As we noted two weeks ago, the February issue of Tabletalk is devoted to the solemn and sobering subject of hell. Since the doctrine of hell has come under fire throughout the history of the church, and more recently in the modern era, “TT” decided to focus on this Biblical truth and defend it against its attacks.
The second main article in this month’s magazine is by Dr.Robert A. Peterson (professor of systematic theology at Covenant Seminary in St.Louis) and titled “Annihilation or Eternal Punishment”. Dr.Peterson lists and then answers six commonly heard arguments raised against the Bible’s teaching on hell. We ought to know the arguments of the enemies of the gospel, and we ought to know how to answer them from the Scriptures. I recommend you read his article so as to be better informed and better armed. Below is the beginning of Peterson’s article; read the rest at the link provided here.
Annihilationism is the view that lost people in hell will be exterminated after they have paid the penalty for their sins. Its proponents offer six main arguments.
First is an argument based on the Bible’s use of fire imagery to describe hell. We are told that fire consumes what is thrown into it, and so it will be for the lake of fire (Rev. 19:20; 20:10, 14, 15; 21:8)—it will burn up the wicked so that they no longer exist.
Second is an argument based on texts that speak of the lost perishing or being destroyed. Examples include unbelievers perishing (John 3:16) and suffering “the punishment of eternal destruction” (2 Thess. 1:8).
Third is an argument based on the meaning of the word eternal. In hell passages, it is claimed,eternal means only pertaining to “the age to come” and not “everlasting.”
Fourth is an argument based on a distinction between time and eternity. Annihilationists ask: how is it just of God to punish sinners for eternity when their crimes were committed in time?
Fifth is an emotional argument that God Himself and His saints would never enjoy heaven if they knew some human beings (let alone loved ones and friends) were perpetually in hell.
Sixth is an argument that an eternal hell would tarnish God’s victory over evil. Scripture declares that God will be victorious in the end; He will “be all in all” (1 Cor. 15:28). We are told that this idea seems hard to reconcile with human beings suffering endlessly in hell.
I will answer each of these arguments in turn….
The third feature article, “Hell on Trial”, is penned by English preacher, teacher, and apologist Dr.John Blanchard. This is also the title of a major work of his on the doctrine of hell. I give you here the opening of his article too,a nd encourage you to read the rest at the link provided.
Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (1859–1930), the Scottish physician and author best known for his creation of the fictional detective Sherlock Holmes, once wrote, “Hell, I may say … has long dropped out of the thoughts of every reasonable man.” He would get a lot of support for that statement today, and not only from those outside of the Christian church. The idea that untold billions of human beings, including many who would have seemed decent, law-abiding citizens, will spend eternity exposed to God’s unrelenting anger, is simply unacceptable to many people. Even some holding high ecclesiastical office have rejected the idea. John Robinson (1919–1983) the liberal bishop of Woolwich, whose book Honest to God reduced the Creator to “the Ground of Being,” said of the idea, “[God] cannot endure that … and he will not.”
By far the most persistent attack on hell comes in the form of a question: how can a God of love send anyone to hell? The British philosopher and theologian John Hick (1922–2012) argued that hell was “totally incompatible with the idea of God as infinite love.” The argument here is perfectly straightforward: sending people to hell is not a loving thing to do, so a God of love could never do it. How do we answer that?
The Three R's Blog 