Rethinking Hell (Annihilationism vs ECT)

[Reformed Sojourner]

Rethinking Hell is a ministry that advocates for conditional immortality/annihilationism, in contrast to the traditional view of Hell as eternal conscious torment. They hold that only the elect will receive the reward of immortality, while the non-elect will ultimately be completely destroyed. I subscribe to the traditional, confessional view, but Rethinking Hell would say there is a biblical basis for their view as well. Out of curiosity, what evidence do you all see for and/or against their view?

 

[MW]

This is a confessional board, so I would suppose the confessional position of eternal torment is the only one to be espoused on here. There would not be any liberty afforded to conditional immortality or annihilationism.

 

[MyCrows]

I hold to the confessional understanding of God's justice.

I wonder who these guys suppose they are helping with their ministry. Those who will be eternally lost? Softening the blow of sin and judgment does not help sinners in need of salvation. It merely comforts them with a false hope that God's justice "isn't as bad as some people claim."

 

[pianoviolin]

The Scriptural evidence is overwhelmingly in support of eternal conscious torment. (Although, I will concede that a tenuous - though unconvincing - case can be made for a temporal hell). Furthermore, the confessions of most major churches (not just the Reformed) affirm an eternal hell, as do most traditions. The 2nd Temple Jewish understanding of gehenna was an eternal hell, as seen in the Talmud, Berakhot 28b verses 8-9:

A similar story is told about Rabbi Eliezer’s mentor, Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai: When Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Zakkai fell ill his students entered to visit him. When he saw them, he began to cry. His students said to him: Lamp of Israel, the right pillar, the mighty hammer, the man whose life’s work is the foundation of the future of the Jewish people, for what reason are you crying? With a life as complete as yours, what is upsetting you?

He said to them: I cry in fear of heavenly judgment, as the judgment of the heavenly court is unlike the judgment of man. If they were leading me before a flesh and blood king whose life is temporal, who is here today and dead in the grave tomorrow; if he is angry with me, his anger is not eternal and, consequently, his punishment is not eternal; if he incarcerates me, his incarceration is not an eternal incarceration, as I might maintain my hope that I would ultimately be freed. If he kills me, his killing is not for eternity, as there is life after any death that he might decree. Moreover, I am able to appease him with words and even bribe him with money, and even so I would cry when standing before royal judgment. Now that they are leading me before the supreme King of Kings, the Holy One, Blessed be He, Who lives and endures forever and all time; if He is angry with me, His anger is eternal; if He incarcerates me, His incarceration is an eternal incarceration; and if He kills me, His killing is for eternity. I am unable to appease Him with words and bribe him with money. Moreover, but I have two paths before me, one of the Garden of Eden and one of Gehenna, and I do not know on which they are leading me; and will I not cry?

If the Pharisees were wrong about hell, Jesus would have certainly corrected them.

When we look at theology systematically, especially in light of the atonement, the case for ECT becomes even stronger.

If one (for whatever reason) is undecided on this question, I would be inclined to always be more conservative and affirm an eternal hell rather than the opposite. Theoretically, if someone holds to ECT but conditional immortality/temporary punishment ends up being "true", that is much better than someone holding to annihilationism and ECT being true. Not that theory should inform our theology, no. But people promoting this doctrine must understand the stakes here. It is better to take the justice of God more seriously than not! If Tim Keller can affirm hell, you can too.

 

[Reformed Sojourner]

I hold to the WCF without exception. I suppose if someone on this board were to advocate for annihilationism then they’d take exception with at least the portion of WCF relevant to this matter.
[automerge]1746497089[/automerge]

I hold to the confessional understanding of God's justice.

I wonder who these guys suppose they are helping with their ministry. Those who will be eternally lost? Softening the blow of sin and judgment does not help sinners in need of salvation. It merely comforts them with a false hope that God's justice "isn't as bad as some people claim."

I’ve seen arguments suggesting their view can still effectively help sinners in need of salvation, but frankly, it’s not a strong case.

 

[Northern Crofter]

conditional immortality/annihilationism... that only the elect will receive the reward of immortality, while the non-elect will ultimately be completely destroyed.

A major flaw with this view (and other manmade concepts regarding eternity such as purgatory) is that it relies on a concept of time which does not exist in eternity. There is neither sun nor night in heaven. The worm never dies and fire never goes out in hell. There is no progression of time like in this present world - the beginning of the eternal state is the end of time as we know it.

 

[MW]

I’ve seen arguments suggesting their view can still effectively help sinners in need of salvation, but frankly, it’s not a strong case.

It raises the question, Salvation from what? The atheists and agnostics I know are quite content with the idea of annihilation, which is itself a strong indication as to where the idea originates from -- a wish that it were so. It is certainly not from the eternal God who made man to glorify God and enjoy Him for ever.

 

[pianoviolin]

A major flaw with this view (and other manmade concepts regarding eternity such as purgatory) is that it relies on a concept of time which does not exist in eternity. There is neither sun nor night in heaven. The worm never dies and fire never goes out in hell. There is no progression of time like in this present world - the beginning of the eternal state is the end of time as we know it.

I've never heard of this perspective. I always thought time continued as normal (forever) in both heaven and hell. On a more positive note, will believers be given tasks to carry out in heaven? Will we be playing a role building God's kingdom, having jobs, houses, etc. in heaven?

 

[Jerusalem Blade]

Hello Jacob, here's an article from Christianity Today by Anthony Hoekema
"Heaven: Not Just an Eternal Day Off: As if anticipating the question, Will life on the new earth be boring? the Bible points to much activity there."

I think this will speak to your question, "On a more positive note, will believers be given tasks to carry out in heaven? Will we be playing a role building God's kingdom, having jobs, houses, etc. in heaven?"

 

[John Nyberg]

I find the view of hell as purgatory for unbelievers far more convincing than anihilationism. The finest work I ever read about this view is Macdonald's "Lilith". Lilith is a prolonged fantasy regarding Macdonalds philosophy of am ultimate universalism in which every sinner is eventually saved from Hells torments (it takes longer for some than others).

While I cannot go along with Macdonald in universalism, I do not believe that anyone states the universalist case better.

C.S. Lewis (who loved George Macdonald) handily defeats universalism in his short story "The Great Divorce." Lewis is quite stunning in this book and I think at his very best philosophically

 

[pianoviolin]

I find the view of hell as purgatory for unbelievers far more convincing than anihilationism.

I agree with this statement, although some annihilationists would hold to this view of temporal hell for non-believers. I don't hold to this view though given the overwhelming Scriptural, confessional, patristic, and systematic reasons to hold to ECT. I am not holding to this doctrine lightly or flippantly, nor do I have a real desire for anyone to perish. It is one thing understand of oneself being a hell-deserving sinner, and another to look up the people around you - your friends, relatives, family members - and the world at-large lost and in need of a shepherd.

For if we sinful human beings feel this way, how much more does Christ himself who had compassion on the multitudes (Matthew 9:36) and lamented:

O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you were not willing! Matthew 23:37

Or in the Old Testament:

Say to them, As I live, declares the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live; turn back, turn back from your evil ways, for why will you die, O house of Israel? Ezekiel 33:11

Not to say that there isn't a sense in which God delights in his righteous justice being satisfied, or in which God is angry at sinners all day.
But we would do well to respect the severity of hell by not discussing these issues in a flippant or exaggerated manner, which I see from time to time in Reformed/Calvinistic circles regarding salvation, hell, election, predestination, etc., forgetting that God has created human beings as essentially good and that man's sinfulness, properly speaking, is non-essential to the human nature.

I resonate greatly with this prayer from the Book of Common Prayer (1662):

O merciful God, who hast made all men, and hatest nothing that thou hast made, nor desirest the death of a sinner, but rather that he should be converted and live: Have mercy upon all Jews, Muslims, unbelievers, and heretics, and take from them all ignorance, hardness of heart, and contempt of thy word; and so fetch them home, blessed Lord, to thy flock, that they may be saved among the remnant of the true Israelites, and be made one fold under one shepherd, Jesus Christ our Lord, who liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Spirit, one God, world without end. Amen.

 

[MW]

Not to say that there isn't a sense in which God delights in his righteous justice being satisfied, or in which God is angry at sinners all day.

It is not a "sense." It is the reality of hell. God is glorified in the eternal punishment of reprobate sinners.

I resonate greatly with this prayer from the Book of Common Prayer (1662):

The BCP contradicts the plain statements of Scripture. Ps. 5:5, "thou hatest all workers of iniquity." Ps. 11:5, "The LORD trieth the righteous: but the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth." The second one is emphatic, as Scripture uses "soul" when it describes what is done with a person's whole being.

 

[pianoviolin]

It is not a "sense." It is the reality of hell. God is glorified in the eternal punishment of reprobate sinners.



The BCP contradicts the plain statements of Scripture. Ps. 5:5, "thou hatest all workers of iniquity." Ps. 11:5, "The LORD trieth the righteous: but the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth." The second one is emphatic, as Scripture uses "soul" when it describes what is done with a person's whole being.

Is there not tension between God's hatred for the wicked and his desire that all men should repent? Of course God hates all those who are in hell, otherwise hell wouldn't make sense. I am just an undergrad studying computer science so forgive me if I don't know all the ins-and-outs of systematic theology.

Maybe this is not the main discussion, but I am curious to know what your thoughts are on the free/well-meant offer of the gospel and if there is any tension between what some call God's decretive vs. preceptive will. What does it mean for Jesus to cry over Jerusalem? Can John 3:16 refer to all men, not just all kinds of men? Or is this all a mystery, as the Lutherans say?

 

[MW]

Maybe this is not the main discuss, but I am curious to know what your thoughts are on the free/well-meant offer of the gospel and if there is any tension between what some call God's decretive vs. preceptive will. What does it mean for Jesus to cry over Jerusalem? Can John 3:16 refer to all men, not just all kinds of men? Or is this all a mystery, as the Lutherans say?

See my review here:

http://www.thebluebanner.com/pdf/bluebanner9-10&12.pdf

 

[Sovereign Grace]

Rethinking Hell is a ministry that advocates for conditional immortality/annihilationism, in contrast to the traditional view of Hell as eternal conscious torment. They hold that only the elect will receive the reward of immortality, while the non-elect will ultimately be completely destroyed. I continue to subscribe to the traditional view, but there does seem to be biblical basis for the view held by Rethinking Hell as well. What view do you gentleman subscribe to and why, and what evidence do you all see for and/or against the contrasting view?

I hold to the view held by both the 1646 & 1689 and that is the only correct view. When ppl have an unbiblical view of God, it automatically leads to an unbiblical view of man. Those who oppose ECT think that God would be cruel to punish ppl for an eternity over their sins, and that is based upon an unbiblical view of man, which leads to an unbiblical view of God. As Dr. James White once said, ppl in the lake of fire do not cease to sin, but their sin is evergoing, so will their punishment, and I obviously paraphrased that quote.

 

[pianoviolin]

See my review here:

http://www.thebluebanner.com/pdf/bluebanner9-10&12.pdf

I will take a look at this, thank you.

While I hold to ECT and the doctrines of grace, it bears a great burden on my heart the lostness and the condition of many of the people around me. Although I come from a family of believers, my high school had less than 5% believing Christians. Where I currently attend school, there are relatively few believers and few of my friends are believers. It pains me to see my generation so lost. The whole creation is groaning, every aspect of society is being perverted, and relations between the sexes have significantly worsened. The institutions are corrupt, social trust is at an all-time low, and many people are hostile to Christianity in a way not seen before. Yet there is a sizable amount of people searching for the truth (not always in the true sense), but many have a zeal without knowledge and this portion of people interested in Christianity is relatively small where I live.

This has always been the crux of my theological struggles with the kinds of strict particularism - in this light, it's not surprising to see the rise of moderate / classical Calvinism and hypothetical universalism (of the English divines/John Davenant) among Gen-Z. There are times when I need to take a step back into child-like faith and not look into the hidden decrees of God, according to Isaiah 55:9. Regardless, I must trust in His promises and His character, knowing that He will work all things together for good to those who love Him.

Let us pray earnestly for revival in this country and among this generation, that many may taste of the goodness of God and dwell in the House of the Lord forever. I wish the Puritan Board could focus more on national and generational repentance, lifting up our cities, our nations, and this generation in prayer, crying out the name of our Lord Jesus.

 

[MW]

This has always been the crux of my theological struggles with the kinds of strict particularism - in this light, it's not surprising to see the rise of moderate / classical Calvinism and hypothetical universalism (of the English divines/John Davenant) among Gen-Z. There are times when I need to take a step back into child-like faith and not look into the hidden decrees of God, according to Isaiah 55:9. Regardless, I must trust in His promises and His character, knowing that He will work all things together for good to those who love Him.

I think you have diagnosed that correctly. It is good to have compassion on the lost. Modified Calvinism has a certain "feel" about it that seems to reflect that compassion. But in the end our compassion saves nobody. It is effete, as with all human sentimentality. Sovereign, particular grace actually saves sinners. This is the hope to be held forth to the lost. Although the decree of God is hidden as to the particular individuals He has chosen to save, the sovereign purpose of salvation itself is clearly revealed in the Word so that we might stand upon it and trust in the Lord with all our heart even when it goes against our natural understanding.

 

[pianoviolin]

I will take a look at this, thank you.

I skimmed over this (have schoolwork to complete, will look into more deeply), it was a very hard read. I see that you reject the free offer of the gospel that the OPC reported at the 1948 GA and in Murray's book The Free Offer of the Gospel with a new (relatively) preface by R. Scott Clark. It seems that thinking about these ideas will drive a man crazy.

As someone who has recently benefited much from R. Scott Clark, the Heidelblog, looking to Christ as the object of our salvation, "guilt, grace, and gratitude", and the law-gospel distinction (as expressed by RSC, Michael Horton, and in a similar - though not identical sense - Dr. Jordan B. Cooper who is a wonderful Lutheran theologian and commentator), this is some food for thought I will return to later as I study marrow theology and what it means on a personal level.

 

[MW]

I skimmed over this (have schoolwork to complete, will look into more deeply), it was a very hard read. I see that you reject the free offer of the gospel that the OPC reported at the 1948 GA and in Murray's book The Free Offer of the Gospel with a new (relatively) preface by R. Scott Clark. It seems that thinking about these ideas will drive a man crazy.

As someone who has recently benefited much from R. Scott Clark, the Heidelblog, looking to Christ as the object of our salvation, "guilt, grace, and gratitude", and the law-gospel distinction (as expressed by RSC, Michael Horton, and in a similar - though not identical sense - Dr. Jordan B. Cooper who is a wonderful Lutheran theologian and commentator), this is some food for thought I will return to later as I study marrow theology and what it means on a personal level.

I will leave you to it and trust the Lord will guide you into the truth. One note for clarification: I teach the free offer of the gospel as taught by confessional reformed theologians, which will be seen from the reformed authorities I quote in the review. I state that so as to avoid confusion. It is regrettable that the Murray paper is called the "free offer of the gospel" when it is not the actual point of contention.

 

[Northern Crofter]

in which every sinner is eventually saved from Hells torments

I've never heard of this perspective. I always thought time continued as normal (forever) in both heaven and hell.

This again runs into the issue of time. Time is relative. In our reality it is relative to God creating and sustaining His creation. The first thing God created was time - "In the beginning." The penultimate Day of the Lord - when the heaven and earth shall pass away - is the end not only of our world but of our time. Part of the Gospel is that there is a beginning and an end, both of creation and of every created life. To have time you must have a beginning and an end (the sun rises, the sun sets; the earth starts an annual rotation around the sun, the earth completes its rotation around the sun), but the very essence of eternity is that it has no end, it is "everlasting." Part of the beauty of the Gospel is that the eternal God entered our time in the person of His Son, Who then in His humility experienced the passage of time (and the temptations that go along with it) according to His human nature but not according to His divine nature.

 

[Reformed Sojourner]

It raises the question, Salvation from what? The atheists and agnostics I know are quite content with the idea of annihilation, which is itself a strong indication as to where the idea originates from -- a wish that it were so. It is certainly not from the eternal God who made man to glorify God and enjoy Him for ever.

Chris Date is the public face of Rethinking Hell. While he identifies as a Calvinist, he doesn’t appear to be confessionally Reformed, at least not without holding some exceptions. He has argued that some believers have expressed a fear of nonexistence, in contrast to atheists who generally do not. However, such cases are not the norm, and do not provide a strong argument in support of the position he advocates.

 

[tanstaafl72555]

Do you think it consistent with the confessional standards to hold the position that while there certainly is an eternal awareness of isolation and alienation from God (a pain which would seem to me to eclipse the eternal flaming sizzling in a kind of cosmic frying pan), the idea of suffering in a constant state of mental anguish might be eclipsed by a constant and eternal degradation and dissolution of our psychic powers, so that in eternity a man might not even be aware of why he is in hell altogether, nor conscious of much at all other than a dull despair and pyschic sense of emptiness?

I say that not from pretending to be John Stott and all those guys (though the idea of eternal suffering is something that I do, like the annihilationists, tremble at). I have not read Stott and he might not be saying what I think he said, but I do not believe there is a cessation of awareness for those in hell, ever.

I do admit to be influenced by Augustine and CS Lewis here though (especially the Unman in Perelandra), in the view that sin and thus damnation is like an asymptotic curve which more and more approaches nothing, as sin/evil is parasitic and cannabalistic, eternally wasting and consuming and destroying the good, yet never able to destroy it. Thus, I have some truck with the annihilationists, but I believe in an eternal collapse rot and decay of the soul which is unable to come to an end, yet eats at consciousness itself forever.

Those who deny eternal punishment seek to "justify" God to the moral bar of man, which is never smart, even at such a ghastly and terrifying subject. Better to let Him speak and then reveal to the universe how His wisdom far transcends ours. I don't believe God will "pull rank" and terrify us into agreement that cruelty and malicious savagery is ok in Him, but bad in us.

However, I am struck with the verbal ejaculation of Isaiah when he says "WOE IS ME! I am (literally) coming apart/unglued!" Is that an insight on how a sinner feels "burned up" or incinerated so that my being seems to be coming apart from the inside out? Is that a possibility? I admit that I have been influenced by Lewis both in the Problem of Pain (a rehash of Augustine) and Perelandra. Plus I have shared my own experience with psychotropic drugs, one of them being a "bad trip" where the primary terror came not from hallucinations, but a general sense that I was under a white hot wrath and that wrath was about to fall and crush me irreparably. Are my thoughts on hell due to chemically induced psychosis, or a genuine step into a realm like Paul describes in 2 Cor.? I am hesitant to make a pronouncement here.

Bottom line is that the punishment for an assault on an eternally powerful God logically demands a very serious punishment.... but I wonder if that "grid" for punishment involves retention of our faculties of reason, logic, coherence, rationality and consciousness at a static level.

Guys in here are smarter and better read than I and I just want opinion and input.

 

[pianoviolin]

do admit to be influenced by Augustine and CS Lewis here though (especially the Unman in Perelandra), in the view that sin and thus damnation is like an asymptotic curve which more and more approaches nothing, as sin/evil is parasitic and cannabalistic, eternally wasting and consuming and destroying the good, yet never able to destroy it. Thus, I have some truck with the annihilationists, but I believe in an eternal collapse rot and decay of the soul which is unable to come to an end, yet eats at consciousness itself forever.

When I was younger I imagined that hell being eternal meant that time got faster and faster and faster in hell until time was moving at the speed of light, years turned into centuries, centuries turned into millennia, millennia turned into eons, etc., yet the torment did not stop. We would do well to (1) acknowledge the severity of hell's most fearsome and infinite torments against body and soul, and (2) not to speculate too much, and focus on the Gospel.

 

[Northern Crofter]

One of the problems of annihilation for atheists and secular humanists (and Seventh-day Adventists and Jehovah's [False] Witnesses) is that it is unjust - if both Hitler and a little old lady who never harmed anyone both face the same fate after death, how is that just? (If you then try to add a purgatorial period of suffering that lasts relative to ones crimes against humanity, then you again run into the logical issue of time in eternity). Another problem is that it removes a large justification for morality - if we all suffer the same fate (annihilation), then eat, drink, and be merry no matter how much that causes others to suffer.

The better option for atheists and secular humanists would seem to be a system of reincarnation where, when the soul separates from the body at death, the soul does not leave time but is reinserted into a new body of a greater or lesser lifeform (based on the relative merit of ones previous life) until one lives such a good life that they enter eternal bliss - it has the concept of purgatory without the logical issue of time, it's based on the annihilation of imperfection rather than existence, and it has all the attraction of other works-righteousness systems. But, like annihilationism, it is incompatible with the testimony of Scripture:

"If a man die, shall he live again? All the days of mine appointed time will I wait, till my changing shall come." (Job 14.14)

"And as it is appointed unto men that they shall once die, and after that cometh the judgment: So Christ was once offered..." (Hebrews 9:27)

Annihilationism amongst Christians is an attempt to make God seem more fair, but part of the doctrine of Hell is that each gets only and exactly what they deserve: "And that servant that knew his master’s will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew it not, and yet did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes: for unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required, and to whom men much commit, the more of him will they ask." (Luke 12.47-48) This part of why the WCF states that everyone will "receive according to what they have done in the body, whether good or evil." (33.1) So I believe that not everyone in Hell will be suffering to the same degree - they will all suffer according to the degree in which they knew the truth and rejected it.

...there certainly is an eternal awareness of isolation and alienation from God...

I believe this is true to the extent of being isolated and alienated from God's love, but I think the most terrifying aspect of Hell is that God, being omnipresent, will be there "for the manifestation of the glory... of his justice" (WCF 33.2).

 

[Ploutos]

Do you think it consistent with the confessional standards to hold the position that while there certainly is an eternal awareness of isolation and alienation from God (a pain which would seem to me to eclipse the eternal flaming sizzling in a kind of cosmic frying pan), the idea of suffering in a constant state of mental anguish might be eclipsed by a constant and eternal degradation and dissolution of our psychic powers, so that in eternity a man might not even be aware of why he is in hell altogether, nor conscious of much at all other than a dull despair and pyschic sense of emptiness?

I say that not from pretending to be John Stott and all those guys (though the idea of eternal suffering is something that I do, like the annihilationists, tremble at). I have not read Stott and he might not be saying what I think he said, but I do not believe there is a cessation of awareness for those in hell, ever.

I do admit to be influenced by Augustine and CS Lewis here though (especially the Unman in Perelandra), in the view that sin and thus damnation is like an asymptotic curve which more and more approaches nothing, as sin/evil is parasitic and cannabalistic, eternally wasting and consuming and destroying the good, yet never able to destroy it. Thus, I have some truck with the annihilationists, but I believe in an eternal collapse rot and decay of the soul which is unable to come to an end, yet eats at consciousness itself forever.

Those who deny eternal punishment seek to "justify" God to the moral bar of man, which is never smart, even at such a ghastly and terrifying subject. Better to let Him speak and then reveal to the universe how His wisdom far transcends ours. I don't believe God will "pull rank" and terrify us into agreement that cruelty and malicious savagery is ok in Him, but bad in us.

However, I am struck with the verbal ejaculation of Isaiah when he says "WOE IS ME! I am (literally) coming apart/unglued!" Is that an insight on how a sinner feels "burned up" or incinerated so that my being seems to be coming apart from the inside out? Is that a possibility? I admit that I have been influenced by Lewis both in the Problem of Pain (a rehash of Augustine) and Perelandra. Plus I have shared my own experience with psychotropic drugs, one of them being a "bad trip" where the primary terror came not from hallucinations, but a general sense that I was under a white hot wrath and that wrath was about to fall and crush me irreparably. Are my thoughts on hell due to chemically induced psychosis, or a genuine step into a realm like Paul describes in 2 Cor.? I am hesitant to make a pronouncement here.

Bottom line is that the punishment for an assault on an eternally powerful God logically demands a very serious punishment.... but I wonder if that "grid" for punishment involves retention of our faculties of reason, logic, coherence, rationality and consciousness at a static level.

Guys in here are smarter and better read than I and I just want opinion and input.

I don't think the idea of an eternal dissolution or eternal dying or eternal fragmentation is necessarily at odds with our confessional standards, but it certainly is a different emphasis that received more air time with the church fathers than it does in our confessions. On the flip side, heaven is likewise portrayed as an asymptotic growth towards God. A noteworthy example of this is Gregory of Nyssa's highly allegorical "Life of Moses". Additionally, though I don't have any first-hand reading to refer to here, I do believe that some of the church fathers also posited that the afterlife would mean the end of temporality - not only as regards time but space as well. I'm not aware that anybody was saying we become omnipresent, simply that all the dimensions of what we would now refer to us space-time cease to exist in heaven as we now know them.

I can leave it to the smart people on this board to parse out how that squares with Reformed theology and whether it's unduly influenced by Greek philosophy in unhelpful ways. Reformed theology seems to be interested in forming a biblical basis for the ideas of heaven and hell, how we get there, and what the basis of the punishment or reward is. I'm less aware of speculation in Reformed thought as to what "day to day" life in heaven or hell is like, but that doesn't mean that the church fathers were wrong in such speculations up to a point, even if that eventually becomes the basis for the Eastern Orthodox idea of theosis, which does generate greater tension with Reformed distinctives.

 

[sgemmen9]

For me, I've always felt it's pretty simple. The Bible speaks clearly when hell is referred to as a place of eternal flames or everlasting punishment. The other depictions of hell that annihilationists pick up on seem to be simile, metaphor, or references of hell as a negative temporal place. But those points are to convey the negative aspects of hell. If we apply the clearer texts to the less clear, eternal condemnation seems undebatable. (But of course it's still debated!).

 

[Reformed Sojourner]

One of the problems of annihilation for atheists and secular humanists (and Seventh-day Adventists and Jehovah's [False] Witnesses) is that it is unjust - if both Hitler and a little old lady who never harmed anyone both face the same fate after death, how is that just? (If you then try to add a purgatorial period of suffering that lasts relative to ones crimes against humanity, then you again run into the logical issue of time in eternity). Another problem is that it removes a large justification for morality - if we all suffer the same fate (annihilation), then eat, drink, and be merry no matter how much that causes others to suffer.

The better option for atheists and secular humanists would seem to be a system of reincarnation where, when the soul separates from the body at death, the soul does not leave time but is reinserted into a new body of a greater or lesser lifeform (based on the relative merit of ones previous life) until one lives such a good life that they enter eternal bliss - it has the concept of purgatory without the logical issue of time, it's based on the annihilation of imperfection rather than existence, and it has all the attraction of other works-righteousness systems. But, like annihilationism, it is incompatible with the testimony of Scripture:

"If a man die, shall he live again? All the days of mine appointed time will I wait, till my changing shall come." (Job 14.14)

"And as it is appointed unto men that they shall once die, and after that cometh the judgment: So Christ was once offered..." (Hebrews 9:27)

Annihilationism amongst Christians is an attempt to make God seem more fair, but part of the doctrine of Hell is that each gets only and exactly what they deserve: "And that servant that knew his master’s will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew it not, and yet did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes: for unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required, and to whom men much commit, the more of him will they ask." (Luke 12.47-48) This part of why the WCF states that everyone will "receive according to what they have done in the body, whether good or evil." (33.1) So I believe that not everyone in Hell will be suffering to the same degree - they will all suffer according to the degree in which they knew the truth and rejected it.


I believe this is true to the extent of being isolated and alienated from God's love, but I think the most terrifying aspect of Hell is that God, being omnipresent, will be there "for the manifestation of the glory... of his justice" (WCF 33.2).

In response to a couple of your points, from the contrasting perspective, which I don’t personally hold, Chris Date of Rethinking Hell would argue that those judged to perish may experience varying degrees of torment in Hell prior to annihilation, depending on the severity of their immorality in this life. He would also maintain that his view is grounded in Scripture, rather than being a theological attempt to reconcile concerns about the fairness of God’s judgment.

 

[Pictet]

Do you think it consistent with the confessional standards to hold the position that while there certainly is an eternal awareness of isolation and alienation from God (a pain which would seem to me to eclipse the eternal flaming sizzling in a kind of cosmic frying pan), the idea of suffering in a constant state of mental anguish might be eclipsed by a constant and eternal degradation and dissolution of our psychic powers, so that in eternity a man might not even be aware of why he is in hell altogether, nor conscious of much at all other than a dull despair and pyschic sense of emptiness?

It might not be fully consistent in the way stated here: in particular, the last part about awareness and consciousness and despair doesn't seem strong enough to account for many verses - their torment going up for ever and ever and so on.

However If we are fully committed to reality of eternal conscious torment (which we should be) then something along these lines, stated very carefully, surely brings together the two halves of the Biblical witness quite well - eternal suffering on the one hand, destruction on the other. That the person we once were is in one sense 'destroyed' would seem to explain certain biblical texts well.

Presumably common grace is removed from sinners when they are condemned? The collapse of a human personality with common grace removed would be a frightful thing... All the things we love in our unsaved friends and relatives are fruits of common grace.

 

[Ploutos]

It might not be fully consistent in the way stated here: in particular, the last part about awareness and consciousness and despair doesn't seem strong enough to account for many verses - their torment going up for ever and ever and so on.

However If we are fully committed to reality of eternal conscious torment (which we should be) then something along these lines, stated very carefully, surely brings together the two halves of the Biblical witness quite well - eternal suffering on the one hand, destruction on the other. That the person we once were is in one sense 'destroyed' would seem to explain certain biblical texts well.

Presumably common grace is removed from sinners when they are condemned? The collapse of a human personality with common grace removed would be a frightful thing... All the things we love in our unsaved friends and relatives are fruits of common grace.

I have generally thought of hell as involving the complete removal of any last vestage of common grace, the complete, total, and unmitigated giving over of one's self to sin and misery. It is not just a collapse but an eternal collapse; the phrase "eternal death" seems to capture this quite well.

Some of the language of the church fathers, at least from the little reading in primary and secondary sources that I have done, can be a little abstract. The talk of eternal dissolution and evil as non-being can somewhat dull the horror of the reality of hell. That's where I think the emphasis of Reformed theology is helpful. And I do think that, regardless of what dissolution or decay maybe going on in hell for all of eternity, unbelievers are aware that they are in hell and experiencing God's judgment.

An anecdotal aside. While I don't think one can argue for the validity of a doctrine based on its effectiveness in achieving a particular outcome (we're not Finney supporters on this board!), I can speak from personal experience to the value of a belief in eternal conscious torment. I was raised going to church, and taught the core doctrines of the faith from a very early age. But I did not become a believer until I was well into my twenties, and not only that but I lived a dissolute and rebellious life in private during my unbelieving years. I believed hell was real, that it was eternal, and that I was going there. The amount of fear and anguish this generated for me would be hard to describe, especially during moments when I was alone and without distractions. I've always had somewhat of an abstract mind - a natural proficiency for math, music, science; a solid ability to grasp a concept and then quickly extrapolate it to all its different logical conclusions - and this only increased my ability to comprehend and therefore to dread the reality of what awaited me on the other side of death. One of the key milestones in my life was the moment when I came to realize that I was no longer afraid of dying as I had once been, and as I began to notice other changes in my life, seemingly happening spontaneously for no clear reason, it began to dawn on me that God had done something remarkable. Although I suffered a good bit of mistreatment at the hands of others growing up (and although I greatly compounded my problems as a rebellious and wayward adult), I have always been exceedingly grateful that, whatever else might have gone wrong in my childhood, I had the doctrine of an eternal and inescapable damnation drilled into my head from an early age. I'm convinced that the mental anguish caused by this, and the destabilizing cognitive dissonance it produced with my lifestyle, played a not-insignificant role in my salvation. Were I less aware or less convinced of this reality, I don't know that I would have as readily come to the end of my rope, so to speak.

Again, I don't know how much utility my personal story has, since God can and does save plenty of people in other circumstances. It does at the very least seem to fly in the face of those who would say that this doctrine hinders evangelism or outreach. And it also means that as a believer, I transfer the fear of my own eternal fate to a great fear and trembling for the eternal fate of my lost friends, and my burden for their souls is thereby much increased.

 

[tanstaafl72555]

Thinking of hell is good for one's soul. Reminds me of a joke (not about hell, but about the way we think about hell).
There was a church which was committed to orthodoxy, and one clear mark was a believe in eternal punishment. They made conformity with this doctrine a key point in interviewing pastors. They had 3 pastors over a 10 year period, and all 3 of them were firm believers in hell, and preached on the topic. During the pastorate of the first two, the church declined in membership, while the third saw professions of faith,and growth both in numbers and solid improvement in Christian maturity. Interviewing the fourth pastor, they re-iterated that hell was an essential doctrine.

One of the candidates asked the question "if all 3 of your previous pastors believed and preached on hell, why did 2 of them see no real changes, and the third saw such good changes?" The elder thought for a second, and then responded "the third guy was the only one who did not act like he was happy at the thought of us going there."

Hell is awful. It would do me well to remember that every person I meet is either destined for hell or rescued from such a place.