Hell, then, is the raw soul joined to an indestructible body, exposed to its own sin for eternity” (Erwin Lutzer, Coming to Grips with Hell. Chicago: Moody Press, 1990, 36). The sinner’s sin is an “eternal sin” according to Mark 3:29 and Matthew 12:32 not to be pardoned nor forsaken in this age nor the age to come which is eternity.

“In his fantasy, The Great Divorce, C. S. Lewis describes a busload of people from hell who come to the outskirts of heaven. There they are urged to leave behind the sins that have trapped them in hell—but they refuse. Lewis’s descriptions of these people are striking because we recognize in them the self-delusion and self-absorption that are ‘writ small’ in our addiction” (Keller, 78). Sinners are in hell because they choose to be there. The Rich Man in Luke 16, while requesting Lazarus go to his brothers’ house, never asked to be released.

Skeptics and evangelicals are man centered in objecting to the eternality of conscious suffering where as the Bible is God centered. The enormity of our sin against an infinite, transcendent, and holy God merits eternal punishment. “What if, from God’s viewpoint, the greatness of sin is determined by the greatness of the One against whom it is committed? Then the guilt of sin is infinite because it is a violation of the character of an infinite Being. What if, in the nature of God, it is deemed that such infinite sins deserve an infinite penalty, a penalty which on one can ever repay?” (Lutzer, One Minute After You Die. 108).

In Part Three, I will discuss the fifth argument and the Scriptural refutation: The imagery of fire is total consummation not the infliction of pain.