Conditional Immortality - Biblical Proof of Annihaliation in Hell by Douglas B. - HTML preview

Chapter 10

Questions and MAJOR problems for those who hold to

the eternal torment position .

Scripture says that God has put His standards in man's conscience and calls us to reason together with Him (Isaiah 1:18). So does the traditional view of the lost, as eternal conscious torment, fit the bill? Does it pass the test of scripture? Assuredly it does not.

CS Lewis wrote, "There is no doctrine I would more willingly remove from Christianity than [hell], if it lay in my power…" (C..S. Lewis, The Problem of Pain (London: Geoffrey Bles, 1940), p. 118.) C.S. Lewis recognized the moral repulsion he faced when looking at the traditional view. "We are told that it is a detestable doctrine and indeed, I too detest it from the bottom of my heart..." .(ibid. p. 118.) Why don't many more see it? Sadly, it seems like some authors will find heaven less pleasurable if they don't gain pleasure from watching the lost suffer. Case in point "…their torment shall ascend up in the sight of

the blessed forever and serve as a most clear

glass always before their eyes to give them a

constant, bright, and most affecting view... This

display of the divine character and glory will be

in favor of the redeemed, and most entertain-

ing, and give the highest pleasure to those

who love God, and raise their happiness to in-

effable heights. Should this eternal punishment

and this fire be extinguished, it would in a great

measure obscure the light of heaven and put

an end to a great part of the happiness and

glory of the blessed.”

53

What kind of sick man could get the highest

pleasure from seeing a cruel God doing his

cruel work on billions and even on many he

knows and loves? He makes the saints in

Heaven be deprived of qualities God has given

to us, sympathy, pity, love for others, caring for

others; and made them to be cruel monsters

that delight in the pain of others, and loves to

hear the groans of those they now love, and

the groans of the countless millions of the lost.

(Quoting Samuel Hopkins "The works of Samuel

Hopkins, p. 458 in The Resurrection and Immortal-

ity, William West, Xulon Press, 2006, p. 313)

Sadly, there is much, much more in traditional theological literature which has ridiculous statements like those of Samuel Hoskins. They say we will get pleasure from seeing the wicked suffer, God says the exact opposite. "For I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, saith the Lord GOD." (Ezekiel 18:32).

At least popular Christian author Max Lucado rightfully and publicly states that if he is wrong about this issue (eternal torment for the lost), "I'll celebrate my misreading of his words" on the last day. (3:16 Numbers of Hope, Max Lucado, Thomas Nelson Publishers, p.96 ) His heart is in the right place, although he still holds to eternal torture. So why do some Christians seem so upset if the lost are not tortured forever?

But that is not the only problem with the eternal torment view. Consider the following....

1) How is this justice?

How can we read about a God who says over and over again in scripture that he is "Just" and wants fairness among his people; commands an "eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth" and then Himself tortures these same people mercilessly for

54

not tens of years, not hundreds of years, not millions or years, not billions of years, not trillions of years, not eons, but eternity. A sinner on this earth living for a millisecond of time, (in comparison to eternity) being tortured for eons and eons of time is not justice.

God has been made so cruel, and this doctrine

is so unthinkable that it has probably created

more atheists, and caused more weak believ-

ers to fall away than any other false teaching.

The dread of Hell has caused misery and men-

tal anguish to countless millions and instead of

the horror of hell turning many to God.... many

millions have been turned away from such an

unjust God. (The Resurrection and Immortality,

William West, Xulon Press, 2006, p. 313

www.jewishnotgreek.com/Robertwr.pdf for more in-

formation)

Clark H. Pinnock picks up on this theme as well...

Let me say at the outset that I consider the

concept of hell as endless torment in body and

mind an outrageous doctrine, a theological and

moral enormity, a bad doctrine of the tradition

which needs to be changed. How can

Christians possibly project a deity of such

cruelty and vindictiveness whose ways include

inflicting everlasting torture upon His creatures,

however sinful they may have been? Surely a

God who would do such a thing is more nearly

like Satan than like God, at least by any

ordinary moral standards, and by the gospel

itself. How can we possibly preach that God

has so arranged things that a number of his

creatures (perhaps a large number

predestined to that fate) will undergo (in a state

of complete consciousness) physical and

mental agony through unending time? Is this

55

not a most disturbing concept which needs

some second thoughts? Surely the God and

Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is no fiend;

torturing people without end is not what our

God does. Does the one who told us to love

our enemies intend to wreak vengeance on his

own enemies for all eternity? As H. KŸng

appropriately asks, "What would we think of a

human being who satisfied his thirst for

revenge so implacably and insatiably?" (The

Destruction of the Finally Impenitent by Clark H.

Pinnock McMaster Divinity College Hamilton,

Ontario, Canada) See:

www.jewishnotgreek.com/Pinnockarticle.pdf

Television evangelist, Dr. David Regan, of the Lamb & Lion Ministries (a former believer in eternal torment) also picks up on this theme on the pages of his Lamplighter magazine....

My first difficulty with the traditional view is that

it seems to impugn the character of God. I kept

asking myself, "How could a God of grace,

mercy and love torment the vast majority of

humanity eternally?" It did not seem to me

to be either loving or just. I realize He is a

God of righteousness, holiness and justice, but

is eternal suffering justice? The concept of

eternal torment seems to convert the true God

of justice into a cosmic sadist. (The Reality of

Hell, Dr. David R. Reagan, Lamplighter maga-

zine March 2006 Lamb & Lion Ministries -

McKinney, TX)

2) If eternal torment is true, it really means abortion is

ultimately a good thing.

There ultimately is no getting around this point. Sadly, untold millions have been aborted in recent history. Surely many

56

babies underwent conscious pain as they were forcibly extracted and suctioned out of the womb. Those who are familiar with the pro-life movement are rightfully horrified by the pictures of aborted little children (yes, they are children.) Most conservative theologians would rightfully place these little ones in heaven for eternity.

However, consider the alternative. If millions of these aborted precious little ones were left to go to full term and then birth, ALL would grow up to be sinners, and the majority would probably never accept Jesus as adults. Jesus Himself said most people would never find the way, "Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it.” (Matthew 7:13).

Therefore, the majority of these people (if left to full term) would be tormented forever. That means if there is a choice of momentary pain for them (abortion) or eternal torture facing them, then abortion would be best. This point needs to be repeated over and over again. Those who consider themselves "pro-life" really need to reconsider the logic of their positions if they believe in eternal torture.

Look what a curious person wrote to a website on this issue...

What happens to aborted babies? I heard a

preacher on the radio say that they go to heaven

and grow to adulthood and become the person

they should have been. If that is so, abortionists

apparently have been responsible for the salvation

of more people than most evangelists combined.

Though they meant it for harm, it turned out for

good. If most people go to hell, how can we

complain if aborted babies bypass this life of

carnal sinful flesh and go directly to heaven...? -

Stan

If eternal torment is true, then he is correct - abortion is best.

57

But if it's not true (and it's not) – then PRO-LIFE is best! God is pro-life!

3) Why would God choose the words like "destroy,

destruction, perish, death" to signify something other

than their plain meaning?

* Psalm 92:7 ...................shall be destroyed forever .... * Psalm 1: 6 ....................but the way of the ungodly shall perish * Matthew 10:28 ..............rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell

* John 3:16 .....................whosoever believeth in him should not perish (Greek: destroyed)

* Romans 6:23 ................For the wages of sin is death… * James 4:12 ....................There is one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy * Philippians 3:19 .............Whose end is destruction * 2 Thessalonians 1:9 ........Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction * Hebrews 10:39 ...............But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition (Greek: destruction); but of them that believe to the saving of the soul * Revelation 20:14 ..............This is the second death.

Is God trying to intentionally deceive us by using words that have a different meaning than what their plain meaning is? Isn't this a basic rule of hermeneutics? The literal meaning is the first meaning used unless context declares otherwise. Don't you have to redefine every single one of these words in order to get eternal torment as the final fate of the unsaved?

Again, William West summarizes this point beautifully when he states....

The present definitions of words must be de-

stroyed and new definitions given. The new

definitions end up being the opposite of the old

58

definition, death is no longer death; it is eternal

life in Hell. No other book in the world uses

these words this way. Did God use words in a

way that would be a deliberate misleading of

mankind? They are not used with these mean-

ing in our everyday language. When we say

anything, a plant, animal or person is dead, we

do not mean that plant, animal or person is

alive and being tormented.

Death (and destruction) must be made to

mean one thing when it is a plant or animal

that is dead and another when it is a person

that is dead. I somehow missed the revelation

by which they know this. Where is the book,