Conditional Immortality

I’m hearing rumblings of an alternate definition of hell, one that’s contrary to the historic Mennonite position, and indeed, to the position of nearly all biblically-minded believers since the beginning of the church in the first century. This view, called “Annihilationism” or “Conditional Immortality,” holds that the souls of sinners cease to exist in the judgment. Those who believe in Christ are granted eternal life; those who reject the gospel cease to exist. Immortality is thus “conditional” on the basis of one’s faith. If one believes, he is granted eternal life in heaven with Christ. If he does not believe, he simply ceases to exist. This avoids those aspects of the historical understanding of hell that make us uncomfortable. Eternal suffering? Not a problem. “The soul who sins will die” (which is understood as “cease to exist.”) Judgment according to this view is not eternal. Rather, the sinner’s life is blotted out, body and soul, and he is spared endless suffering.

This view is more palatable to our human nature, but it departs from Scripture. We believe that the Bible portrays hell as eternal conscience torment for sinners as a just punishment for their sins. It is meted out by God, it is severe, it is frightful. Why else would we be “subject to bondage” by our “fear of death” (Hebrews 2:15)? We do not believe in an eternal conscious torment because we like it. We believe this because it is what the Bible unequivocally teaches. I am exploring this subject in this and following issues under the “Theological Touchpoints” column. I encourage your attention and interaction on this important subject. Like it or not, Annihilationism is here. It won’t go away without a fight.

The consequences of accepting Conditional Immortality are far-reaching and severe. This teaching twists what we are to believe about God’s character and work, His authority, His holiness, our sin and its consequences, and the trustworthiness and authority of Scripture. Indeed, the whole scope of redemption in Christ is altered. We cannot tolerate this teaching and claim to love the word of God and the gospel of Christ. If we are complacent toward false doctrine, we abrogate any right to claim we love the truth. Love for the truth produces hatred for anything else, precisely because true worship of Christ can only exist within right knowledge of Him. False Christ equals false worship.

But some may say, “Isn’t quibbling over hell just causing unnecessary division? After all, the Bible calls us to unity.” It is true that we ought to seek such wherever the Bible permits. When we come to faith, many of us are the guardians of false ideas and false theology. This changes through the power of God’s Word. We are to grow in the knowledge of God, as 2 Peter 3 says. Scripture urges us to be patient and merciful with those who are struggling and growing; God has certainly been merciful to us. We are commanded in 1 Thessalonians 5:14 to “comfort the fainthearted, uphold the weak, be patient with all.” This is our goal whenever possible.

But there are times when unity is no longer an option. While we must be patient with the weak and immature, we must also note those who refuse to submit to Scripture and not keep company with them (cf. 2 Thess. 3:14). Unity ceases to be an option when persons distance themselves from the true gospel. Tolerating their false teaching is sharing with their sin. If we are to be truly biblical, we must separate from all those who resist the Scriptures. Since true unity is found in the gospel itself, we must purge all teachings that detract from that gospel.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *