Customer Reviews

Hell Under Fire: Modern Scholarship Reinvents Eternal Punishment

5 star:		(9)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Having already read the first book in what I hope is to be a continuing series, God Under Fire (Zondervan), and having read other works by most of the contributors to the present volume under review, I expected to gain from reading Hell Under Fire. I was not disappointed, and the essays contained in the book were all of a consistently high standard.

The first essay was by Albert Mohler, and outlined the modern demise of the doctrine of hell from the 17th century onwards. His article outlines how hell began to be questioned in mainline denominations, gradually moving to a doctrine repellent to many in the church by the Victorian Era, and eventually being regarded as nothing more than a myth in the 20th century. Mohler then outlines how these attitudes have recently been entering even evangelical circles, with annihilationist leanings in the writings of such prominent theologians as John Wenham, John Stott, and of course, Clark Pinnock.

Following Mohler's historical review are four essays on the teaching of certain parts of the Scripture: Daniel Block on the Old Testament, Robert Yarborough on the teaching of Jesus, Douglas Moo on Paul's teaching and Gregory Beale on Revelation. Block's essay is an interesting read for those who are unacquainted with the way in which the Old Testament lays the backdrop for the teaching of Christ and the apostles on hell in terms of imagery, and I especially appreciated his discussion of the Netherworld, in the OT, and Daniel 12:1-3. The essay's by Yarborough and Moo met the high expectations I had of them from reading some of their previous works. Yarborough summarized the large amount of Gospel teaching on Hell very well, as well as including an interesting section refuting the charge that His teaching came from Plato, and concluding with a reflection on the teaching in light of September 11th, while Moo excelled in his discussion of Paul's teaching on the issue of eternal punishment and the justice of God (Paul never uses the term `hell'). Beale's essay was good, but was the most disappointing to the reviewer (all things are relative!), but still argued powerfully against the annihilationist teaching that is becoming ever more prevalent in evangelical circles.

The next two essays covered hell in Biblical Theology and Systematic Theology. Christopher Morgan (the only author the reviewer had not come across before, but whose two essays were not out of place in the book) commented briefly on the doctrine from each of the New Testament authors, concluding with a discussion of hell pictured as punishment, destruction and banishment. Robert Petersen (who has written on thee subject more fully elsewhere) presented a very interesting and rewarding paper on the theology from three vantage points: those of the trinity, human responsibility and divine sovereignty, and the `no' and `not yet' tension on the Bible.

Two essays followed on universalism (by J. I. Packer) and annihilationism (by Morgan again). Both essays were useful, and showed the flaws in these approaches according to the clear teaching of the Bible, though Morgan's is most useful in the context of modern evangelicalism as universalism is not really proposed by many serious theologians who label themselves as evangelicals. The final essay was, in this reviewer's opinion, the finest, with Sinclair Ferguson discussing the pastoral implications of the Biblical doctrine of hell. Ferguson's pastoral heart was obvious throughout as he wrestled with the reality of hell in preaching and evangelism, and his essay is the most important contribution of the volume I would say, as the other material is covered in other volumes elsewhere, though the reviewer has not come across another essay quite like Ferguson's.

Overall, a fine volume on a difficult topic, and perhaps the best summary the reviewer has read on the topic (though find also Robert Petersen's other books, and John Blanchard's `Whatever Happened to Hell'). As stated at the beginning, I hope Zondervan will continue to release more books in this series...perhaps Justification Under Fire may be a good one, edited by Don Carson!

The reason I ordered this book was because I thought I would get a book that provided exegetically-driven counter-arguments to the arguments for annihilationism / conditionalism, as I have recently gone through Fudge's "The Fire that Consumes," with presents some impressive arguments for this view. Here's the chapters:

1. Modern theology: the disappearance of Hell (Albert Mohler Jr)
2. The old Testament on Hell (Daniel I. Block)
3. Jesus on Hell (Robert W. Yarbrough)
4. Paul on Hell (Douglas J. Moo)
5. The Revelation on Hell (Gregory K. Beale)
6. Biblical Theology: Three Pictures of Hell (Christopher W. Morgan)
7. Systematic Theology: Three Vantage Points of Hell (Robert A. Peterson)
8. Universalism: Will Everyone Ultimately be saved? (J. I. Packer)
9. Annihilationism: Will the Unsaved Be Punished Forever? (Christopher W. Morgan)
10. Pastoral Theology: The Preacher and Hell (Sinclair. B. Ferguson)

As one may conjecture based on this (I couldn't see the table of contents when ordering), this book is diffuse, with repetition of material by different chapters. For someone seriously concerned (and not confident) about the truth of the matter on this issue, like me, there have been some irritating moments in reading, because certain Scripture and issues would be, in a given chapter, passed over very quickly, which would not happen if the book was more focused in is content / organization. Another aspect of the broad scope of the book is that it deals with history and philosophical and emotional objections to the traditional view, whereas I was looking mainly for biblical exegesis. I'll just give some feedback about the chapters on Scripture vis-a-vis the argument against annihilationism

Bock's "Old Testament on Hell" - He says that "We find hints of the netherworld and the afterlife as a place/time of eternal torment (in contrast to a beatific afterlife for the righteous) as we know it from the New Testament in only two Old Testament texts: Isaiah 66:24 and Daniel 12:2" (59). But in proceeding to discuss these two passages, Bock does not argue for the traditional view at all, does not deal with annihilationist arguments, but just asserts his view! I'm not at all faulting Bock's intelligence or scholarship here; it seems to me, rather, that he simply wasn't thinking about arguing against annihilationism when he wrote this, but was giving a more general informative article on the Old Testament's view of the netherworld.

Yarbrough's "Jesus on Hell" - Yarbrough clearly takes it upon himself to argue against annihilationism, however in my opinion the argumentation is lacking. Everyone is entitled to his own opinion about the soundness of Yarbrough's anti-annihilationist arguments, but I think a less disputable point would be that the chapter was organized in such a way that little space was allocated to rebutting annihilationist exegetical arguments; and for a reader such as me, that's where I was itching. He for some reason spent 4 pages on the reliability of the gospels as testimonies to Jesus' words. 6 pages were given to rebutting Fudge's views on certain verses in the gospels.

Moo's "Paul on Hell" was a very good chapter; I don't have any gripes with Moo; unfortunately I think the main controversial verses in this dispute are not Pauline. Moo does however provide some considerations that he believes favor the traditional view.

Beale's "The Revelation on Hell" - this is an excellent chapter, and the main reason I'm still glad I bought this book. Beale is very rigorous exegetically, and he explicitly takes up the annihilationist position and argues against it by arguing about the Scriptural data and not appealing to intuitions or "it seems to me that..." This is the chapter that I'll continue to work through in my own studies on this issue.

Christopher Morgan's "Annihilationism..." chapter was very short on exegetical counter-arguments to annihilationist's arguments (most of the chapter is on history, and broader theological/philosophical issues). Two short paragraphs constitute the attack on annihilatonist views of "eternal" as it pertains to passages on hell, and two more paragraphs on the annihilationist view of "destruction."

This and Peterson's Hell On Trial will feel affirming to those who already agree with him and the others whose articles are present. They will offend those of a clearly liberal mindset who find the doctrine of eternal conscious punishment/torment to be offensive. And they will be very little help to those who are looking for clarity with specific exegetical inquiries into the legitimate questions regarding the imagery and language the Bible uses in regard to Hell and how we are to understand these things systematically. There seems to be a kind of bias in that if you don't accept the traditional view it's because you've been improperly influenced by a culture that doesn't want to believe in Hell. I find this condescending. In fact, many who struggle with this issue struggle because of the language of the Bible and serious contemplation over the nature and attributes of God, which is given short shrift in these books. So much time is spent in these books on anti universalist treatements, which is, in my mind, the easy thing to dismantle with scripture. But there is a constant mixing of positions and illustrations that is not helpful. In Hell On Trial, for instance, we're told that Hell is like a hot stove that burns the hand and not like a hot furnace that destroys what you put in it. In fact, both of these descriptions fit what the Bible says about Hell, and this is why people like Stott, who is no idiot, are not as sure as others seem to be about these things. I am holding to the traditional doctrine at this point because I don't think that this issue has been conclusively dealt with by theologians at any time in history, and when it's not conclusive, I choose to hold to the accumulated concensus of the Church. But I would hope that someone with more smarts than me would take seriously the arguments, especially of final annihilationism, and put them through a rigorous and specific assessment instead of the general approach that has been taken so far (at least in the books I've been able to find). Treating the different non traditional positions as if they're all just different takes on the same bad concept is not resolving any of the issues. There are some excellent points along the way. Peterson's argument that sin is eternal because it is committed against an eternal God is a good example. And I admire anyone who cares enough to defend the faith. I'm thankful for these books and the help they offer, but they are exegetically inconclusive.

While it is true that a fair share of the anti hell revisionists are of the kinder gentler sort, in researching this topic for myself I have also found that there has been scholarship dating back at least 125 years which examines in detail the original Greek, Aramaic, and Hebrew texts in order to place this discussion into the original context of the language and the culture of the time.

Nowhere in the reviews did I find any mention of original language and original meaning of the text. What I saw was the usual. People using quotes from numerous places throughout the scriptures to prove that the scriptures are true. This strikes me as disingenuous at best. Of course the Bible is true if your only evidence is what the Bible provides. Of course you will find what you want to find using only translations that have been commissioned by various churches to create texts which conform to those churches' theologies. What sort of result can one expect from those trained in the divinity schools and seminaries and university departments run by those very same churches with their agendas, and whose particular theologies they wish to perpetuate?

I did not see anything in any of the reviews which address the fact that over the period of time in which the various pieces of the Bible were written, there were evolutions in thought and concept. Ideas changed. Concepts changed. Particularly the concept of hell, which is mostly the product of medieval Christian theology, starting in a minor way with Tertullian, expanded greatly by Augustine, and received its crown from Thomas Aquinas. These scholars poured over the original texts, seeking out those words and phrases which they could then bend into their theology. For example, the Greek word hades, translated as hell, was assumed to mean hell as we are told it exists today. In truth it meant something else.

Nor did I see very much about the manner in which Jesus taught, using metaphor for the most part. Metaphor is not truth, but a means of conveying a principle or lesson. For example, in the story of the good Samaritan, was Jesus reporting a factual event? Yet so much of the metaphor Jesus used has become, to the traditionalists, the basis of their proof.

Isn't it interesting how the traditionalists are so adamant about the existence of hell and eternal punishment. One can almost see the smiles on their faces as they talk about it. One can almost hear the delight in their voices as they think about their enemies suffering eternal damnation.

For those who would suggest that if only I would read more of the Bible then I would come to understand, I received a strict religious upbringing. I've read the Bible. It was through my reading of the Bible that I came to doubt the interpretations I was being told to believe.

Jesus taught, and the early Christians believed, that everyone dies. Death is the consequence of sin. However, if you are right with God and right with your fellow humans, you will be given eternal life. If not, poof! You are relegated to the dustbins of history. (Does that mean there really are such dustbins? Or is that just an expression? You get the idea)

I'm not sure about the rules regarding posting external links here within the reviews, but there are many available through thoughtful search engine terms.

The doctrine of eternal punishment is firmly established in both Scripture and the Christian tradition, but it also has its detractors within the church, from Origen in the early third century and Arnobius of Sicca in the early fourth to Thomas Talbott and Edward William Fudge today. The principal alternatives to eternal punishment are universal salvation and the annihilation of the wicked, the former represented by Origen and Talbott, the latter by Arnobius and Fudge. Hell Under Fire is an exegetical and theological defense of the doctrine by evangelical scholars.

In Chapter 1, R. Albert Mohler Jr. traces the disappearance of hell. Though once a staple in both Catholic and Protestant - and especially evangelical Protestant - preaching, hell has been downplayed by modern theologians and preachers. Mohler explains why.

Chapters 2-5 provide exegesis of relevant passages from the Bible. Daniel I. Block examines what the Old Testament teaches about the afterlife. Only two passages - Isaiah 66:24 and Daniel 12:1-3 - clearly articulate a postmortem experience of divine judgment, although many passages speak of or hint at life after death. Nonetheless, the OT material is valuable for understanding how Jews prior to Jesus thought of life after death, and one can see a theological evolution of the doctrine from the OT's vague statements to the New Testament's clearer teaching on the subject.

Robert W. Yarbrough (my NT professor at Wheaton College) surveys the Gospels. He opens with a critique of those who doubt that the Gospels accurately convey the teaching of the historical Jesus. He goes on to provide a close exegesis of relevant passages from the Synoptics and John and concludes that they teach the "ceaseless constant torment" of the impenitent, against Fudge's annihilationist reading of those same passages.

Douglas J. Moose surveys the Pauline epistles. Moo concedes that Paul does not use the terminology of "hell" as Jesus did. Nonetheless, based on what Paul wrote about divine judgment, Moo concludes that Paul believed hell was real, eternal, and retributive in nature.

Gregory K. Beale provides, in my opinion, the book's densest and most technical exegesis in his study of Revelation. He tracks down the background of John's visions of hell to the OT and intertestamental Jewish literature, interacts with annihilationist readings of the relevant passages, and concludes that Revelation clearly teaches eternal punishment, hinting that only someone with "a prior theological agenda" could conclude otherwise. Coming as it does in the penultimate paragraph of his chapter, after pages of fair-minded exegesis, Beale's hint strikes me as very plausible.

To my mind, the single most helpful chapter in Hell Under Fire is Morgan's (Chapter 6), which offers a broad survey of the NT teaching on hell using its three primary images: punishment, destruction, and banishment. Morgan's chapter builds upon and frames the previous exegetical chapters. He notes that the NT writers use all three images, sometimes mixing and matching them. The dominant image is punishment, but the other images explain other aspects of hell that the punishment doesn't capture.

In Chapter 7, Peterson surveys the interrelationship of the doctrine of hell with three other doctrines: (1) the Trinity, (2) divine sovereignty and human freedom, and (3) the NT's inaugurated eschatology, in which the kingdom of God - both to save and to condemn - is "already" but "not yet."

Chapters 8 and 9, by J.I. Packer and Morgan, respectively, evaluate the underlying theologies of universal salvation and the annihilation of the wicked, in that order. Packer's chapter was the weakest in the book, in my opinion. To the extent that they rely on biblical exegesis to ground their belief, universalists cite several passages in Paul, which Packer treats in only a cursory fashion. Thankfully, Moo considers those passages in his own chapter and shows why context rules out a universalist interpretation of them. The real strength of universalism, or rather, its real impetus, is philosophical. Unfortunately, Packer does not do as good a job of dealing with universalist philosophical objections as he could have. A philosopher such as Jerry Walls would've done a better job, in my estimation, of answering the universalist arguments of people such as Talbott. I'm not sure why Walls wasn't asked to contribute a chapter, since he has written a book on hell from the standpoint of philosophical theology. Given the Reformed or Calvinist leanings of the authors of this book, my guess is that including an Arminian such as Walls simply wasn't on the agenda. To his credit, Packer notes that Calvinists and Arminians - indeed, open theists! - unite in opposing universalism, though for different reasons, of course.

Morgan's chapter on annihilationism, also known as conditional immortality, takes up five objections to eternal punishment offered by advocates of this alternative position, including the notion that eternal punishment assumes a Platonic or Hellenistic rather than biblical anthropology of the soul's immortality. As in his earlier chapter on biblical theology, Morgan does an excellent job of working his way through the arguments in a clear, accessible style of writing.

Chapter 10 by Sinclair Ferguson addresses the pastoral uses of the doctrine of eternal punishment. This situates the doctrine in the real life of the church, as pastors evangelize and lead the spiritual formation of their congregations. Isaiah, Daniel, Jesus, Paul, and John do not discuss the doctrine of hell for systematic theological reasons. They preach it in order to warn sinners and motivate repentance. Ferguson refocuses his readers on these important pastoral tasks.

Although Hell Under Fire contains high-level exegesis and systematic thinking, it was not written for academics. Rather, it was written for them, for pastors, and for patient lay readers with an interest in theology. If the Bible teaches the reality of eternal punishment and encourages people to avoid that fate through repentance and faith in Jesus Christ, then Bible-believing Christians should do the same. If you are going to purchase only one book on the doctrine of eternal punishment, this is the one you should buy.

Stereotypes abound when one thinks of hell. The school child may conceive images as seen in 1940's era cartoons -complete with devil costumes and boiling caldrons. The cynic may imagine nothing worse than the current state of the world -life is a living hell. Hollywood concocts grotesque and wonton versions of hell -but perhaps not far off the mark. What then of the minister of the gospel, how does he handle hell? Sadly, the traditional and historical view of hell is lost or at best missing in action in modern ecclesia. When the lights come on and the curtain rises, the doctrine of hell is often left waiting in the wings on the stage of Christian worldview - never to utter its solemn teaching to the masses.

Too often in modern evangelical scholarship and preaching, the biblical teaching of hell as eternal conscious punishment is conspicuously absent. Taking its place is a me-centered gospel message of sugar and spice and everything nice. Often used as an expletive, hell has had its place in orthodoxy usurped by such emotive heresies as Universalism and Annihilationism. Hell has become nothing more than a bad dream, a scary story mothers tell their children to keep them honest, and at best, a defunct and embarrassing doctrine from a primitive age, proven erroneous by modern theological intelligentsia.

The editors and contributors of Hell Under Fire beg to differ with those attempting to sweep hell under the carpet of theology. In what amounts to a compendium of modern, orthodox, evangelical scholarship, the contributing authors of Hell Under Fire outline exactly how the doctrine of hell has been traditionally understood, what the Bible has to say about hell, and how believers are to handle the various affronts to the doctrine of hell. The format of the book is rather simple - each author contributes an essay based on their own academic specialty, concerning the doctrine of hell; the editors acquiesce the information into a smooth ebb and flow, palatable for scholars and laypeople alike. Although all nine contributors to this book are well respected and learned men, regretfully, space dictates that only three of them receive mention.

R. Albert Mohler opens the book with his essay Modern Theology: The Disappearance of Hell. Mohler traces the idea of hell as ever present on the minds of the ancients right up to the time the death knell was driven in the Victorian Era -paving the way for subsequent liberal philosophers and theologians to eradicate hell from public consciousness.

Mohler's treatment on the history of hell is as much fascinating as it is enlightening. In a relatively short space, he manages to give a complete picture of how hell went from a first-level doctrine to a caricature of its true nature. Using no fewer than ninety-six references, Mohler takes the reader on an odyssey of historical theology as if it were effortless for him. Mohler seeks out and examines the varied and many philosophers that have both affirmed and denied the actual existence of a physical place called hell (respectively), all the while keeping an eye on Scripture as his truth compass. Indeed, Mohler's final words should ring loud the ears of the readers, "Hell may well be denied, but it will not disappear." Hell Under Fire would be worth the read if only for Mohler's flawless exposé of ancient and current thinking in the church concerning hell.

J. I. Packer uses his real estate to explore the false doctrine of Universalism with his essay titled, Universalism: Will Everyone Ultimately Be Saved? Universalism is a theory thought to have sprung from the early church father Origen. The theory states that the salvific intent of the atonement was so universal, that all humans will be saved through Christ and eventually come to a harmony with God and reside in his Heaven, regardless of one's decision to acknowledge Christ as Lord and God during their natural life; this includes Satan and his angels. Packer is quick to point out that the vast majority of proponents to Universalism attach a great deal of emotional baggage to the theory. Interestingly, Packer notes that Universalism is far from being a unified theory; rather it is comprised of many small, varied versions of the theory. One of the most theologically perplexing ideas put forth by Universalism theologians is that the ultimate expression of God's agape love is not necessarily the person of Christ, but the desire that God would not allow any to ultimately parish.

After surveying the primary scholarship of Universalism and breaking down the major tenants of the debate between universalists and those holding the historical view of hell, Packer correctly asserts that advocates of this false doctrine are simply trying "to circumvent the seemingly clear New Testament witness to the eternal destiny of those who live and die without Christ." Packer concludes that Universalism is appealing only prima facie. The chance that all would not parish, but have eternal life is at the heart of evangelism. The notion of all people achieving salvation, regardless of their earthly attitude toward Christ is so counter-biblical, so distorted from the teaching of God about himself revealed in Scripture, that it must be rejected with extreme prejudice. Packer adds that if the church neglects hell, the world will not "know the truth about holiness, the judgment, the plan, the love, the Christ, and the salvation of our God."

"To speak of hell is to speak of things so overwhelming that it cannot be done with ease... the thought of hell... can carry no inherent attraction to the balanced and coherent human mind... yet hell exists; this is the testimony of the Scriptures, of the apostles, and of the Lord Jesus himself." With these solemn words, Sinclair B. Ferguson begins his essay on Pastoral Theology: The Preacher and Hell. The doctrine of hell has been debated since the first century and has been repeatedly vindicated by orthodox thinkers and councils. The problem as Ferguson sees it is that the debate must stop at the pulpit. If ministers of the gospel are honoring God, have reconciled their own sin and sheer dependence on the mercy of Christ, then they cannot but help preach with fear and trembling "the righteousness of God, the sinfulness of our sin, and the absolute justice of God's condemnation of us" as seen in the doctrine of hell. Hell must be preached, and regularly at that.

Ferguson spends time examining how the pastor must have his own life in order before he can preach with any credibility on such a topic as hell. After a brief discussion on the pastor's role in preaching on hell, Ferguson examines the most common reactions by hearers to lectures on hell, with scriptural rebuttals. Ferguson then poses a series of four important questions and answers concerning the doctrine of hell:
1. Is hell fair?
2. What of those who have never heard of the gospel? May we entertain a "larger hope" that many who have never heard the gospel will be saved?
3. What are we to say at funerals of unbelievers and to their relatives?
4. How can I ever be happy in heaven if I know that there are people in hell -including people I have loved?

Ferguson correctly concludes the inquisition, with the statement that there are aspects of God that cannot be fathomed this side of eternity. The only answer for believers in regards to Heaven and hell is to "constantly remind ourselves that it is the Savior who spoke clearly of the dark side of eternity. To be faithful to him, so must we."

Weaknesses are hard to come by in this sort of work; if they exist at all, it is in the arguments of the authors themselves -which they are entitled to, as per the nature of such a work. Several of the authors tend to get a little long-winded at points, but this quickly passes as the reader becomes engaged with the subject matter. Didactically, Morgan and Peterson could have established harder lines between several of the essays to keep one subject from spilling over into the next, avoiding some redundancy. Perhaps each essay's contingency on another's topic makes coalescence unavoidable.

Hell Under Fire is a fantastic resource for one beginning research on the vast topic of hell in the modern context, using it as a encyclopedic source. However, the book is also a sound handbook for those familiar with modern scholarship reinventing eternal punishment, using it as a refresher or supplement to existing research. Although the contributors are a veritable who's who of evangelical scholarship, Hell Under Fire is palatable for layman as well as serious Bible students. This book can earnestly be recommended to any who wish to understand hell as essential to an orthodox doctrine of the Christian faith and its essentiality to evangelism.

HELL--Is it everlasting?

The Lord Jesus Christ spoke these words: "That servant who knows his master's will and does not get ready or does not do what his master wants will be beaten with many blows. But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows" (Luke 12:47-48).

Christopher Morgan & Robert Peterson served as Editors for Hell Under Fire. Various authors, including the editors, contributed. I comment on some of the authors.

On page 64, Daniel Block wrote: "Just as God is eternal (Ps. 90:2), so those who are created as his image are eternal," but this can and perhaps should be challenged. There are actually two problems. First, we were made "in" the image of God--the impress of God the Son was/is on us. He, however, is the Image of God, as shown in such passages as 2 Cor. 4:4, Col. 1:15, Heb. 1:3, and John 1:18. Second, unlike God, we all had a beginning. We are not eternal retrospectively speaking.

On pages 73-74, Robert Yarbrough purportedly discusses what Jesus said about hell in Luke but then seems to omit any reference to Luke 12:47-48. This seems strange to me. Why overlook such an important passage?

Robert A. Peterson, in his Hell on Trial: The Case for Eternal Punishment, quotes Craig Blomberg about this passage. Peterson says of Blomberg that he is "an expert in the study of Jesus' parables." Here is the quotation: "These verses rank among the clearest in all the Bible in support of degrees of punishment in hell." One wonders why, therefore, Yarbrough would not discuss this Luke passage. Is it because it suggests that some unbelievers may suffer less time in hell than others?

To his credit, Yarbrough admits that it "is possible, but by no means necessary, to interpret terms like `perish,' `condemned,' `judgment,' and `death' as excluding eternal conscious punishment" (p. 75). Also to his credit, he affirms with John R. W. Stott, "that the doctrine of eternal conscious punishment strains our sense of justice" (p. 90).

Another writer, Douglas Moo, wrote: "At first sight, `conditional immortality' seems to find solid support in the letters of Paul" (p. 108). Conditional immortality allows for significant suffering in hell after physical death, but it says that eventually the unbeliever will be completely destroyed--after sufficient suffering.

Christopher Morgan wrote, "Both punishment and separation from God require conscious existence" (p. 203), but I question the truthfulness of this. I am now separated from my two dogs, Laddie, and Shadow, and they are separated from me. Both were sorrowfully put down, but I very much doubt that either now exists or is now conscious of me or their previous, former, finite existence. Separation does not require a two-way conscious existence. One way is sufficient. I know I am separated from my dogs, and God will know those He has separated Himself from even if they eventually do not.

Regarding punishment, one time I "punished" a fish I had in my aquarium, for it persistently would attack other fish in the tank. However foolish my action may have been, I flicked my finger on the back of the attacking fish, trying, in my feeble sort of way, to train the fish to stop attacking other fish. It died as a result of the flick! Nevertheless, what I administered was a form of punishment. I do not know how conscious the fish was of my punishment when I applied it, but I am sure it does not now exist. Punishment, therefore, does not have to require "conscious existence." It can have eternal consequences, however. That fish is now gone forever.

The same author also wrote: "sin is an infinite evil and merits endless punishment" (p. 210). He said essentially the same thing two pages later: "endless punishment would be the only means by which finite sinners could approach paying the infinite penalty due sin" (p. 212). In his book, Jonathan Edwards & Hell, Morgan suggested, on Jonathan Edwards' behalf, that "only one sinful word, thought, or deed merited an infinite penalty...."

On 9/22/10, I wrote to the author, Chris Morgan, and received a response from him. Then I sent him a second email (same day), but he has not yet responded to it. I wrote, "Dear Chris, Thanks. Here are some thoughts I have put together. I do not remember much of an analysis in your book of Jesus' words: "That servant who knows his master's will and does not get ready or does not do what his master wants will be beaten with many blows. But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows" (Luke 12:47-48). ... There are many other passages that suggest that some sins are worse than other sins. Some are described as sins of ignorance, for example. ... I believe there are degrees of sin and degrees of punishment for sin."

He has not yet responded to his omission of Luke 12:47-48. I thus do not know how to fit Morgan's notion that "only one sinful word" warrants "an infinite penalty" with the Lord's teaching in Luke 12. Jesus spoke of sins of ignorance as warranting "few blows," but Morgan seems to be saying that the smallest infraction/sin warrants an "infinite penalty." According to Morgan, there can be no relenting on God's part to punishing even the smallest infraction. I rather believe Morgan is my brother in Christ, but I am having difficulty reconciling his teaching with that of the Lord Jesus in Luke 12.

A brother shared the following words in response to a draft of this paper: "Your words tell me that you are assuming the `he' of Luke 12:48, is a non-believer. I would disagree, as the context is speaking of the Lord's servants. That being the case, the `he' in Luke 12:48 would be a servant of the Lord; in essence, a believer, not a non-believer."

The previous verse, however, says: "The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of. He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the unbelievers." Being assigned a place with unbelievers does not seem hopeful of heaven, and being "cut ... to pieces" does not lend itself easily to the notion of eternal existence.

Further in the book, Morgan admits, "At first glance, this argument seems persuasive" (p. 217). What were the words that immediately preceded? "It would be easier to hold together the awful reality of hell and the universal reign of God if hell means destruction and the impenitent are no more."

In short, it seems even Chris Morgan recognizes the sensibleness of a punishment in hell that is less than unending. I would add that it is even easier if hell is viewed as a real place, and that punishments will be meted out according to the weight of the sinful infractions.

The Apostle Paul seems to support this in Romans 2:5ff: "But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God's wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed. God `will give to each person according to what he has done.' To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger."

Sinclair Ferguson, one of the authors later in the book, uses this text to support his words: "God will accurately weigh each person's individual responsibility" (p. 223). This seems to be in harmony with the Lord's teaching in Luke 12:47-48 and Paul's teaching in Rom. 2:5ff.

Dr. Ferguson also wrote that sinning in hell is ongoing, and he bases this on Rev. 22:11. He wrote: "Ongoing condemnation is met by ongoing alienation in a cyclical fashion" (p. 235). In other words, unbelievers in hell are sort of on a treadmill of sin. This is perhaps the strongest argument I have seen in favor of everlasting punishment in the book (aside from words like everlasting punishment), but perhaps Ferguson has not considered the possible connection with Phil. 2:10-11: "at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."

Thinking future, let us say that there will be persons in hell who are mounting up sin after sin in their persistent rebellion against God. Finally, they come, some sooner than others, to the self-realization and admission that they have been wrong all along (for their entire existence on earth and for their perhaps even extended duration in hell). However begrudgingly, they bend the knee and admit that Jesus Christ is Lord (in line with Phil. 2:10-11).

This would, of course, not be repentance unto life, but at least the Lord could close the books--silencing all human rebellion forever. Col. 1:20 says, "...and through Him to reconcile to Himself all things"? Heaven certainly will be reconciled, but even unbelievers may admit defeat (cf. again Phil. 2:10-11).

I find myself in sympathy with men like Stott and Hughes and think the notion that God will never be able to completely stamp out evil is unattractive; moreover, this unattractiveness seems to find at least some support in Scripture and from the Lord Himself.

Far more attractive is the idea that there will be a final judgment of everyone who has ever lived. Believers in Jesus will experience eternal bliss with Christ forever. Unbelievers, on the other hand, will be judged and punished with far-reaching suffering having eternal consequences. Based on Luke 12:47-48, there will be varying degrees of punishment in hell, but even unbelievers will eventually bend the knee and confess with their mouths that Jesus Christ is Lord. Perhaps it is at this point that they will "perish" -- be "destroyed."

I did some OT study and considered the main Hebrew word for everlasting/forever/ eternal/ goh-lahm. There are many, many uses of the word, but some that seem to allow for a less than "everlasting" understanding included the following:

1. Gen. 17:13 says: "Whether born in your household or bought with your money, they must be circumcised. My covenant in your flesh is to be an everlasting covenant."

Physical circumcision is not longer necessary.

2. Ex. 40: 12-16 says: "Bring Aaron and his sons to the entrance to the tent of meeting and wash them with water. 13 Then dress Aaron in the sacred garments, anoint him and consecrate him so he may serve me as priest. 14 Bring his sons and dress them in tunics. 15 Anoint them just as you anointed their father, so they may serve me as priests. Their anointing will be to a priesthood that will continue throughout their generations." 16 Moses did everything just as the LORD commanded him.

ESV translates it as "a perpetual priesthood," and the KJV renders it as "an everlasting priesthood throughout their generations."

The Levitical priesthood has given way to a new priesthood in Jesus.

3. Dt. 15:16-17 say, "But if your servant says to you, "I do not want to leave you," because he loves you and your family and is well off with you, then take an awl and push it through his earlobe into the door, and he will become your servant for life. Do the same for your female servant."

The KJV renders this: "he shall be thy servant for ever."

We know this is not everlasting in the fullest sense.

4. Josh. 4:7 (KJV) says: " Then ye shall answer them, That the waters of Jordan were cut off before the ark of the covenant of the LORD; when it passed over Jordan, the waters of Jordan were cut off: and these stones shall be for a memorial unto the children of Israel for ever."

The NIV also uses "forever," but it is very doubtful that the stones are literally still there. Perhaps this is a mental memorial--in our memories as we read the Scriptures.

5. This is about Solomon's temple--1 Kings 9:3 The LORD said to him: "I have heard the prayer and plea you have made before me; I have consecrated this temple, which you have built, by putting my Name there forever. My eyes and my heart will always be there.

The physical temple, however, came down.

6. Isaiah 42: 14 "For a long time I have kept silent, I have been quiet and held myself back. But now, like a woman in childbirth, I cry out, I gasp and pant."

A "long time" is not forever, and everlasting punishment (Mt. 25:46) may mean "long time."

7. Jer. 18:15-16 says, "Yet my people have forgotten me; they burn incense to worthless idols, which made them stumble in their ways, in the ancient paths. They made them walk in byways, on roads not built up. Their land will be an object of horror and of lasting scorn; all who pass by will be appalled and will shake their heads."

It eventually was rebuilt, however.

8. Jer. 20:17 says, "For he did not kill me in the womb, with my mother as my grave, her womb enlarged forever."

It would seem imprudent to think of this in literal terms.

9. Jer. 49:12-13 says: This is what the LORD says: "If those who do not deserve to drink the cup must drink it, why should you go unpunished? You will not go unpunished, but must drink it. 13 I swear by myself," declares the LORD, "that Bozrah will become a ruin and a curse, an object of horror and reproach; and all its towns will be in ruins forever."

Will there not be a burning up and a new heavens and earth replacing?

The words above were put together by me, PGH, and should not be viewed as the official teaching of any particular church.

This book was written by top scholars from an Reformed, evangelical stance (intelligent folks that believe the Bible is the inerrant Word of God. Full disclosure: as do I). It aims to thoroughly prove that the Bible teaches the traditional doctrine of eternal hell awaits those who do not turn to Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins and that this is morally just.
They interact with the latest, widespread scholarship within more liberal veins of Christianity (and increasingly more conservative ones) that opts for either annihilationism or universalism. I would recommend this for pastors, lay leaders, and anyone interested in hearing the full arguments for hell - Whether coming from a pro or con position. HUF is a worthy opponent, a counter-balance of any arguments against the traditional doctrine of hell.

Strengths:
Hell Under Fire is one stop shopping for anyone wrestling with the doctrine of hell because of the thoroughness of the writing. The reader should feel that every subtopic is covered well, or is at least footnoted for an easy on ramp to more study. I would recommend this book over Hell on Trial, as editor Robert Peterson incorporates much of the material in his HOT into this book.

The book is particularly strong addressing the Biblical warrant traditional hell, probably because of the super abundance of scripture passages that point to the traditional view that the burden of proof rests with those who would deny the doctrine.
Likewise, the authors make a convincing case that while the traditional view of hell is sobering, it is just and actually promotes justice on earth.

As we should expect from Christian scholars, the authors are gracious with their opponents but firm in their views on truth.

Could be better:
Those with a problem with God's sovereignty over evil and salvation (free will) will probably still have those beefs after reading this. To be fair, these were not the main issues the authors were addressing. Also, no worldview can explain evil without problems (atheists can, but can't call evil 'evil' because they have no divine "ought" that creates moral absolutes- nor can they explain good... but I digress).
For a more winsome, challenging presentation of these issues, see Tim Keller's The Reason for God, particularly the chapters on Evil and Hell.

A thorough and to the point examination of the issue of life after death in relation to Hell and why a Just and loving God would not only create such a place but why there must be a Hell. This book also answers from scripture those who would deny Hell and its reality. It left me more greatful of God's grace as found in Jesus Christ alone and a greater burden for the Lost.

I'll tell you. You have to read these books. Hell sells... so don't knock it. Wait until you see my book on Hell.