A few weeks ago (on May 29th), Dr. Pat Zukeran spoke
against the doctrine of annihilationism on his podcast which is part of the
ministry he leads, Evidence and Answers. Since I believe the Bible teaches annihilationism, I’ve decided
to provide a point by point response to his 25 minute talk.
Looking at the Evidence and Answers website, it appears that Dr.
Zukeran is a solid evangelical Christian who has a valuable ministry helping
people to understand God’s truth and guard against the many lies that saturate the
world we live in. What I have in common with Dr. Zukeran is far more important
than the difference I will be focusing on in this post. Perhaps providentially,
Dr. Zukeran posted another podcast on June 3rd on the topic of “the
improbable planet.” In this podcast he interviews Dr. Hugh Ross and discusses
some of the many amazing things about the way God made our planet earth which
are unique and give glory to God as our Creator. It turns out, without knowing
anything about Dr. Zukeran and his ministry, that the very same day I posted a
blog post on the same topic (God Created the Earth to be Inhabited). I share this to emphasize that
while I strongly disagree with Dr. Zukeran on the specific issue of the nature
of hell, I also thank God for him and his ministry overall and sincerely pray
that God will continue to use Evidence and Answers to bless, help, equip, and
strengthen God’s people and to win people to Christ.
I did not choose to analyze Dr. Zukeran’s arguments against
annihilation because of how poor his case is compared to others, but precisely
because it is so typical. I have been interacting with people who defend the
doctrine of eternal conscious torment for about nine years now. Most of the
problems I see in Dr. Zukeran’s talk are similar to the types of problems and
errors I have heard many times in many settings from those who believe in
eternal torment.
In reading my critique, keep in mind that Dr. Zukeran only speaks
for twenty-five minutes. Perhaps if he had presented his case in a setting that
allowed more time, he would have addressed some of the issues I will discuss
here. However, in my experience, attempts to defend eternal torment are plagued
by similar problems whether the presentation is book length or in the form of
brief comments. No amount of argumentation or skill at presentation can make a
wrong interpretation of the Bible correct.
After taking notes on Dr. Zukeran’s talk I noticed I had
identified 25 issues. Since the talk is 25 minutes long, this makes for a
catchy title for this blog post. However, I admit that some of the issues could
be combined and others could have been broken up into more than one issue.
Before addressing the 25 problems with his arguments in the podcast,
I will address one foundational error in thinking that I found not in the
podcast, but in an article Dr. Zukeran wrote in 2012.
A
Foundational Problem: Assuming all human
souls are unconditionally immortal
Dr. Zukeran wrote:
“First of all, Christians agree with the immortality of the soul,
acknowledging that man is composed of material and immaterial components. At
death, the physical body dies but the immaterial essence of man, comprised of
his soul and spirit, lives in an eternal and conscious state either in heaven
with Christ or in Hell, eternally separated from Him.” (from the article, “The Three Views of Eschatology” by Dr. Pat Zukeran)
My response:
Although not part of his podcast, I include this quote from an earlier
article by Dr. Zukeran because a wrong belief about the immortality of all
human souls is one of the deepest roots of the error of eternal conscious
torment. Contrary to what Dr. Zukeran states, there are and have been many
Christians who do not agree that human souls are inherently immortal. The Bible
never says anything like “All people will live forever,” or “the soul is
immortal.” Instead, the Bible consistently presents immortality as something
that is conditional. According to the Bible, we will only live forever if we
believe in Jesus. In fact, for this reason, the doctrine of annihilationism is
also often called conditional immortality. Conditional immortality is
easy to see in many Bible verses. Here are three examples:
To read more on the topic of conditional immortality see this blog
post: What is Conditional Immortality?
The 25 Problems
What follows is a discussion of the 25 problems I heard in the podcast. For each problem I include a time marker which should make it
easy to find Dr. Zukeran’s remarks and listen to them in context if desired.
Problem #1
The claim that unbelievers will live eternally separated from Christ
Dr. Zukeran: “People who do
not know Christ will spend eternity separated from God quarantined in a place
called hell” (1:14)
My response: Today it is common for Christians to emphasize hell
as a place of eternal separation from God. Because our sins do separate us from
God (Isaiah 59:2) and because Jesus tells those whom He never knew to depart
from Him (Matthew 7:23) this may sound plausible, but there are problems. One
problem with this view is that there is no reason to think that anyone
completely and finally separated from God, who is the source of all life (John
1:4), would continue to live. In fact, when Adam and Eve sinned, God
intentionally barred their access to the tree of life so that people would not
live forever in a fallen state (Genesis 3:22). At the end of the book of
Revelation, we see again that the redeemed have access to the tree of life, but
the unsaved do not. This indicates that God still does not want the unsaved to
live forever.
Another problem is that when Christ sends people away from Him at
the final judgment, they are cast into the lake of fire. We are told in several
passages that their fate is exactly what one would expect if someone was thrown
into something like a lava pit. They are completely burned up (Matthew 3:12,
Matthew 13:30) and turned to ashes (2 Peter 2:6). Once they are reduced to
ashes, of course they are no longer conscious and can no longer be tormented.
To read more about the unrighteous being burned up completely and
reduced to ashes, you may read this blog post: Downburned and Ashified.
Problem #2
An implication that the horror of eternal torment is the motive for belief in annihilation
Dr. Zukeran: “For many this [eternal torment] is a horrific idea,
as a result some believe that the unsaved are annihilated . . .” (1:25)
My response: I feel that overall Dr. Zukeran treats his brothers
and sisters in Christ who believe in annihilationism with respect. He even
refers to at least some annihilationists as “fine theologians” (1:35). That’s
the way it should be when we have theological differences over secondary (but
important) issues. Nevertheless, he does imply belief in annihilationism is a
reaction to feeling that eternal torment is a horrific idea. Of course, eternal
torment is horrific, but many of us came to belief in annihilationism simply
because we came to see that the Bible teaches annihilationism. It was biblical
study and not emotional response that motivated our move from belief in eternal
torment to belief in conditional immortality. When arguing against a view, we
should be careful not to assume wrong or
low motives on the part of those who hold the view.
I shared the reasons for my own move to annihilationism in a two
part sermon. You may view it on YouTube here:
Problem #3
Annihilationism is misrepresented as souls being snuffed out of existence
Dr. Zukeran: “annihilationism is the doctrine that the souls of
the wicked will be snuffed out of existence rather than being sent to a place
of everlasting conscious torment in hell” (2:10)
While the above statement could be defended as being true is a
very limited and narrow way, it is really misleading. Annihilationists like
myself believe the following:
1. The unrighteous will be raised in physical bodies to face
judgment (John 5:29).
2. Annihilation allows for any amount of finite suffering either
before finally perishing or in the process of perishing. This suffering will be
proportional to a person’s guilt in God’s eyes so that some people will suffer
more than others. The process of judgment and destruction will be terrifying
and will result in weeping and gnashing of teeth.
3. After a limited (but significant!) amount of conscious suffering,
the main and final penalty for sin is death. This second death involves the
destruction of both the body and soul. This penalty is permanent. It lasts
forever. It involves missing out on an eternity of joy with our Savior and
other saved people.
I have never heard any of my evangelical conditionalist friends
(and I know many) describe annihilation as simply souls being snuffed out of
existence. That language makes annihilationism sound like no big deal.
Annihilation is a very big deal.
If you want to read more about why annihilationism is a punishment
to be feared, you may read this blog post:
Problem #4
Underestimating the breadth and depth of the Biblical case for annihilationism
Dr. Zukeran: “there are
several scriptures that they point to” (2:39)
Dr. Zukeran, like many who defend eternal torment, does not appear
to be aware of the breadth and depth of the biblical case for annihilationism.
I realize he only had 25 minutes, but he could have said something like
“annihilationists claim many verses support their view, but we have time to
look at just a few examples.” Instead he implies that there are just “several”
verses we point to. The truth is that there is a wealth of biblical data that
supports annihilationism, from Genesis to Revelation. Here is a list of 58
texts which I have shared before as supporting annihilationism:
The above list is by no means exhaustive. In fact, I’m convinced
that almost all of the texts frequently quoted to support eternal torment, when
read in context and interpreted with proper exegesis, actually support
conditional immortality. The few that don’t fit in this category don’t really
favor either view.
The above verse list features in a ten minute explainer video
which you may view here:
In addition to the list in my video, the excellent group
Rethinking Hell (I’m a part of their ministry team) has a list of verses on the
topic of hell.
Problem #5 Claiming that Annihilationists believe the word
“perish” implies nothingness
Dr. Zukeran: “many annihilationists
believe that to perish implies a state of nothingness, that you no longer exist”
(4:55)
My response: This one is a little more subtle. I’ve heard this
basic misunderstanding many times before, so it is worth addressing. It is true
that conditionalists like myself see the word “perish” in many verses as
pointing towards annihilationism. For example, think about John 3:16:
For God loved the world in this way: He gave
his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but
have eternal life. (John 3:16 CSB17)
In John 3:16 Jesus gives the two possible
fates for each person who has ever lived: (1) believe in Him and have eternal
life or (2) perish. Both the common meaning of perish and the fact that
perishing is contrasted with having eternal life point towards annihilationism.
However, it is not true that that annihilationists (at least the
majority of those I interact with) think the word perish “implies nothingness.”
Instead, we think that perishing involves the loss of life. It is true that we
also believe that the unrighteous will be reduced to ashes, but this further
detail of being reduced to ashes is not something we believe because of the
word “perish,” but because of words in the Bible that mean being completely
burned up and turned to ashes. If you think of ashes as “nothingness,” then it
is accurate to say that I believe that those who perish eventually are reduced
to “nothingness.” But the word “perish” by itself does not mean “nothingness.”
Nor does it mean the loss of existence, although it certainly does mean the
loss of conscious existence (what we normally call “life”). In this present
age, when someone perishes a part of them, their soul, may continue to have
conscious existence. However, at the final judgment God will destroy both
the bodies and the souls of those He casts into hell (Matthew 10:28).
Therefore, every part of the person perishes in final judgment.
There’s more to this. We’ll discuss some of the Greek words used
to describe the fate of the unrighteous below.
Problem #6 Dr. Zukeran is
wrong about the meaning of olethros.
Dr. Zukeran: Referring to 2 Thessalonians 1:9, “. . . the term
destruction is the Greek word olethros.
Now the fundamental thought is not annihilation, not by any means, but
unavoidable distress and torment. That’s what it means there by destruction”
(5:45).
My response: Dr. Zukeran
does not give any linguistic evidence that olethros “is not
annihilation” nor that it means “unavoidable distress and torment.” The two
main types of evidence that could have been given to support his claim are
indirect evidence from Greek lexicons or direct evidence from sentences from
Greek manuscripts that use olethros in a way that makes the proposed
meaning obvious. I didn’t find “unavoidable distress and torment,” or even just
“distress and torment,” or even just “distress” or just “torment” in any of
several Greek lexicons I just checked for the definition of olethros. Perhaps
Dr. Zukeran was using a different Greek lexicon than the ones I checked. If so,
he didn’t tell us. I don’t know of any sentences from ancient Greek writings
where the meaning Dr. Zukeran proposes for olethros is obvious (and I’ve
studied this word extensively). On the other hand, “complete destruction” is a
definition found in lexicons (this definition is found in the Friberg Lexicon,
and similar definitions such as “utter ruin” and “destruction” are found in
other lexicons). Perhaps even more importantly, there are examples of an ancient
Greek author using olethros in a context where it is clear and
unambiguous that he was using this word to refer to annihilation of human souls
after death. Here are two such quotes from Plato. After each quote I have
included a link where the quote can be read in context in both English and the
original Greek:
But he might say that no one knows
beforehand the particular death and the particular dissolution of the body
which brings destruction (olethros)
to the soul, for none of us can perceive that.
Phaedo, 88b
And, Cebes, I believe, granted that
the soul is more lasting than the body, but said that no one could know that
the soul, after wearing out many bodies, did not at last perish (apollumi) itself
upon leaving the body; and that this was death—the destruction (olethros) of
the soul, since the body is continually being destroyed. Are those the points,
Simmias and Cebes, which we must consider?”
Phaedo, 91d
You may read an excellent, in depth, two part article on 2
Thessalonians 1:9 here: part 1 and part 2.
Problem #7 It is wrong to assume that eternal must refer to an
eternal process as opposed to an eternal result
Dr. Zukeran: Again, referring to 2 Thessalonians 1:9, “Everlasting
destruction would not be annihilation for annihilation takes but an instant and
it is soon over. If someone undergoes everlasting destruction than they have
everlasting existence. So, the term destruction here is speaking of everlasting
distress and torment” (6:03)
First, annihilationism does not require that “annihilation takes
but an instant.” The process may be prolonged and involve prolonged suffering.
More importantly, the phrase “eternal destruction” does not need to refer to a
process of destruction that goes on forever. A more likely and natural
interpretation is that “everlasting destruction” simply means a destruction
that once completed, lasts forever. Once destroyed, the unrighteous will never,
for all of eternity, be restored. This is an important teaching. God is capable
of restoring things that have been totally destroyed and He has promised to do
precisely this when He resurrects all human bodies, including those turned to
dust centuries ago or vaporized by nuclear bombs. However, God will never, for
all eternity, restore the destroyed bodies and souls of the unrighteous after
the final judgment.
You may read a helpful article related to this topic on the
Rethinking Hell website: The Meaning of Destruction in the Bible
Problem #8 Destroyed cars in a junkyard do not support the
doctrine of eternal torment
Dr. Zukeran: “Dr. Norman Geisler uses this illustration. The cars
in a junkyard have been destroyed, but they are not annihilated, they’re simply
beyond repair and unredeemable. That’s the same condition we find the people
who are in hell. They are in everlasting distress and torment. That’s what it
means when Paul says the unsaved are in a place of everlasting destruction”
(6:27)
Cars were never conscious to begin with, so when they are
destroyed, of course they do not lose consciousness. Further, the cars in the
junkyard are not experiencing any distress or torment. Finally, we need to
recognize that words have a range of meaning rather than one simple meaning.
Just browse through any dictionary and you will quickly see confirmation of
this fundamental characteristic of words. Just because a word like destruction
(or the Greek equivalent, olethros) can in some cases refer to a
situation that does not fit annihilationism does not mean that in other
contexts the word is not used to refer to annihilationism. In fact, we have
already shown that olethros was used by an ancient Greek writer to refer
to annihilationism (see problem #6, above).
Problem #9 When referring to the final fate of people, apoleia (and
its related verb, apollumi) is wrongly claimed to refer to being lost
and ruined while still existing as a conscious person
Dr. Zukeran: While discussing 2 Peter 3:7, he says: “Now the Greek
word for destruction in 2 Peter 3:7 is apoleia.
In the New Testament this word refers to the unsaved who instead of becoming
what they could have become all is lost and ruined. All the joy and meaning and
purpose that eternal life was ever meant to be is now lost and ruined” (7:20).
My response: Again, words have ranges of meaning. The precise
meaning that is applicable in any given sentence is determined by the context.
It is true that apoleia can mean lost or ruined when referring to coins,
wineskins, or sheep. But when referring to the people, by far the most common
meaning is the person perishing (passively) or being killed (actively). This
meaning supports annihilationism, yet we can get even more specific. Like olethros,
apollumi was used by Greek authors specifically to refer to the
annihilation of human souls. Here are a few examples:
They fear that when the soul leaves
the body it no longer exists anywhere, and that on the day when the man dies it
is destroyed and perishes (apollumi), and when it leaves the
body and departs from it, straightway it flies away and is no longer anywhere,
scattering like a breath or smoke. - Plato,
Phaedo, 70a
And they are discomposed when they
hear it said of any one, he is perished
(apollumi), or he is gone, or he
is no more - Plutarch, NonPosse, 26
“. . . for
God has not made us as sheep or beasts of burden, a mere by-work, and that we
should perish (apollumi) and be annihilated
(aphanizo).” – Athenagoras, Apology,
Chapter 31
I have two articles that show that the
same words that biblical authors repeatedly use to describe the final fate of
the unrighteous are used by other ancient Greek authors to refer to
annihilation. The quotes above are from these articles, which contain more
quotes and evidence. You may read the article here:
Problem #10 Mark 14:21 is treated as an annihilationist
proof text
Dr. Zukeran: “Now in Mark chapter 14, verse 21 Jesus states . . .”
(9:12)
Dr. Zukeran discusses Mark 14:21 in the category of the several
verses he says annihilationists point to in order to support our view. We
already pointed out in problem #4 that, like many traditionalists
(traditionalist is a term often used to refer to those who believe in eternal
torment), Dr. Zukeran appears to be unfamiliar with the breadth and depth of
the biblical case for annihilationism. This problem is compounded by the fact
that of the few annihilationist support texts he discusses, he includes Mark 14:21.
If you look back up in problem #4, you’ll notice that Mark 14:21 is not even on
my list of 58 texts that support annihilationism. Neither is it on the list of
48 annihilationist proof texts listed on the Rethinking Hell website (which,
despite being shorter than my list includes some verses which my list does
not). In fact, in over nine years of extensive reading and discussing on this
topic, I don’t remember a single time an annihilationist referred to Mark 14:21
as evidence for annihilationism over eternal torment. I think I remember it
being used to support annihilationism against universalism, but that’s a
different discussion. Like many traditionalists whom I’ve heard argue against
annihilationism, to me it sounds like Dr. Zukeran is not very familiar with the
arguments for the view that he is opposing. Given how little time he had to
address this, why not include one of the more popular annihilationist texts
like some I’ve mentioned above (Matthew 10:28 and John 3:16) or one of these:
CSB17 Genesis 3:22 The LORD God said,
"Since the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil, he must
not reach out, take from the tree of life, eat, and live forever."
CSB17 Matthew 7:13 "Enter through
the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the road broad that leads to
destruction, and there are many who go through it.
CSB17 2 Peter 2:6 and if he reduced
the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to ashes and condemned them to extinction,
making them an example of what is coming to the ungodly
Dear reader, before you reject or argue
against annihilationism, I urge you to spend some time reading and/or listening
at the Rethinking Hell Website, or looking at my own collection of
resources on this topic that are collected at Mark’s Resources on Hell.
Problem #11 The claim that passages like Psalm 37 do not teach
annihilationism is poorly supported
Dr. Zukeran: Speaking of verses like Psalm 37:20, he says “In the
proper context these verses do not teach annihilationism” (11:20).
My response: The only evidence Dr. Zukeran gives to support his
claim is examples where the Hebrew word abad, translated “perish” in
Psalm 37:20, means “lost.” While abad can indeed mean to be lost, as
when describing sheep that have gone astray, the word frequently means to
destroy (actively) or to perish (passively) in a way that fits well with
annihilationism. Here are some examples:
CSB17 Deuteronomy 11:4 what he did to
Egypt's army, its horses and chariots, when he made the water of the Red Sea
flow over them as they pursued you, and he destroyed them completely;
(abad is translated, “destroyed completely”)
CSB17 Jonah 1:6 The captain approached
him and said, "What are you doing sound asleep? Get up! Call to your god.
Maybe this god will consider us, and we won't perish (abad)."
Since abad can mean either to be lost
like sheep or to perish like men drowning in the sea, how do we know which
meaning was intended in verses like Psalm 37:20? Dr. Zukeran was correct when
he mentioned the importance of context. Look at all of Psalm 37:20:
CSB17 Psalm 37:20 But the wicked will
perish; the LORD 's enemies, like the glory of the pastures, will fade away--
they will fade away like smoke.
This verse tells us that the wicked will
perish (abad) and it also tells us that they will fade away like smoke
from a burned field. Does that sound to you more like being lost or being
annihilated? We should also look at the context of the entire psalm. Psalm 37
contains a list of parallel phrases describing the fate of the unrighteous:
It’s hard to imagine a list of phrases that would sound more like
annihilation!
You may read more about how Psalm 37 supports annihilationism
here: Psalm 37, A Song of Annihilation
Problem #12 An unsupported claim that the majority of biblical passages
support eternal conscious torment
Dr. Zukeran: “In fact, the
majority of biblical passages build a very strong case that indeed those who do
not know Jesus Christ will be eternally separated from Him in a conscious state
of torment forever and ever.” (11:34)
This claim simply is not true. If one went by Scriptures which,
based on a very simple, literal, straightforward reading, would appear to
support either eternal conscious torment or annihilationism, there are many
more verses that support annihilationism. There are no actual contradictions in
Scripture. The relatively few Scriptures that are claimed as support for
eternal torment, upon further study, either actually support annihilationism or
are neutral.
In addition to the resources listed so far, and those to come, below
are links to two good articles by Reese Watt where he looks at the weight of
biblical evidence. While supporters of eternal torment may want to move some of
the verses into different categories, Reese’s articles show that claims of
broad biblical support for eternal torment are not supported by a fair minded
review of biblical evidence.
Problem #13 The incorrect claim that eternal punishment requires
eternal conscious existence
Dr. Zukeran: Referring to Matthew 25:46, “To experience eternal
punishment, or eternal suffering, means one is in a state of conscious
existence.” (12:25)
My Response: Matthew 25:46 is one of a handful of verses
frequently claimed by traditionalists as proof that the unrighteous will
experience eternal conscious torment. Here is the verse:
CSB17 Matthew 25:46 "And they
will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal
life."
Like many others, Dr. Zukeran assumes that eternal punishment must
mean eternal suffering. However, he fails to notice that Jesus teaches that
only the righteous will have eternal life. If one does not live forever, one
cannot suffer forever. You must be alive to suffer. That’s common sense. What
then, does “eternal punishment” mean?
“Eternal punishment” is like “eternal judgment” (Hebrews 6:2).
Eternal judgment does not refer to a process of judging that goes on forever.
Rather, it refers to a judgment which, once complete, is permanent and has
eternal results. God will never change His mind after the final judgment.
Likewise, eternal punishment is not a process of punishing that goes on
forever, but rather a punishment which, once complete, is permanent and has
eternal results. Annihilation is an eternal punishment.
To read a more detailed discussion of Matthew 25:46, see this blog
post:
Problem #14 Annihilationists like myself agree that aiōnon
means everlasting
Dr. Zukeran: “the Greek word there [Matthew 25:46] is aiōnon
which literally means everlasting” (13:12)
My response: Like most others who teach annihilationism from an
evangelical prospective, I completely agree that aiōnon literally means
“eternal” or “everlasting.” Annihilationism is an everlasting punishment for
the simple reason that it lasts forever. While both annihilationism and eternal
torment qualify as eternal punishment, universalists have a big problem with
the phrase eternal punishment. Universalists, not annihilationists, are the
ones who frequently argue that aiōnon does not mean eternal. In fact, I
have written a three part blog series giving detailed linguistic evidence that aiōnon
means eternal. You may read it, starting with part 1, here:
Problem #15 The story about the rich man is poor support for
eternal torment
Dr. Zukeran: “In this
parable there is a dialog that goes on between the rich man and Father Abraham
showing you that after the physical death of the body the unsaved are in a
conscious state in eternal torment”
(15:15)
My response: It is true that in the parable of the rich man and
Lazarus the rich man is described as being in torment in flames and he is
obviously conscious. However, this is not relevant to the issue of what happens
to the unsaved at final judgment for the following reasons:
1. The parable is not about final judgment. The parable describes
what is called the “intermediate state.” It refers to a time in between when a
person dies on earth and when they are raised to face final judgment. It says
nothing at all about what will happen at the final judgment.
2. The rich man is depicted as being in “hades” which is not the
same place as hell (Greek: Gehenna). Hell (Gehenna) is where God will destroy
the bodies and souls of the unrighteous (Matthew 10:28). In fact, hades will
itself be thrown into the lake of fire (Revelation 20:14). So, what happens in
hades is not necessarily the same as what happens in hell.
3. The rich man is described as being in torment, and as an
annihilationist I have no problem with that. Jesus does not say the torment
will go on forever. There is a huge difference between torment and eternal
torment.
4. All of this assumes that the description of the rich man in
torment in Hades after death is literal. However, as Dr. Zukeran himself
acknowledges, this is a parable. Some elements of the parable are very likely
symbolic. But even if the whole story is completely literal, points 1-3 above
show that it still would not give any support for eternal torment because it is
not about the final, eternal state of the unrighteous.
Problem #16 It is wrong to think that the worms and fire are being
used to torment living people
Dr. Zukeran: Referring to Mark 9:43-48, he says “In other words,
Hell is a place that exists eternally and the unrighteous will go there to an
eternal existence” (16:30)
My response: Like Dr.
Zukeran, I used to assume that the worms and fire mentioned by Jesus in Mark 9
were being used to torment living people. But that was before I realized that
Jesus was quoting part of the last verse in Isaiah. Compare the two passages
ESV Mark 9:47-48
And if your eye causes you to sin, tear it out. It is better for you to enter
the kingdom of God with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into hell, 'where
their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched.'
ESV Isaiah 66:24 "And they shall
go out and look on the dead bodies of the men who have rebelled against
me. For their worm shall not die, their fire shall not be quenched, and
they shall be an abhorrence to all flesh." (Isa. 66:24 ESV)
The worms and fire are not tormenting living people. They are
consuming dead bodies. This makes sense because all throughout history there
have been two common ways that dead bodies are disposed of: either they are
eaten by worms and turned to dust, or they are burned with fire and turned to
ashes. This makes a lot more sense than using fire and worms to torture people
forever.
The “fire is not quenched” means that it cannot be put out by
anyone. But after the bodies are gone, it can go out on its own. If you
returned home one day to find your house burned to the ground and surrounded by
fire engines, you would not agree if the fire chief said, “We succeeded in
quenching the fire” (I heard this helpful example from Chris Date). The fire
going out after there is nothing left to burn is not the same as it being
intentionally quenched. Likewise, the worms will not die until their job of
turning dead bodies to dust is complete. “Not die” is not the same as “never
die.”
#17 The souls and bodies of the unrighteous do not have different
fates
Dr. Zukeran (referring to Luke 12:4-5)
18:06 “the soul goes on to exist in an eternal state separate from
the body”
and
18:20 “Jesus is warning that there’s an immaterial part of us, the
soul, that exists beyond the death of the body in an eternal state which can be
thrown into hell which is everlasting. The body dies once and Jesus says there
is nothing more that can be done, but the suffering of the soul in hell, that
lasts for eternity. That’s why Jesus says in contrast to the body that once it’s
dead it’s over, fear the one who can bring you to judgment and cast your soul
in hell where that is everlasting torment”
My response: While discussing Luke 12:4-5, Dr. Zukeran speaks as
if the souls of the unrighteous will have a different eternal condition from
their bodies. I’m not sure he actually believes this, but that’s what it sounds
like from the quotes above. Here is what Luke 12:4-5 says:
ESV Luke 12:4-5 "I tell you, my
friends, do not fear those who kill the body, and after that have nothing more
that they can do.But I will warn you whom to fear: fear him who, after he has
killed, has authority to cast into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him!
This passage tells us that God will throw
people into hell, but it does not tell us what He will do to them there. It
does not tell us that their soul will exist in “an eternal state separate from
the body” nor that your soul in hell will experience everlasting torment.
However, in a similar passage in Matthew, Jesus gives us more information:
ESV Matthew 10:28 And do not fear those
who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy
both soul and body in hell.
There are two important facts to notice. First, the same thing
will happen to both the body and the soul of anyone who is cast into hell.
Second, what happens to the body and soul is not everlasting torment. Rather,
the body and soul are destroyed in hell. The Greek word for destroy here is apollumi,
which was discussed above in problem #9.
Problem #18 It is wrong to take Revelation 20:10 literally and
apply it to the unrighteous
Dr. Zukeran, speaking of Revelation 20:10: “so the lake of fire is
a place where the unrighteous are thrown and they will be tormented there day
and night forever and ever”
My response: The book of Revelation consists of visions from God
that use symbols and images to communicate His truth. Some of these images are
shocking and bizarre, like seven-headed monsters and a prostitute drunk with
the blood of Christians. Some of the things John sees in the visions from God
are literal, but the visions also contain many symbolic elements. Most
evangelical commentators on Revelation do not expect there to be a literal
seven headed monster in the future, nor a literal prostitute drunk with blood.
But how do we know which parts of John’s symbol laden visions are symbolic and
which are literal? Well, sometimes the meaning of a symbol is revealed to John.
Here are two examples:
It’s easy to see the pattern. John sees something in a vision.
What he sees is a symbol that refers to something we are already familiar with.
The same pattern occurs with the lake of fire. Dr. Zukeran quotes part of
Revelation 20:15, but he leaves off the part of the verse where the literal
meaning of the lake of fire is stated. Dr. Zukeran said, “And in verse 15 of
chapter 20 it states ‘. . . and if anyone’s name was not found written in the
book of life he was also thrown into the lake of fire’ which in verse 10 John
said is a place of torment” (20:00). Reading the rest of the verse shows that
the vision of the lake of fire is symbolic and that what literally happens is
that the unrighteous die a second time:
I’ve provided much more detail backing up an annihilationist
interpretation of Revelation 20 in a blog post here:
#20 A second broad claim that the weight of Biblical evidence
supports eternal torment is unsupported
Dr. Zukeran: “the weight of the biblical passages in the Bible
from Old to New Testament teach that the unrighteous are in a state of
conscious existence eternally suffering torment in hell” (20:43)
My response: Problem #20 is similar to problem # 12, but here Dr.
Zukeran specifically mentions the Old Testament. Yet there is no verse in the
entire Old Testament that mentions eternal torment. This fact creates a major
problem because God Himself gave us a principle of fair warning. When
administering justice, it is best to warn people ahead of time what the
consequences of their sins will be. There are
warnings in the Old Testament, beginning in the early chapters of
Genesis, that fit annihilationism very well. But there is nothing that fits
eternal torment. That means that if eternal torment is true then for more than
half of human history there was no warning of the main punishment for sin, a
punishment so terrible and severe that every other punishment is insignificant
in comparison.
To read about this biblical principle of fair warning and how it
applies to the nature of hell, you may go to this blog post:
Problem #21 A major theological argument for annihilationism is
not mentioned
Dr. Zukeran: Referring to philosophical arguments for
annihilationism, he says “mainly there are three” (21:12).
My response: Given his limited time, it is understandable that Dr.
Zukeran could not address all arguments for annihilationism (there are so many
good ones!). What he calls philosophical arguments could also be called broad
theological arguments. These are arguments that instead of depending on direct
statements in specific verses pointing to annihilationism (we’ve already seen a
lot of these), depend on looking at how annihilationism or eternal torment
harmonize with broad theological truths drawn from the Bible. He mentions
three, but he leaves out an important one.
The argument he left out states that annihilationism is a much
better fit for the doctrine of substitutionary atonement than is eternal
torment. Jesus bore the penalty for our sins on the cross. The Bible places
special emphasis on what happened to His body as the payment for our sins:
CSB17 Colossians 1:22 But now he has
reconciled you by his physical body through his death, to present you
holy, faultless, and blameless before him—
The physical body of Christ experience a
severe but limited time of suffering and then died. When His body died, His
body was no longer conscious until it was resurrected out of death. After the
second death, the unrighteous will never again be resurrected. Like what Jesus
experienced as our substitute, annihilationism involves a limited time of
conscious suffering that ends in death. However, if eternal torment is correct,
then the unrighteous do not die at final judgment in the same way that Jesus
died. In both the case of annihilationism and eternal torment, the penalty
Christ experienced for our sins is different in so far as it is not permanent.
It is reversed by resurrection. However, the Bible emphasizes that Jesus died
for our sins, and His death was a very physical death. But this type of
physical death is precisely what will never happen to the unrighteous after
judgment if eternal torment is correct. Thus, annihilationism harmonizes with
the foundational Christian doctrine of substitutionary atonement far better
than eternal torment does. We should also keep in mind the many thousands of
animals that were killed (not tormented) as a picture of substitutionary
sacrifice throughout the Old Testament.
You may read more about this here: What does the Bible mean by death?
Problem #22 The strength of the biblical case for proportional
justice is not recognized
Dr. Zukeran: Referring to philosophical arguments for
annihilationism, he states, “the first one is that eternal punishment violates
God’s justice” (21:18).
My response: I’ll respond to the four counterarguments from Dr.
Norman Geisler that Dr. Zukeran references in problems #23 and #24 below. First,
I want to point out that the nature of God’s justice is indeed a very strong
argument against eternal torment. The principle of proportional justice is not
something that originated in human minds, but in God’s revealed will. It is God
who taught that:
CSB17 Exodus
21:23-25 If there is an injury, then you must give life for life, eye for
eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, bruise for
bruise, wound for wound.
And in the New Testament we are told that God
will “repay each person according to what they have done” (Romans 2:6). What
human has ever caused God eternal torment? Eternal torment for sins committed
in a short human life is grossly and obviously unjust.
To read more on this issue, see: What is the Second Death? Part 5, Eye for Eye
Problem #23 There’s no reason God should allow people to continue
to sin forever
Dr. Zukeran: Giving the first two reasons that Dr. Norman Geisler
provides to justify eternal torment, Dr. Zukeran says, “First, eternal punishment is inflicted on a
sinner who does not repent and since he continues in his sin up to death and on
into eternity he is reasonably punished by God forever” (22:07) and
“Second, no sin is acceptable as long as
God exists and God is eternal, hence punishment for sin must also be eternal”
(22:14).
The argument that God keeps punishing sinners forever because they
keep sinning in hell forever might sound plausible except for two facts. First,
there is simply no good reason for God to allow them to continue to sin
forever. As soon as their annihilation is complete there will be no more sin.
Secondly, the Bible indicates that God will judge people for sins committed in
this lifetime. This is indicated by the fact that books are opened which
contain their recorded sins and their judgment is based on what is written in these books (also, see 2
Corinthians 5:10). The Bible says nothing at all about continued sins in hell
being continually judged.
Problem #24 Neither the Bible nor logic teaches that because sins
are committed against an infinite, timeless God they should be punished by
eternal torment
Dr. Zukeran: Referring to Dr. Geisler’s third and fourth
justifications for eternal torment, he says “Sin against an infinite God is an
infinitely wicked sin and worthy of infinite punishment” (22:40) and “only
eternal punishment will suffice for sins against the eternal God” (22:50).
My reply: It’s true that who we sin against does matter and it is
true that sinning against our great God, our Creator and Lord, is very serious
and results in serious consequences. However, just because God may be
considered infinite and timeless does not mean that people who sin against Him
deserve infinite, timeless punishment. The Bible never says anything like that.
Who one sins against is not the only factor considered in determining the
punishment. A factor that the Bible specifically teaches is taken into account
is the amount of knowledge or ignorance a sinner has:
Luke 12:47-48a
And that servant who knew his master's will and didn't prepare himself or do it
will be severely beaten. But the one who did not know and did what deserved
punishment will receive a light beating.
Since no human even begins to fully comprehend our infinite God,
this principle would seem to imply that no person deserves infinite punishment.
Further, Jesus specifically teaches that some will receive a “light beating.”
How could this refer to eternal torment? Even if in some sense people do
deserve an infinite punishment, in a way annihilationism is an infinite
punishment if one measures the punishment by how much is lost (an infinite amount
of joy during eternity with God) rather than by how much pain one experiences.
Rather then trying to weigh out these factors ourselves, we should trust what
God says about the unrighteous perishing (John 3:16) and being burned to ashes
(2 Peter 2:6).
To read a more in depth analysis of the “sin against an infinite
God requires eternal torment” argument, here are two articles at Rethinking
Hell, the first by Joseph Dear, and the second by myself:
Problem #25 The two annihilationist arguments that he didn’t get
to are good arguments!
Dr. Zukeran: He mentioned these two philosophical arguments, but
due to the time limit on his broadcast he did not have a chance to discuss
them. (1) “eternal punishment violates
God’s mercy” and (2) “eternal punishment violates the universal nature of God’s
victory.”
My response: Instead of saying that eternal torment violates God’s
mercy, I would say it does not appear to be consistent with his goodness. While
God is indeed incredibly merciful, it’s not obvious to me that He will be
showing mercy on judgment day to the unrighteous who rejected His love and
salvation. However, everything God does is good, and while justice is good, as
pointed out above torturing people forever is not consistent with justice. The second argument Dr. Zukeran mentioned but
didn’t get to time to discuss is also quite strong in favor of annihilationism.
The Bible teaches that God’s great purpose is to unite all things in Christ
(Ephesians 1:10). Evil is completely eliminated if annihilationism is true (and
it is!), but if the eternal torment view were correct, evil would continue to
exist forever, and some things would continue to exist which would never be
united with Christ.
You may read a little more about these philosophical arguments
(plus an overview of other annihilationist arguments) here:
Conclusion
The
first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
(Prov.
18:17 CSB17)
Many Christians, including myself, grew up hearing only the eternal
torment view of hell. If one already believes in eternal torment I can see how
a presentation against annihilationism like Dr. Zukeran’s might reinforce their
belief in eternal torment. Thankfully, more and more Christians are taking a serious
look at the biblical case for annihilationism/conditional immortality. And many
are becoming convinced by the biblical evidence that the Bible does not teach eternal
torment for the unrighteous. Rather, it teaches that those who believe in Jesus
will live forever, and everyone else will not live forever.
Having pointed out what I view as 25 problems with Dr. Zukeran’s
argument against annihilationism, there is a risk that you might think I don’t
respect him or value his ministry. Not true! Of course, I disagree with his
arguments against annihilationism, but as mentioned above I thank God for Dr.
Zukeran’s ministry and pray that God will continue to bless and equip people
through it. As I glanced through some of his material on other topics, I
thought that if I had time I could probably write a post on 25 thousand points
where we agree!
One of the things we apparently agree on is that this issue,
namely the nature of hell and final punishment, is important to a lot of people
and worth discussing. May God bless and guide us as we study His Word and seek
His truth together.
Note: I sent a draft of this blog post to Dr. Zukeran a few days
before posting it. I would be delighted to discuss this topic with him or
anyone associated with his ministry.
Note 2: This post has been updated with minor spelling/grammatical corrections.
Hebrews 13:16 And do not forget to do good and to share with others . . .
No comments:
Post a Comment