Prelude
Before discussing the main topic of this post,
I want to point out that there is a difference between why we believe something
is true and why we think it is an important topic to discuss.
For instance, I believe the resurrection of
Jesus Christ is important to discuss because of the many wonderful ways
believing in His resurrection should change how we live (I discuss seven of
these in a post here
). But these benefits from believing in the resurrection are different from
the reasons I believe the resurrection is true (I share some of those
reasons in a different post, here).
The top seven reasons I believe in Conditional
Immortality (also called annihilationism) instead of eternal conscious torment
may be summed up like this:
1. Scripture
2. Scripture
3. Scripture
4. Scripture
5. Scripture
6. Scripture
7. Scripture
Each of the “reasons” above links to a blog
post or series of blog posts where I argue for Conditional Immortality using
Scripture. I’m intentionally trying to emphasize that I do not believe in
Conditional Immortality merely because of some emotional distaste for eternal
torment. Of course, eternal torment is extremely distasteful, but that would
never be a valid basis for rejecting it if
it were taught in God’s Word. I also do not reject eternal conscious torment
because it causes problems and causes people to stumble. Yet, it has caused
many to stumble. And that is one reason I feel it’s worth my time to continue
to address the long held, deeply entrenched error of eternal torment.
In other words, the rest of this post is about
why it is important to teach Conditional Immortality, not why Conditional
Immorality is true.
The
Doctrine of Eternal Conscious Torment has Led Many to Stumble into Theological
Liberalism
At a recent T4G Conference, Al Mohler briefly
discussed the topic of Hell. His comments were partly prompted by recent
reports in the news that the Pope does not believe that Hell consists of
eternal conscious torment. But Mohler also specifically mentions a recent
Rethinking Hell conference. I was not able to attend that conference, but I am
part of the Rethinking Hell movement.
Mohler’s comments regarding Rethinking Hell
and the conference were unfair and inaccurate. But I’m not writing to address
that. Chris Date already published an excellent short article addressing that
issue, which you may read here: “Hath
God Said?”
I’m writing to address something specific
Mohler said which in a way I agree with, even though Mohler is overall arguing
against annihilationism. Mohler points out that the doctrine of Hell played a
major role in the start of theological liberalism. Theological liberalism has
been and continues to be one of the most damaging distortions of the gospel
found among those who claim to be Christian. Mohler explains that a rejection
of the doctrine of Hell was one of the factors which led to the false teachings
of theological liberalism. Here’s the one minute portion of Mohler’s talk where
he discusses this:
It’s important to note that the liberals were
not reacting against just any vague concept of Hell. They were rebelling against
the specific horrors of eternal conscious torment. Tragically, many of those
who rejected eternal conscious torment did not find the biblical truth of
Conditional Immortality. Instead, they stumbled into full blown theological
liberalism. Mohler correctly points out that theological liberalism often leads
to a rejection of many core and vital Christian beliefs such as substitutionary
atonement.
The doctrine of eternal torment continues to
cause many to stumble in our generation. For instance, in Rob Bell’s (in)famous
book Love Wins, he rages against the
doctrine of eternal torment. Bell writes:
Has God created
millions of people over tens of thousands of years who are going to spend
eternity in anguish? Can God do this, or even allow this, and still claim to be
a loving God?
Does God punish
people for thousands of years with infinite, eternal torment for things they
did in their few finite years of life? (Love
Wins, Rob Bell, pg. 2)
Tragically, Bell does not point to the
biblical teaching of Conditional Immortality as the alternative to eternal
conscious torment. His alternative is not very clear (a lack of clarity is a
hallmark of postmodern theology), but he seems to point people towards a type
of theological postmodernism which in many of its specifics as well as its overall
effect is very similar to theological liberalism. For example, like the
liberals before him, Bell also questions the doctrine of substitutionary
atonenment.
In addition to leading many Christians to
stumble into theological liberalism, the false doctrine of eternal torment has
also caused many people to stumble into atheism. For example, in his book Why I am not a Christian, Bertand Russel
wrote:
There is one very serious defect to my mind in
Christ’s moral character, and that is that He believed in hell. I do not myself
feel that any person who is really profoundly humane can believe in everlasting
punishment.
And
one of the most damaging atheists in modern history wrote these words:
I can indeed
hardly see how anyone ought to wish Christianity to be true; for if so the
plain language of the text seems to show that the men who do not believe, and
this would include my Father, Brother and almost all of my friends, will be
everlastingly punished. (Charles Darwin)
Darwin was wrong to think that the plain text
of the Bible teaches eternal torment. But, I wonder if history might have been
far different if in Darwin’s day most churches taught the truth about
Conditional Immortality instead of teaching eternal torment.
Do I think that if a large portion of the true
Church begins to teach Conditional Immortality instead of eternal torment that
this will prevent everyone from becoming theologically liberal or falling into atheism?
No, of course not. But I believe it will help. In this dark world, removing
even one major stumbling block seems like a worthwhile task.
Conclusion
The Bible teaches Conditional Immortality, not
eternal torment. The Word of God teaches that the unrighteous will suffer the
destruction of their bodies and souls (Matthew 10:28), that they will perish
(John 3:16), that the wages of their sins is death (Romans 6:23), that their
destiny is destruction (Philippians 3:19), and that they will be burned to
ashes (2 Peter 2:6).
Tragically, many in the church have distorted
the biblical teaching of hell to mean eternal torment. This in turn has caused
many to stumble into serious errors such as theological liberalism, theological
postmodernism, and even atheism.
This is one of the reasons (not the only one)
why I pray that God will work to correct the error of eternal torment. I thank
God for the efforts of those in Rethinking
Hell. I also thank God that it seems like more and more Christians are
studying what the Bible truly says about the final fate of the unrighteous and
as a result are embracing the doctrine of Conditional
Immortality.
Hebrews 13:16 And do not forget to do good and to share with others . . .
No comments:
Post a Comment