← Wretched Radio with Todd Friel
Wretched Radio with Todd Friel
Phil Johnson: The Doctrine of Hell and the ERROR of Annihilationism
00:54:59
Today on Wretched Radio, we listen in to a recent breakout session from the Shepherds Conference, where Phil Johnson addresses the growing push to redefine hell. Annihilationism may sound more reasonable—even more compassionate—but does it actually ali...
Loading summary
Transcript43 lines
- [00:04]
Todd Friel
Wretched radio begins in 3, 2, 1.
- [00:08]
Jimmy Hicks
Now, I am not reintroducing the idea of purgatory, but on the other hand, I do believe the baby was thrown out with the bathwater. With that came a belief, when you die, you're instantaneously and magically made perfect.
- [00:19]
Phil Johnson
The soul of someone who dies immediately goes into eternity. There is no place where you make
- [00:25]
Fortis Institute Announcer
up for your sins.
- [00:26]
Phil Johnson
There is no purgatory. In the twinkling of an eye, we shall be changed.
- [00:30]
Todd Friel
It's time for Wretched Radio with Toad Friel.
- [00:34]
Wretched Radio Host
This is the final word, and this is Wretched Radio. Why would this be the final word on the subject of the doctrine of hell specifically? Is it eternal conscious torment, or do you ultimately get snuffed out and experience nothing for eternity? That is the recent debate and the, the embers, thank you very much. The embers of that debate are still kindling. But one, Phil Johnson is going to throw a bucket of water on him and put him out. That is why this is going to be the final word on the subject of the doctrine of hell here at Wretched Radio. Because Phil Johnson at the Shepherd's Conference did a breakout session on the doctrine of hell, confronting the latest uprising. No, the latest conflagration. I, I think that's a fire word over the doctrine of hell. And as always, Phil is just going to put an end to it. And so we're going to do something a little unusual today. We're just going to let Phil speak a lot because this subject is so important.
- [01:42]
Jimmy Hicks
How important is it?
- [01:43]
Wretched Radio Host
Well, you're almost right there. Just a little tick off right there. It's so important because this debate is. It really isn't about the doctrine of hell per se. It is about the doctrine of scripture. Take it away, Phil.
- [01:59]
Phil Johnson
Our subject in this seminar is the biblical doctrine of eternal punishment. And I do want to show you from Scripture why we believe and teach that hell is not just a temporary stopover for sinners on the way to being snuffed out of existence. That view, that notion that the fires of hell will simply annihilate sinners and their souls will cease to exist. That idea is, I think, best known as annihilationism. That's a description of what it is, that's what I'm going to call it. Even though annihilationists themselves usually prefer a milder sounding term. So they call themselves conditionalists, or they say their view is called conditional immortality. And every decade or so this resurfaces. Annihilationism will find a new advocate who promotes the doctrine with usually persuasive words and great enthusiasm, as if this were a new idea that they've just discovered. It is not a new idea. It's one of the deviant doctrines that Spurgeon fought hard against in the downgrade controversy 150 years ago. And Spurgeon pointed out that annihilationism gives aid and comfort to those people who say, let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die. It's an excuse, he said, for calloused hearts. And he said, let me quote him exactly. He said, what better pillow for idle heads than the doctrine that the finally impenitent become extinct? And he noted that annihilationism fosters an indifference to the task of evangelism. And he called it an unbiblical influence that we don't need. He said, in Spurgeon's words, we are sluggish enough. We don't need sweet, but sleep producing theories that remove any sense of urgency from Christians in their calling to evangelize. Nevertheless, every time this theory resurfaces and begs for acceptance, people who are naive and sometimes even scholars who should know better, become either confused or convinced by what they think is a nicer sounding, friendlier, more benign opinion about what happens to the souls of those who die in a state of unrepentant rebellion against God. In other words, annihilationism is attractive as a comforting view for people who don't truly trust the justice of God. They aren't content to leave divine judgment in the hands of Christ where it properly belongs, and they see themselves as fit arbiters of eternal justice. And so they grab onto this theory because it's more comfortable for them than the actual words of Scripture. And in fact, you listen to their arguments and they practically admit that this is their motive. They want to set limits that God himself has not set on the scale of his righteous retribution against unrepentant sinners. And if you think I'm overstating the case, just stay with me, because before this session is over, I'm going to quote an example from Clark Pinnock where he actually admits that he thinks his standards of justice and equity are superior to what we're told in Scripture. So hang on to that thought. We'll get there, Lord willing. But no one should ever feel free to co opt God's role as the righteous judge of sinners. Hebrews 10:30. We know him who said, vengeance is mine, I will repay. And again the Lord will judge his people. And as hard as the statements about hell in Scripture are to receive, and they are hard to receive. We are nevertheless duty bound to accept what Christ taught. And he spoke of eternal punishment. We're not entitled, you and I, to rewrite Scripture or even just to tiptoe around the hard reality of hell just because the idea of unquenchable fire makes us uncomfortable. It's supposed to make us uncomfortable. And annihilationism is a. You can think about it like this. It's a quasi Protestant view of a kind of purgatory, Purgatory on steroids, maybe, where sinners suffer a finite penalty for their sins, but when they're released from this purgatory, it's not into heaven, but into utter oblivion. And so their suffering is comparatively short lived. It's very short in comparison to eternity. Even if you stretched it out for 100 years, that's compared to eternity, a very short time. And then they simply go out of existence. And that supposedly then reconciles the notion of divine vengeance with the inexhaustible grace and mercy of God. But in Scripture, the words of Christ himself, Hell is a place of eternal fire and everlasting punishment, where their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched. Those are Jesus words, and in one case he's quoting there from an Old Testament prophecy. And people can try to eliminate the actual meaning of those expressions by inventive or fanciful exegesis. But it's a simple and inescapable fact that the words eternal and everlasting are used repeatedly to describe the punishments of Hell. Unquenchable flames and never ending torment are either expressly mentioned or clearly implied every time the Bible describes Hell. Scripture never portrays hell as anything other than endless, infinite agony. The wording is impossible to evade. Fire that shall never be quenched. Flaming fire, executing vengeance, the punishment of eternal fire, the relentless agony of Hell's endless punishments, and hell as a place of torment. That's the biblical word, where the smoke of torment ascends forever, forever and ever, with no rest, day and night. And I'm certain most of you have probably heard, and it's true that no one in all the Bible had more to say about hell and its infinite duration than the Lord Jesus. And although the language and the word pictures he used to describe hell may sound intensely and ruthlessly severe, those words always came as tender hearted warnings from a heart of deep compassion and care. In fact, you see it in the triumphal entry at the start of Passion Week. While everyone else is engaged in joyous celebration, shouting hosannas. Luke tells us Jesus saw the city and wept over it, so don't get the idea that he enjoyed describing the horrors of hell. Nevertheless, it is significant that he never used any kind of nuance or subtlety to try to tone down the fearsome reality of eternal punishment. His descriptions of hell are always vivid and stark and unapologetically bleak. And they serve for us as a powerful reminder that no merely temporary or finite punishment could ever constitute a just recompense for sin against the infinite power and the infinite authority of our infinitely holy God. A temporary punishment wouldn't do it. Hell must be a place of everlasting punishment, just as Jesus described, and he never backed away from that. That is the historic Protestant understanding of what Scripture says about hell. Now you might ask, and I asked, why should we have a breakout session on such a grim subject at the Shepherd's Conference? Because this is supposed to be a week of joy and encouragement for beleaguered pastors. So why afflict them with a grim subject at the Shepherd's Conference? Why afflict them with a subject that, frankly, has little or nothing that stirs up any sense of gladness or hope or satisfaction? And so you should know, we added this seminar to the schedule just really a few weeks ago, because for the past three months, fierce debate over the enormity and duration of hell has generated kind of a nonstop discussion and debate online. And it's causing waves of confusion and in all the evangelical districts of social media. It's an issue that I don't think we can ignore.
- [10:52]
Wretched Radio Host
Told you this would be the final word. Just. I just love preaching. That's like, this is just authoritative. Phil Johnson at Shepherd's Conference dealing with the doctrine of hell. And now that he's established why this is a big deal, he's now going to deal with why the theological confusion that we are seeing these days is so rampant and causing so much harm. Next on Wretched Radio.
- [11:26]
Fortis Institute Announcer
Be honest. When's the last time you shared the gospel with a stranger? Not posted something online, not like the Christian meme, but actually opened your mouth and told someone about Jesus? If your stomach tightened just a little bit, you're not alone. Most Christians would rather do almost anything than evangelize. It's terrifying. What if they get mad? What if I say something wrong? What if they ask me a question I can't answer? Our resource terrified, too.
- [11:51]
Jimmy Hicks
It exists because Jesus gave us the
- [11:53]
Fortis Institute Announcer
Great Commission, not the great suggestion, and he actually gave us the tools to obey it. And this resource will walk you through how to share the gospel with strangers, even family members, without needing Pepto Bismol to get through it. You'll still be nervous. That's normal. But you'll also be equipped. And equipped beats terrified Every single time. Terrified. 2 It is streaming right now for free on Fortis. Download the app right now on your smartphone, on your smart TV, or head to fortisplus.org
- [12:26]
Wretched Radio Host
Is it possible a Christian university can actually be ranked high when it comes to preparing students for the real world? The hat tip to Masters University. You want to send your kids someplace where they actually still teach the Bible. Not just based on a document that they may be having a file cabinet someplace, but they actually use the Bible there. The education at the Master's university, not only biblical, but oh so practical courses, diplomas, degrees, they can be achieved online or of course, on their beautiful campus in Southern California. Would you like to learn more about the Master's University to prepare you or your child for the future? I encourage you to visit Masters. Edu Wretched Masters Edu Wretched.
- [13:26]
Jimmy Hicks
Most men don't make one big decision
- [13:29]
Fortis Institute Announcer
that takes them off course. No, it happens gradually and eventually you look up and you realize, I've been coasting for years. Well, Dr. Adam Tyson has created Walk Like a Man. It's available now on Fortis Plus.
- [13:41]
Jimmy Hicks
Dr. Tyson knows that's the story for
- [13:43]
Fortis Institute Announcer
way too many guys right now. And so he gets into God's word and he lays out what it actually looks like to walk with wisdom and live with real conviction. And the way he teaches it, you'll walk away from every episode knowing exactly
- [13:56]
Jimmy Hicks
what to do and why it matters.
- [13:58]
Fortis Institute Announcer
This is biblical teaching that puts solid ground under your feet and gives you
- [14:02]
Jimmy Hicks
a clear path forward.
- [14:04]
Fortis Institute Announcer
It's streaming right now, with new episodes dropping every Monday on Fortis for free.
- [14:09]
Jimmy Hicks
Download the Fortis app right now wherever
- [14:11]
Fortis Institute Announcer
you download apps on your smartphone, your smart TV, or just go to fortisplus.org and walk like a Man.
- [14:27]
Todd Friel
Books of the Bible Zechariah was a prophet who preached God's judgment, repentance, and the promise of salvation to the Jews returning from exile. He relays a series of apocalyptic visions focusing on the coming of Christ, the final salvation of God's people, and the final judgment upon sinners. Remember that Jesus is the ultimate fulfillment of prophecy. This is Wretched Radio with Todd Friel.
- [14:56]
Wretched Radio Host
Gotta, gotta be a little careful, Phil. This is Wretched Radio, listening to a presentation recently delivered by Phil Johnson, who, by the way, happens to be one of the members of the board of directors here at Fortis Institute he has faithfully served us well for years. Preaching at the Shepherd's Conference. This isn't the big room session. This is a breakout session dealing with the doctrine of hell. And Phil, as always authoritatively, by using the Bible, goes about the business of dismantling the latest effort to shorten the expiration date on hell. He's now going to tackle the issue of doctrinal formation. You say, wait, what doctrinal formation? How we go about the business of putting together our theology and his warning. And you better be careful with this, Phil, is that social media ain't a good place to do that. I say that as this program is delivered on social media. So watch yourself, Phil.
- [16:00]
Phil Johnson
I hope you'll understand that the Internet, I hope you all understand this. The Internet is a dangerous place spiritually. And online forums are never a good place to hone your understanding of any biblical doctrine. So I take it you all get that? Okay? There are a lot of people in the broad evangelical world who seem blithely unaware of how foolish and how grossly unbiblical it is to crowdsource your belief system. You know, to let majority opinion decide what you believe. I think there are lots of students and young people nowadays who believe that social media is a superior substitute for the seminary classroom. It's not. And I say that as someone who never went to seminary, social media is not better than seminary. Even some guys who already have seminary degrees seem to think that social media is the perfect tool for us to untangle difficult theological questions. And it's not. In fact, there may be no worse approach to understanding biblical doctrine. I say that again as someone who has been active in theological forums on the Internet since 1995. I don't stay away from those things. Because social media does have a few legitimate uses, and used rightly, it can be a tool of discernment and a medium for spreading the gospel, or a supplement to our face to face fellowship. A speedy way to answer misunderstanding or confusion, or simply a means of encouragement. It can do all of those things. And so I'm the last person to scold people for having social media accounts. The Internet can be useful for ministry on a limited scale, and even John MacArthur, who hated social media, hated it with a white hot passion. Actually, he nevertheless found a few edifying ways to use it. But you need to know that Twitter and Facebook and Reddit and similar online forums, these are not and never will be classrooms for theological orthodoxy. They're open forums, and they are most often dominated by fools and novices and some of you guys fall into this category. I hope I do too. There are some faithful, orthodox and biblically sound voices on social media and I thank God for them. I hope they stay. But solid biblical content is too easily drowned out or lost in all of the discussions. And so in any open forum where anybody who wants to can contribute, there will always be a noisy tsunami of foolish and evil and unorthodox opinions. And there are dozens of forums for theological discussion online that frankly are dominated and populated by mountebanks and wolfs and theological hacks and ignorant neophytes. And some of the very worst heretics in the mix turn out to be glib, persuasive, assertive, authoritative sounding. But they are dangerously wrong. Professing to be wise. They're really just fools. Apply a little common sense here. It's simply unwise for anyone to think that he can be taught well in a forum of free for all debate, where half the people post anonymously, where false teachers lurk who want to lead you into heresy, where rank fools get to speak freely and pretend that they have authority equal to that of godly men who have seriously studied scripture and doctrine and they know what they're talking about. And Proverbs 14:7 tells us, Stay away from a foolish person. You will gain no knowledge from his speech. If you think you can become a doctor of divinity or a keen biblical scholar merely by following online forums where foolish opinions are constantly tossed around by people who are just looking, some of them just looking to argue for sport, you will be led astray because what you have are blind leaders of the blind, and they both will fall into a ditch. So you follow me here, right? Social media is not a legitimate place to seek a theological education. It may be the worst place to go if you're looking for reliable answers to difficult doctrinal questions. Before you take something like that to social media, take it to your pastor. Take it to someone who knows what he's talking about Just a little more than three months ago, a Hollywood celebrity who many of us thought as an outspoken conservative evangelical Christian suddenly announced that he doubted the biblical doctrine of hell as it is affirmed in every single Protestant confession of faith from the past 500 years and immediately had countless people willing to crowdsource their religious convictions who began to echo his skepticism that infidelity all over social media. Kirk Cameron is the actor known for his role on the TV show Growing Pains and the original Left behind movie. He's also been well known for years because of his testimony as a Christian, he's an exceptionally likable person with a better track record, frankly, than most Hollywood evangelicals, most of the Hollywood characters who say they're Christians. He's always been of the best. In fact, in the past he had partnered with Ray Comfort and Todd Friel, and he was actually part of our fellowship here at Grace Community Church, at least semi regularly. I would see him here a decade ago or so. Then he moved further out to the West Valley and he hasn't been coming here for a while. But largely because of his influential voice on matters of faith and morality, he's gathered a very large following on social media. And he produces a video podcast which he describes. These are his words, quote, a multi platform talk show where faith, family, politics and pop culture all meet through a biblical lens. And the show streams on YouTube and Facebook and pretty much anywhere you can listen to podcasts. He's all over the place. And then in December, he surprised virtually every Christian leader he had ever partnered with by releasing an episode titled Are We Wrong About Hell? In which he gave a list of arguments in favor of annihilationism. To my knowledge, he never sought any advice or counsel or help to understand this issue from Scripture, from many of the people he'd ever worked with, Todd Friel, Ray Comfort, they were all blindsided by this. As far as I know, none of the conservative ministries he'd ever been engaged with. If I had to guess, I would say he borrowed all of his main arguments from a single book that's titled the Fire that Consumes, written by Edward Fudge. Fudge's book was first published in 1982, and it's been revised and republished at least two times since then. The original version of that book actually included a forward by no less than FF Bruce. And that's what really began to clue me into this issue back in the 1980s. I think it was Lance Quinn who introduced me to that book, the Fire that Consumes. He pointed it out and said, this is a horrible book. So I've been watching the rise and fall of annihilationism since the early 1980s. And again, this issue resurfaces every five to seven years, maybe seven to ten years, and it's usually led by some influential Christian author or celebrity. And so Kirk Cameron's bombshell really isn't anything distinctively profound or eye opening. It's just the next chapter of this same cycle. And apparently Kirk Cameron himself has always harbored a secret feeling that the way Jesus described the punishment of the wicked just doesn't sound truly just and fair by any earthly standard of justice and he wants it toned down. Now. I said there have also been other well known individuals who have led these waves of interest in annihilationism. And I should mention they are usually people who are known as they're generally conservative, mostly orthodox voices. That was true of Edward White in Spurgeon's time. He wasn't a rank liberal on the doctrine of the atonement or any of the other doctrines that modernists in his era were constantly attacking. He actually stood with conservatives on most of those issues. And I think that's also fairly true of Edward Fudge, I believe is still alive. I've never heard him really express any criticism of evangelical ideas other than his attacks on eternal punishment. He hasn't openly championed any other, as far as I know, any other heretical or unorthodox idea.
- [25:14]
Wretched Radio Host
Those are the dulcet. Nah, they're not dulcet tones. They are powerful and authoritative and I'm so glad his voice is still so strong. Phil Johnson, grace to you at Shep's Con preaching on the doctrine of hell and that there isn't an expiration date. You don't get snuffed out. But Phil is going to Next, tackle the motive. Why do people seem to be sympathetic toward the doctrine of annihilationism? What is it that motivates them to work so tirelessly against what the Bible clearly states about the eternality of hell? Next on Wretched Radio.
- [26:01]
Jimmy Hicks
And it's now time for your daily Fortis news break, a production of Fortis Institute. We'll start but some actual good news. Scotland's parliament voted 6957 to reject a bill that would have allowed doctors to administer lethal drugs to terminally ill patients. Several lawmakers raised concerns about patients being pressured into choosing death, which if you're paying attention to how these programs play out, it's not paranoia, it's recognizing a pattern. Closer to home, pro life momentum is building on multiple fronts. In Wisconsin, Democratic Governor Tony Evers, a committed abortion advocate, signed a bill explained expanding the state's safe haven law from 72 hours to 30 days. A mother can now anonymously surrender a newborn to law enforcement, emergency workers or hospital staff within the first month of life, no questions asked. Evers didn't suddenly grow a conscience here. The bill doesn't touch abortion directly, but the result is the same more lives potentially saved. West Virginia is moving in the same direction. The state House committee advanced a bill allowing pregnancy support funding to cover abortion pill reversal, the process of using progesterone to counteract my Fristone after a woman has had second thoughts about chemical abortion. Success rates run between 64 and 81%, depending on the study. The bill already cleared the Senate 31 1. And in Missouri, a new St. Louis University poll shows 47% of likely voters support a fall ballot initiative to restrict abortion, compared to 40% opposed. Given the abortion lobby's track record of winning these fights, the margin is pretty encouraging. On immigration, Sen. Rick Scott introduced two bills this week tying federal funding to cooperation with I Cities and states want federal dollars. Well, they need to honor ICE detainers, conduct joint training and share information.
- [27:41]
Fortis Institute Announcer
Seems like a low bar.
- [27:43]
Jimmy Hicks
And despite the nationwide backlash against dei, hospitals are still at it. A watchdog group called Consumers Research warned Congress this week that nonprofit hospitals are using federal tax exempt status to fund racially focused initiatives in gender clinics for children as young as 3. A California clinic is offering puberty blockers to kids, describing them as reversible despite research showing permanent effects on bone density. And we'll close with this. A Utah woman named Corey Richins was convicted of murder this week specifically for poisoning her husband with five times the lethal dose of fentanyl. She had taken out millions in life insurance on him, had a boyfriend lined up, and her Internet search history included both lethal doses of fentanyl and luxury prison searches. But the detail that really completes the the picture. After killing him, she wrote a children's book about coping with grief. It was called Are youe With Me? And I don't know exactly what the opposite of a rhetorical question is, but that's it. And that wraps up today's Fortis News Break. I'm Jimmy Hicks. If you want more, you can download Fortis for Sign up to become a Fortis Insider for exclusive daily content. Both of those things can be done@fortisinstitute.org, and don't forget, you can also subscribe to Fortis News on your favorite podcast app in order to get these updates daily. And until tomorrow, go serve your king.
- [29:04]
Todd Friel
Books of the Bible Lamentations is a book of poems written by Jeremiah after the fall of Jerusalem. They are marked by weeping woes and affliction, but even in sorrow, Jeremiah praises God. He proclaims God's justice, cries out to God for mercy, and confesses his faith in God. Lamentations teaches us a godly way to express sorrow and grow in the midst of loss. This is Wretched Radio with Todd Friel.
- [29:33]
Wretched Radio Host
Well, this should put the subject to rest, at least for a few years. This Is wretched radio. Phil Johnson, grace to you at the Shep's con, speaking in a breakout session on the doctrine of hell, specifically responding to the individuals recently who have stated what has raised its head throughout church history. Doctrine of hell has been misunderstood. It is not eternal conscious torment. You ultimately get snuffed out in hell and experience no more consciousness. It's called annihilationism. Phil Johnson is going to close the books on the conversation that name conditional
- [30:13]
Phil Johnson
immortality comes from the belief. I'll explain what it means. They believe that the human soul is not inherently immortal. And although they would never say this candidly in these terms, their view really amounts to this that the human soul in its natural state has no more claim on life after death than the soul of a dog or a cockroach or a tick or a tapeworm. They say when a person dies, his soul simply goes out of existence. So immortality is conditional. It's conferred only on those who are awakened to the truth of the gospel. So they repent and believe and they're given eternal life. So Christ gives them new life so that they and they alone, out of all humanity, have an everlasting existence after death. Those who hold this view typically say that the wicked dead will be briefly resurrected or that they don't quite go out of existence until the judgment and they'll suffer in the flames of divine retribution for a little while, but then the flames of God's wrath will consume them. And so for unbelievers, this view says there is no life to come. Their end is total oblivion. And it amounts to a denial of what Ecclesiastes 3:11 says about the human soul, namely that God has set eternity in our hearts. Annihilationism is obviously pretty hard to reconcile with the story Jesus told about the rich man and Lazarus. Because if the human soul lacks immortality, what is this guy doing suffering prolonged torment in flames that don't actually consume him? Spurgeon hated both the doctrine of annihilation and he really hated that artificial name, conditional immortality. He wrote this quote, the idea that a man is but a brute, as soulless as a dog or a lion until conversion takes place. This idea is to us unaccountably profane and absurd. And it's full of logical contradictions. Now, the most influential proponent of annihilationism in Spurgeon's time was a free church pastor who also pastored in London at the time, named Edward White. And White wrote a book called Life in Christ that's a book length defense of annihilationism. You look it up. It's on the Internet. You can download it for free if you're interested in reading it. In fact, the book itself has never completely gone out of print. You can also order a copy of one of those things that makes a book to order when you order it on Amazon. So you could get this book. I don't recommend it, but it is easy to obtain and it had a huge but but viciously unhealthy influence. In an era when higher criticism was gaining popularity, church leaders were questioning Scripture. In the wake of Darwinism, mainstream churches were on the downgrade. Then there was Philip Edgcombe Hughes. He was a British writer, also from South Africa. He was in both places, and he embraced this view publicly and emphatically. Hughes was a highly respected New Testament scholar, an Anglican who was born in Australia, I think, and raised in South Africa. But in the late 1980s, late in his ministry, he began to argue against the idea of eternal punishment. He believed this was inconsistent with the biblical promise of Colossians 1:20, where we are told that Christ will one day reconcile all things to himself, whether things on the earth or things in heaven. Or he also pointed out Ephesians 1:10, that in the dispensation of the fullness of times, he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on earth. He also cited Revelation 21:4, which says, God will wipe away every tear from our eyes, and there will no longer be any death, there will no longer be any mourning or crying or pain. And he said he didn't think any of that was possible if people would be still suffering eternal punishment in hell. John Stott tried to sound ambivalent on this question of eternal punishment, but Stott clearly leaned towards annihilationism as well. He wrote, for example, emotionally, I find the concept of eternal conscious torment intolerable, and I do not understand how people can live with it. But then he also said, as a committed evangelical, my question must be and is not what does my heart tell me, but what does God's word say? So those are his precise words, but the fact that he was nevertheless waffling on this idea. Even though he said scripture should determine this for us, it is historical orthodoxy. He nevertheless went on to say, and these are his very next words, we need to survey the biblical material afresh and to open our minds, not just our hearts, to the possibility that Scripture points in the direction of annihilation and that eternal conscious torment is actually just a tradition. Let me quote what John Piper said In response to that claim, Piper said this in his typical. He said the other day, he doesn't like to yell or sound angry. I think he yelled and sounded angry when he said this, but these are his exact words. No, John Stott, Scripture does not point in the direction of annihilation. Your emotions do. And that's how people end up denying what Scripture says about hell. Piper is absolutely right. And every major argument that has ever been published in favor of annihilationism is it's always accompanied by an appeal to what my heart tells me. That's always the case. John Stott and JI Packer were friends, but they clearly did not agree on this issue. And although to my knowledge Packer never publicly called Stott out by name, he nevertheless after that spent a great deal of energy and ink defending the biblical and confessional view of hell. Closer to my generation. Clark Pinnock began his career in the late 1960s as a solid conservative. You may not know that about Pinnock because he's not that today, but back in that era when I worked for Moody Press, we published one of Pinnock's books on the authority and inspiration of scripture. You can still get it as a used book on Amazon. It was a 256 page book titled Biblical Revelation. Pinnock was fairly young at the time when he wrote that book. He was 33 years old. But then he spent the rest of his career being tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine. And for the past 20 years or so, he's been promoting a view of open theism that has the feel and the aroma of radical process theology, which is frankly, just the worst kind of Socinian liberalism gone to seed. So the Pinnock today is not someone I would recommend under any circumstance, but it is a fact that one of the shifts that began his descent into liberal doctrine and open theism was his denial of eternal punishment. He said this quote, I was led to question the traditional belief in everlasting conscious torment because of moral revulsion. You listen to that. That's the quote I was speaking of, where he basically is admitting that his sense of morality and justice is superior to what Scripture says. His way of describing. He thinks that his way of describing the fate of unbelievers is better and more in line with actual justice than the language of the New Testament. And he says so very bluntly. In 1990, he wrote this quote. I consider the concept of hell as endless torment in body and mind, an outrageous doctrine, a theological and moral enormity, a bad doctrine. Which needs to be changed and try to change it he did. He ended up denying virtually every significant Protestant and Reformed tenet of theology proper, from the sovereignty and immutability of God to the authority of Scripture. He abandoned it all. And it's a simple matter of historical fact that that's a fairly common trend. Those who deny the doctrine of everlasting punishment always put themselves and their followers on a path that, given enough time, always ends in apostasy.
- [38:59]
Wretched Radio Host
Nothing wrong with having feelings, but our feelings cannot, must not override the clarity of Scripture. Even though we don't like something the Bible says, we submit to Scripture. Why? Because, well, God wrote the Bible and everything that he describes, everything that he determines is right, just and good. And if my feelings don't align with what the Scripture says, guess what needs to be corrected? Not the Bible. Phil Johnson, grace to you at Shepherd's Conference. We don't usually play really lengthy sermon clips here on Wretched Radio, but his treatment of the subject of the eternality of hell versus conditionalism, which means you ultimately get annihilated in hell, is, I think, so thorough, so forceful, so important. We are going to listen to the conclusion of Phil's message to understand why it is so important that we continue to defend the doctrine of hell, specifically the eternal conscious torment position, even if our feelings don't like it. Next on Wretched Radio.
- [40:22]
Fortis Institute Announcer
Hey, thanks for listening to Wretched Radio today. You know what's rare? Finding something that makes you laugh and makes you think at the same time. And that's why we've brought in Gary Varvell. Gary's an award winning cartoonist and every week he draws in an original creation just for Fortis Institute. They're sharp, they're funny, and they usually make a point that sticks with you a little bit longer than you expect expected it to. And something else you'll find at Fortis Institute is Fortis News, which is hosted by yours truly. These are up to the minute headlines that matter to Christians and they're told from a biblical worldview. There's no spin, there's no agenda. It's just the news with a Christian perspective. And both of these things part of what we're building in Fortis Institute. And both are made possible by our gospel partners. If you have been helped and you appreciate the content that we're creating at Fortis Institute, would you consider supporting us so that we can reach more people in more places all over the world?
- [41:12]
Jimmy Hicks
It's really simple.
- [41:13]
Fortis Institute Announcer
We know you have questions, so we have answers@fortisinstitute.org Wretched Amazing Grace Amazing Gospel well, you can't judge me. You've heard that a thousand times. It's the verse people quote when they don't want to be corrected. Even people who've never opened a Bible. But here's the Is that actually what scripture teaches? Or have we been misreading one of the most misunderstood commands in the entire Bible? Thou shalt judge is a 13 lesson in series with Todd Friel and Justin Peters that sets the record straight. They demonstrate why failing to discern truth from error doesn't make you loving, it makes you dangerous. Righteous judgment isn't hateful. It's one of the most loving things you can do because it protects people from the damage of false teaching. This series even includes a free study guide. It's perfect for your family, your youth group, or just working through yourself. If you've ever been told that calling something wrong makes you the problem, this is one you'll want to watch. It's streaming free on Fortis, right? Download the app where you download apps on your smartphone, your smart TV, or just simply go to fortisplus.org 369 million that's how many people are a part of the new Apostolic Reformation movement. And if you've never heard of it, that's part of the problem. Maybe you have heard of Jesus culture. Maybe your teenager listens to their worship music, maybe your church sings their songs on Sunday morning, but you don't know what they actually teach and where it leads. Drunk in the Spirit pulls back the curtain on one of the most destructive forces in Christianity today. Who are these people? What do they believe? And why should it matter to your family and your local church? This isn't fear mongering, it's education, because you can't guard against something you don't recognize. And this movement has tentacles in places you wouldn't expect. If you care about protecting your family and your church from false teaching, that sounds Christ centered, but it's not. This is essential. Drunk in the Spirit it is streaming now for free on Fortis. Download the app on your smartphone, on your smart TV, or just simply go to fortisplus.org.
- [43:25]
Todd Friel
Names of God we learn a lot about God from the names given to him in scripture. One name is Jehovah Jireh. God will provide. When we were dead in sin and unrighteousness, God provided the righteousness he requires in Jesus Christ, our substitute. If God has provided for our salvation, how much more is he able to meet our daily needs? This Is Wretched Radio with Todd Friel
- [43:54]
Wretched Radio Host
really encouraging to see that Phil Johnson got this right? Sorry, this is Wretched Radio. Weathered conversation heated up. Oh, on the doctrine of hell a month or two ago. We discussed it a fair amount here on Wretched Radio, and we identified why the eternal conscious torment position is not only the most biblical and obvious understanding of the doctrine of hell, but any rewriting of the doctrine of hell to limit its eternality compromises so much. And Phil, he banged that nail into the wood so forcefully that we're going to share with you the conclusion of his presentation at Shepherd's Conference from just a couple of weeks ago, addressing the conditional view, the annihilation view of the doctrine of hell.
- [44:50]
Phil Johnson
The biblical language on this issue is clear. It is uncomfortable, but it's clear. And Jesus words in particular make it inescapably obvious that the anguish of a fiery hell, the way Jesus described it as eternal and everlasting, it's never ending. And furthermore, Romans 3:8 specifically says of people who try to minimize the seriousness of sin, Scripture says their damnation is just. So here's the key issue. Justice. God's justice is defined by what the Bible says, not by what our hearts say. But I want to start to wrap this up by giving you three specific examples of how denying the eternality of hell undermines actually some of the cardinal truths of Christianity. First, annihilationism minimizes the sinfulness of sin. The truth is, if you and I were perfectly holy, if we really understood that all sin, all of it, is exceedingly sinful, if we hated evil the way God hates it, we would see the necessity of an infinite punishment for everyone who has sinned against an infinitely holy God. Because every sin is a direct assault on the holiness and goodness of the Creator, whose eyes are so holy that he can't even bear to look on sin. His holiness is infinite. His majesty is infinite. His worthiness as our rightful Lord and God and heavenly ruler, it's infinite. All sin against the one truly almighty Deity, therefore deserves an infinite punishment. And anyone who would deny the justice of that then has to diminish or demean the true holiness and justice of God and say, sin isn't really that bad, which demeans the holiness of God. Because in the process of minimizing the sinfulness of sin, they're also minimizing the holiness of God. Hebrews 10:30 Vengeance is mine, says the Lord. And then the very next verse says, it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God. It's simply not our prerogative to grant clemency to sinners who refuse to repent and who acknowledge the unapproachable holiness of God. Again, to do that is to minimize the exceeding sinfulness of sin. That's problem number one. Problem number two. Second, annihilationism subverts the authority of Scripture. Now, I contend God always speaks clearly. There are things in Scripture that are hard to understand. But in general, God speaks clearly, not in puzzles or riddles. And if the punishment of the wicked were a finite penalty, ending with the extermination of the sinner, Scripture would make that clear. Instead, the Bible consistently uses expressions like eternal fire. That's Matthew 25:41. And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever. They have no rest, day and night. That's Revelation 14:11. And we even have a real life example of divine judgment in the way God dealt with the angels who rebelled. He did not annihilate them. He never even threatens them with annihilation. They were cast out of heaven. And Scripture tells us that in the end they're going to be eternally consigned to hell. They will burn forever in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone. Revelation 19:20 describes how the beast and the false prophet will be thrown alive into the lake of fire, which burns with brimstone. And then a full chapter later, Revelation 20:10, the devil who deceived them, the devil himself is thrown into the lake of fire and brimstone. Listen to this. Where the beast and the false prophet are not where they were, where they were annihilated, where they are. And listen to this. They will be tormented day and night, forever and ever. How could that be any more clear? Earlier, I made a passing reference to Matthew 25:46, and in this context, Jesus is describing God's final judgment of humanity. He likens it to separating the sheep from the goats. Verse 46 is where he says of the goats, these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life. And I want to stress again that same word, eternal, is used twice in that sentence. Eternal punishment and eternal life. And that's not true only of the English text. The Greek word is the very same thing in the original manuscripts as well. The Greek word there is aionios, which means literally without end, never to cease everlasting. It's clear that Jesus was saying, the punishment of the wicked is everlasting in the same way that the life of the righteous is everlasting. If we're going to be honest with the text this is not really subject to nuance. If Jesus meant two different things, he wouldn't have used the same word. He would have made it clear. If he meant to say that the punishment of the wicked would be temporary or short lived or transitory, if his intention was to suggest that the flames of hell will annihilate the sinner and end his existence, then surely Jesus, of all people, whose tender mercies exceed any sense of compassion that you and I and our human souls might feel, Surely Jesus would have said that he could easily have softened or mitigated the image of everlasting torment. But instead, what he stresses is the forever and ever aspect of Hell's punishments. Every time the subject comes up, and in order to stress the reality of Hell's unrelenting misery, he tells that story of the rich man and Lazarus. And some dismiss that whole account by saying, well, that's a parable. Let me respond to that. First, Jesus parables were never fanciful or mythical. There were stories that either really happened or they could have happened in the realm of reality where we live. And second, if the story of Lazarus in the afterlife was just a parable, that's the only parable of Jesus where he explicitly gives a name to the central character. He names him. This is not about a poor, nameless beggar. The righteous man's name was Lazarus. And the punishment of the rich man, as Jesus describes it, is an endless, nightmarish horror. One final point, and I hate to give it short shrift because this is supremely important, but it's simple. This is number three. Annihilationism undermines the doctrine of substitutionary atonement. Think about this. If the punishment for sin is temporary and finite, there was really no need for our atonement to require a sacrifice of infinite value. There would have been no necessity for the eternal Son of God in all his infinite perfection to be the proxy who bore our punishment if the punishment that we deserve is just a finite penalty. And this, to my mind, is the definitive point, the fact that our atonement had to be of infinite value, that nothing less could ever pay the price of our sins. That seems clear proof to me that the only just punishment for sin and rebellion against an infinitely holy God must be an infinite punishment. And that punishment, therefore, by definition, can never be paid in full, at least not by us. And again, our fallen finite human minds cannot and should not and do not determine the boundaries of divine justice. To intrude into that role and think we can tone down what God says that is itself a grievous sin. So don't brush this issue off. Don't look at it and say, this is a secondary issue. So it really doesn't matter much. Just remember, denying hell minimizes the exceeding sinfulness of sin. It subverts the authority of Scripture, and it undermines the doctrine of substitutionary atonement. That's a huge open door to apostasy. Dangerous step to take because it breeds spiritual indifference in believers and unbelievers alike. Because for the believer, this idea of annihilationism severely lessens the urgency of evangelism. For the unbeliever, it diminishes or completely eliminates the fear of God's righteous judgment. And the fear of Yahweh is the beginning of wisdom. For our God is a consuming fire. And it is therefore a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God. And woe to those who diminish that reality.
- [54:08]
Wretched Radio Host
Not bad, Phil. Not bad. One of the best preachers of our age, Phil Johnson. Grace to you at Shepherd's Conference. Let's hope now that, having heard I believe, an authoritative and biblical word on the doctrine of hell, we can put this conversation where it belongs. On the shelf. No, six feet underground. Because the Bible is clear. Because of who God is, because of what sin is, and because of what Jesus accomplished, we must continue to defend the biblical doctrine of hell as eternal conscious torment. And until tomorrow, go serve your king.