What is hell?

Everyone, can we have a quick discussion of this point without it turning into a name-calling fest or condemnation?

I want to discuss the verses in Revelation that mention the "second death":

Revelation 2:11
He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches He who overcomes will not be hurt by the second death.'

Revelation 20:6
Blessed and holy is the one who has a part in the first resurrection; over these the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with Him for a thousand years.

Revelation 20:14
Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire This is the second death, the lake of fire.

Revelation 21:8
"But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death."


I know a couple of people who are annihilationists. One of them is a highly respected professor that teaches at Southwestern Seminary near my home.

I was having a discussion with him about annihilationism a number of months ago and we talked about the "second death" of Revelation. He believed that the second death was the ending of existence, not merely separation. Revelation 2:11 speaks of not being hurt by the second death... the context does not lend itself to interpret it as a separation. Revelation 20:6 describes the second death as having a power... not really a very clear relationship to a 'separation' viewpoint.

Apparently, he sees those who die outside of Christ entering into Hades, separated from God and in pain from the loss of God's benevolence in their lives, until the time when God empties out the 'garbage' into the Lake of Fire to be destroyed into nothingness by fire.

What do you think? (And please deal with this interpretation instead of snipes about the SBC, the character or spirituality of this professor, attacks on me for daring to raise this issue, or general hand-wringing about how the church is apostate, how Obama is the anti-christ, and we should be running-around-like-our-hair-is-on-fire because the election didn't go the way many of us wanted. :laugh: )

 

So let me get this straight. You are telling me that at one of our SBC Seminaries there is an annihilationist on staff? What is his name?

 

I'm not planning to give you his name. Paige Patterson almost certainly knows about it since he and the Pattersons are friends, and I'm guessing these views are published since he is well published. Certainly, he is well known to hold his opinion since I have seen him listed as holding the view on a popular Web site. Since Paige Patterson has been the theological leader of the so-called "conservative resurgence", then it must be okay. Right?

Let's deal with the question, since if annihilationism is biblical, then there shouldn't be a problem.

What do you believe the "second death" to be?

 

I have no idea if Dr. Patterson knows about it or not. There has been no evidence to suggest he does thus far. Finding out who it is will not be a problem.

"Since if"? What does that mean? Annihilation is heretical

There is no language in scripture that lends itself to this heretical ideology of annihilation. Both death and hell are cast into the lake of fire. The terminology expresses not annihilation but extended suffering.

This sounds much like a liberal theology of McClaren or Mcmanus, or Bell or even Willard who work hard to find ways to compromise scripture with their own personal standards.

 

I am not refuting or defending the viewpoint of anhiliationism, but think about what a fire does. It destroys or consumes and it also purifies. Now apply those brief definitions to the lake of fire. The thought in Revelation seems to be that those who die the second death are hurt by the death. It would appear, then, that annihilation would be a reward and a relief to them.

There are some things in scripture for which we have no definitive answer. Lots of speculation.

The best we can do is apply other scriptures about similar circumstances, shrug our shoulders and get on with it.

Cheers,

Jim

 

Annihilationism is not biblical and it is especially not Baptist! I'm surprised this professor can continue to teach there.

Conscious eternal separation from God.

 

Not separation from God, but perhaps separation from God's benevolence.

Mere separation from God would support anhilationism

Cheers,

Jim

 

This puts us back into that other question, "Is God present in hell?" which is why I started that thread!

 

If we have all the answers we may declare ourselves as God. I have studied theology for over 60 years and I would not presume to have all the answers. There are many things that remain a puzzle to our finite minds, and will remain a puzzle until we meet God in Christ personally.

There are some things I have left alone. For many years we pointed up for heaven and down for hell. After those many years we realized that heaven and hell were both out there; just beyond our finger tips. We cannot reach either in the flesh, it remains out there, and that is where we must leave it.

This Lake of fire if something like that. We only have the second death in Revelation and we do know that that book is somewhat printed in colourful language, some so written to protect John from his enemies whilst he was in exile.

Cheers,

Jim

 

I asked this professor how he gets along at SWBTS since he is 1) an annhilationist, 2) a hard-core Calvinist, 3) believes women are called to vocational ministry to mixed gender groups, and 4) practices a private prayer language as the Spirit leads. He said he wasn't sure, except that he is "more conservative than the president [Paige Patterson]."

It would be astounding if Patterson didn't know about these positions since he and Dorothy are good friends with this professor, and I have seen items #2-4 listed above in books written by, and about, this professor. I have not personally seen item #1 in his books, although I have not read most of them, but it is known among his students. I have also asked him directly about annihilationism during an informal lecture a little over a year ago and we had a discussion of it. A few days later, I asked one of my friends who earned a Ph.D at Southwestern if he know this professor was an annihilationist. He did not hesitate to affirm that he knew. It had apparently come up once or twice in class.

If Patterson doesn't know about it, he certainly doesn't know much about his faculty and is not competent to lead the seminary. However, if it wasn't for his blatant hypocrisy of condemning others for holding even one of these views (or the "crime" of being a woman teaching in the school of theology) I would be supportive of him being open to having these views presented for consideration at the seminary as part of the educational process.

If you put forth some effort, you shouldn't have a problem figuring out who it is. However, please do everyone a favor and privately ask me to confirm the name so you don't make false charges against an 'innocent' professor. If you have the correct name, I'll tell you honestly.

But you may want to think long and hard about going after one of Patterson's friends. In my opinion, the "conservative resurgence" has never been primarily about theology for those who led it, it has been about power. And I've known probably a dozen people who have ended up on the wrong side of the leadership (often, not even for theological reasons) who have taken very painful public and private assaults from the "conservative resurgence" machine.

I don't want this professor harmed (I think Patterson will strongly protect him for a number of reasons, both personal and political) because he brings a lot to the seminary. He is also a very nice man who has a deep and abiding faith in God.

If we get our theology from the scripture, not church councils or popular opinion, then we will need to demonstrate it is heretical from the scriptures.

Not exactly. I can see it both ways. I was hoping for a deeper analysis from you and others.

MacLaren (please note the spelling), McManus, Bell and Willard have nothing to do with this discussion.

 

Yes, good point.

If "in Him, we live, move, and have our being" as Paul quotes on Mars Hill, then we lose life, ability to act, and our very being when we are permanently separated from God.

 

Calvinists usually do. However, it their view never changes facts.

He handled the Klouda situation well. While i would find it disturbing that he doesn't know it is quite a stretch to tie it into compentancy of leading the college. Unless of course you have an agenda.

If his position is well known as you suggest then no "harm" can come can it?

Which I have done.

There is nothing more to say. The language does not support it. Trying to over intellectualize it doesn't help. Let's not complicate the simple.

I was speaking of Brian McLaren (I thought you would have understood that) These men hold to very similar heretical views of God's judgment and it wouldn't surprise me if it was being espoused by one of them.

 

Southwestern is a seminary. It also has a college. Patterson leads both.

Furthermore, Patterson has made his long political career in Southern Baptist life by collecting a "heresy file" in the seminal days of the so-called "conservative resurgence." He used the alleged existence of that secret file to build political support in the convention and actively solicted students in seminaries and colleges to turn in their professors. This is widely known and documented. One of my friends turned in a number of my professors, and I was asked on two occasions to contribute.

I would have a very difficult time believing he could somehow remain ignorant of this professor's views. If he doesn't know, there may be some senility issues or complete denial involved.

I don't really have an agenda. I don't really want this professor to face a bunch of charges, but I'm sure he would be forthright if asked.

The entire reason I brought it up was to demonstrate that a discussion of annihilationism is not outside the bounds of Baptist life. I am not an annihilationist at this point, but I am studying the position.

Of course, this discussion is now a long way from the intended topic.

It's well known among those who are well read in the academic circles of the seminary. I don't think it is well known throughout the Convention. I'm not interested in naming names or causing an SBC fight. If you want to do it, then that's your business.

Uh huh... There's more to the annihilationist viewpoint than you imply.

Okay, so since there is a "second death", then what is the first death?

 

I have just confirmed that he has written about his annihilationist views in a book published a few years ago... So all four of these viewpoints are represented in his writings.

 

Annihilationism was strongly around, and including some Baptist circles, back in 1907, when A.H. Strong, a Baptist theologian, wrote three pages on the subject in his Systematic Theology text. He opposed it, and quotes the related scriptures.

So, it is not to be taken lightly in theological circles.

This professor you are speaking about is at least honest and open about his viewpoint and this particular doctrine does no harm to fundamental theology.

Cheers,

Jim

 

I agree. He's not hiding anything and is well-published. That's why I feel very confident that the president of the seminary knows all about his theological position.

While I don't agree with some of his theological positions, I can respect his viewpoint and I do not wish for him to be persecuted for his beliefs. He is also a highly-respected and thoughtful scholar whom I have access to on a regular basis, so I am exploring the issue for myself.

 

IF, and I mean IF, that is true then why are YOU trying to hide him?

If he is so upfront then why all your mysterious allusions?
It definately makes one wonder if your making it up or if he really is as up-front as you say and is actually hoping no one finds out.

 

Baptist Believer, I went to a workshop on conditionalism (also known as annihilationism or a form of it) given by Dr. Robert A. Peterson who teaches at Covenant Theological Seminary in St. Louis. He refuted this view beautifully.

He also has a book on it you might like to read. Since you are studying this issue, I think you should see a good response to it:

Hell on Trial: The Case for Eternal Punishment
by Robert A. Peterson

He also contributed to Hell Under Fire (Zondervan).

I think he has another book on the topic but I don't recall the title.

Peterson's response using Scripture really defeats the arguments for annihilationism.

 

I'm not trying to hide him. At the same time, I am not interested in bringing him to the attention of those who might want to attack him. If someone is really interested in figuring out who it is, it is not difficult.

Not really mysterious, but another poster suggested that Patterson probably doesn't know about this man's beliefs. That would be nearly impossible to believe.

I have to confess I'm a little torn about it. I wouldn't mind if Patterson's blatant hypocrisy were brought to the forefront of Baptist life, but I also don't want this professor to get attacked for his beliefs. Furthermore, that's not the point of this thread.

If you want to believe that I'm making it up, that's fine. I'm sure one day it will all come out and you will know that I've been telling the truth.

 

Thanks! I'll put Hell on Trial on my reading list. In the next week or so, I'm going to start reading Four Views on Hell