• Introduction
 
• Chapter 1 - What is "Conditional Immortality"?
 
• Chapter 2 - Are all souls immortal?
 
• Chapter 3 - Are you saying there is no 'punishment' for the unsaved?
 
• Chapter 4 - Why rarely cited Isaiah 66:24 is a key.
 
• Chapter 5 - Doesn't Daniel 12:2 say some will face "everlasting contempt"?
 
• Chapter 6 - Why the "Book of Life" is exactly that, a book of Life.
 
• Chapter 7 - Why this topic is important.
 
• Chapter 8 - Why traditional theology is biblically wrong about the phrase "gnashing of teeth."
 
• Chapter 9 - Answering the critics & supposed scriptures that teach otherwise.
 
• Chapter 10 - Questions and MAJOR problems for those who hold to the eternal torment position.
 
• Chapter 11 - What some reviewers have said about a classic book on this topic
 
• Chapter 12: Comments left by previous readers
 
• Further Reading
 
• About the Author

A Biblical Defense of Conditional Immortality

Grk/Heb Fonts

PDF

Over 75 Online Commentaries

Chapter 9

Visit author’s web site at www.jewishnotgreek.com

Answering the Critics and Supposed Scriptures that Teach Otherwise.

Thankfully, Conditionally Immortality is growing in belief among evangelicals. A great article was written by respected evangelical scholar Clark Pinnock who has come out strongly in favor of this position: The Destruction of the Finally Impenitent.

The fact that it is gaining ground must be the reason why a few are writing responses to it. They usually all quote the same four or five verses in defense of eternal torment, so these are now going to be addressed in this section.

First, in scripture, Jesus speaks definitively on the fate of the unsaved soul, it will be destroyed.

Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the

One who can destroy both soul and body in hell. (Matt 10:28)

It is Jesus who gives us the truly critical and pivotal scripture for understanding the fate of the lost soul–that it can and will be destroyed. It will die (cease to function anymore) on Judgment Day at the end of the age. This will happen in the lake of fire (Revelation 20:15) which will be a terrible fatecremation. However, Matthew 10:28 is the text through which all other scriptures and their interpretations must be filtered. Without using this text as the foundation for the fate of the lost, there will be confusion. With this text, (Matthew 10:28) as a foundational text, all other texts follow smoothly. Additionally, Paul also taught that immortality is brought to light through the gospel only. (2 Timothy 1:10) With this as a biblical filter, an important rule of biblical hermeneutics can now be followedplain texts must interpret any symbolic texts.

What about the unquenchable fire in Mark 9:48?

First of all, we need to realize that Jesus is quoting verbatim Isaiah 66:24 in this passage so please read, Why rarely cited Isaiah 66:24 is a key for a more complete understanding of this scripture. Proper hermeneutics demands that we interpret scripture with scripture. If Jesus is quoting Isaiah, shouldn't we read Isaiah too? Obviously Jesus would not disagree with Isaiah. Was Isaiah talking about the soul? Clearly he was not.

Second of all, if God throws something into eternal fire, who says that what is thrown in, is eternal also? Inter-Varsity Press author John R. Stott rightly concludes:

"...it would seem strange...if people who are said to suffer destruction are in fact not destroyed...it is difficult to imagine a perpetually inconclusive process of perishing."

(J. Stott and D. Edwards, Essentials: A Liberal-Evangelical Dialogue, London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1988, p. 316)

Third of all, this phrase is used elsewhere in "Tenach" (the Old Testament) and is never used to mean eternal torment. If you look up Isaiah 66:24, Jeremiah 7:20 and 17:27, and Ezekiel 20:47-48, they all mention that same phrase. And reading the context of these verses, it can clearly be seen that "unquenchable" means a judgment that man cannot "quench" or "talk God out of." In other words, no one can talk God out of it and it will indeed run its course. Has God ever been "talked out of" something in the past? Yes. Clearly Moses talked God out of destroying Israel in the desert. (Exodus 32:10-14) In a real sense–Moses "quenched" God's anger against Israel.

Fourth of all, remember it (the fire) was "prepared for the devil and his angels." (Matt 25:41) It was never, never made for humans. Humans will perish in the fire, not be preserved in the fire. With that in mind, reread the second point above by John Stott.

What about the eternal punishment of Matthew 25:46?

This is covered in Are you saying there is no "punishment" for the unsaved? But to state very briefly, the punishment (or wages) of sin according to scripture is always death. Romans 6:23 and many other scriptures state this very clearly, "The wages of sin is death." And how long will this punishment of death last? Remember, this verse is taking place while they are standing before God and know that He can bring anyone back from death. Perhaps God will raise them back to life to enjoy the Kingdom they will clearly see in front of them? No, they will be told they will miss out on the joy of being alive forever. Their sentence and punishment of death will last forever. That is why he tells them it is eternal punishment. It is a complete shame that believers have such a low view on the gift of life and existence from God that they do not believe having a person's life removed is a punishment. Yet it is a punishment. And that punishment will last forever.

What about the rich man and Lazarus in Luke 16?

The teaching of Conditional Immortality means that the soul of man is finally destroyed on the Day of Judgmentat the end of this age. Therefore, technically speaking, this scripture has no bearing on this doctrine.

However, as a side note, there is sufficient reason for understanding this passage of scripture as a parable.

1. The previous four stories were all parables (Luke 15:4, 15:8, 15:11, 16:1) so this story is obviously in a long string of parables.

2. The parable in Luke 16:1, which He just told them, also began with the exact same words "There was a certain rich man," (Luke 16:1). That story, "the parable of the shrewd accountant," is clearly a parable (though not labeled as such). These two stories both have to do with "mammon" (money) and the misuse of it. If the first is clearly a parable, why not the second, for it is in the exact same section of scripture?

3. The point of the parable is at the end, "And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead." (Luke 16:31). He told them this parable to make the point that, "No matter what anyone tells them (i.e. the Pharisees), they will never believe in me because they refuse to believe even Moses and the prophets." Jesus just said money was their god (verse 14). He made a point and backs it up with a parable. The ultimate point of this parable is that their unbelief is due to money–not lack of evidence.

4. Matthew tells us, "and without a parable spake he not unto them." (Matthew 13:34) The Greek word used in this passage is not Gehenna (hell), but it is Hades (temporary abode of the dead). It is a different Greek word. A word that most translators mistranslate as "hell."

Note: For an excellent study on this passage and Hades–visit www.hellhadesafterlife.com. Remember, Hades will be itself emptied and destroyed one day:

Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. (Rev 20:14)

5. The great nineteenth century Hebrew Christian scholar Alfred Edersheim flatly states it is a parable:

"The Parable itself is strictly of the Pharisees and their relation to the "publicans and sinners" whom they despised...their Pharisaic righteousness, which left poor Lazarus at their door to the dogs and to famine, not bestowing in him aught from their supposed rich festive banquets...it will be necessary in the interpretation of this Parable to keep in mind, that its Parabolic details must not be exploited, nor doctrines of any kind derived from them, either as to the character of the other world."

(The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, Alfred Edersheim, Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody Mass., 1993, p. 667)

6. Inter-Varsity Press scholar Craig Keener and many other conservative commentators also call it a parable:

"Some Jewish parables, including the rabbinic one mentioned at the beginning of this section, named a character or two...But this parable specifies only economic inversion."

(Craig S. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary New Testament, Downers Grove, Inter Varsity Press, 1993, p. 236)

The list could go on and on, but suffice it to say that there are sufficient grounds for looking at this as a parable. Either way, let it be said again, that the teaching of Conditional Immortality means that the soul of man is finally destroyed on the "Day of Judgment"at the end of this age (Revelation 20:14. Therefore, technically speaking, this scripture has no bearing on the doctrine of Conditional Immortality, the destruction of the lost. Many Evangelicals who hold to Conditional Immortality also hold different views on the intermediate state and this paper does not discuss the intermediate state. It is also important to remember that if Jesus suffered on the cross for about six hours–we have every reason to believe that the lost will suffer no more than the same amount of time that Jesus suffered.

NOTE

For great information on the intermediate state of "Sheol"–visit www.hellhadesafterlife.com.