Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary

Liberty University

A THEOLOGICAL CRITIQUE OF

FOUR VIEWS ON HELL

STANLEY N. GUNDRY AND WILLIAM CROCKET, EDITORS

Submitted to Dr. Timothy Chong

in partial completion of course requirements for

THEO 530 – Systematic Theology II

Elke Speliopoulos

Downingtown, PA

February 26, 2010

 3

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................1

SUMMARY OF BOOK..................................................................................................................1

THE LITERAL VIEW....................................................................................................................3

THE METAPHORICAL VIEW......................................................................................................3

THE PURGATORIAL VIEW.........................................................................................................4

THE CONDITIONAL VIEW..........................................................................................................4

DISCUSSION..................................................................................................................................5

CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................9

BIBLIOGRAPHY..........................................................................................................................10

BIBLIOGRAPHY
 1

INTRODUCTION

Whatever denominational background they may be from, hell is a topic that makes many

followers of Jesus Christ slightly - and at times even significantly - uncomfortable. For many

who have been exposed to the “seeker friendly” environments of recent years, the topic is one

that seems better to avoid, especially as it might scare away said seekers.

Yet the Bible makes very explicit statements on the topic of hell. As such, it is not a topic

that can or should be avoided, especially when desiring to teach the full counsel of God.

However, the question remains how literal the statements in the pages of Scripture are to be read.

The book under review is a collection of four theological stances entitled “Four Views on Hell”

and was compiled by Stanley N. Grudem and William Crocket as editors. It allows the

proponents of each view to voice their theological arguments in support of their very

significantly differing interpretations.

Since no human can report from the “other side”, it seems reasonable to arrive at a

biblically based opinion on what hell is like by considering the valid points brought forth both by

Walvoord and Crockett, while realizing that the theological opinions brought forth by both

Hayes and Pinnock by and large lack biblical support.

SUMMARY OF BOOK

Stanley N. Gundry as series editor and William Crockett as general editor bring together

four different viewpoints on hell as seen through the eschatological filters of John F. Walvoord,

Crockett, Zachary J. Hayes, and Clark H. Pinnock. The authors come from diverse backgrounds.

John F. Walvoord, who was the long-time president of Dallas Theological Seminary and died in

2001, was considered “one of the most prominent evangelical scholars of his generation.”1 In this

book, he argues a position that “biblical descriptions of hell as a place of everlasting fiery

1. http://www.walvoord.com/author_bio.php?author_id=1, John F. Walvoord: Theologian. Educator.

Author (2007).
 2

torment should be taken literally.” 2 While agreeing with Walvoord on the eternal duration of

conscious punishment, William V. Crockett, New Testament professor at Alliance Theological

Seminary3, will argue that “the biblical descriptions of this place should be understood

metaphorically”4. Zachary J. Hayes, a retired teacher of theology at the Catholic Theological

Union5, alters the discussion away from one focusing on hell itself to one that looks at purgatory.

Finally, Clark H. Pinnock, Professor of Systematic Theology at McMaster Divinity College6,

“contends for the ultimate annihilation of the wicked.”7

Each writer offers a lengthy outline of their position, offering in most cases both biblical

and philosophical arguments. Each section is then followed by a brief response from each of the

other three contributors to the book. As such, the reader is not just exposed to each writer’s

eschatological viewpoint, but to counter arguments by the other contributors within each section.

As Pyne writes, “These different approaches make the book as much a study in theological

method as in eschatology.”8

THE LITERAL VIEW

John Walvoord presents a view that incorporates everlasting punishment for the wicked.

In addition to an eternal length, this punishment is “punitive, not redemptive.”9 Walton argues

that throughout Scripture, Old Testament to New, this view is presented. He spends a few pages
2. Robert A. Pyne, “Book Reviews,” in Bibliotheca Sacra Volume 150, 500. 600 (Dallas, TX: Dallas
Theological Seminary, 1993), 500.

3. http://www.nyackcollege.edu/content/ATSFaculty, William Crockett.

4. Pyne, 500.

5. http://www.zondervan.com/Cultures/en-US/Authors/Author.htm?
ContributorID=HayesZ&QueryStringSite=Zondervan, Zachary J. Hayes.

6. http://www.mcmaster.ca/mjtm/bio1-3.htm, Clark H. Pinnock.

7. Pyne, 500.

8. Ibid., 501.

9. John F. Walvoord, Zachary J. Hayes, and Clark H. Pinnock, Four Views on Hell, ed. Stanley N. Gundry
and William Crockett (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996), 12.
 2

on the views presented during the intertestamental period, in the New Testament and by Jesus, as

well as on a discussion of the term aionios and its use in the New Testament as meaning

“endless”10. His final points center on a discussion of whether this view is in agreement with the

understanding of a loving God and whether believers are to view the depiction of hell as literal

terms.

THE METAPHORICAL VIEW

From the first paragraphs of his response to Walvoord, it is clear that Crockett shares

more with Walvoord than with the other writers, but especially with Pinnock. However, their

overlap ends when Crockett states, “Walvoord is mistaken when he argues that hell is a place of

intense heat, material fire, and smoke akin to the fires of an earthly furnace.”11 As such, in his

own section, Crocket develops a theological stance that leaves Walvoord’s idea of eternal

punishment in place, but takes away the need for a literal interpretation. Crockett thus asks

whether we should take a literal view of the images of heaven and hell, or whether we should

“see them as metaphors pointing toward real but indefinable states”.12 Crockett’s argument

centers on the symbolic use of words, as well as the inconsistency of the mention of both utter

darkness and burning flames. He concludes his argument by stating that the images of heaven

and hell in the Scriptures depict two real places, “one a place of immeasurable happiness, the

other of profound misery.”13

THE PURGATORIAL VIEW

Hayes approaches his argument from a very different angle than the prior writers. Rather

than focusing on hell specifically, he argues for the need and benefit of purgatory. From his
10. Ibid., 23-27.

11. Ibid., 29.

12. Ibid., 45.

13. Ibid., 76.

 2

position as a Catholic theologian, Hayes states, “Now, our response to God's grace during our

life on earth may be basically good, but it is far from perfect…This difference provides a helpful

basis for seeing that there is a genuine form of "both just and sinner".14 In order to allow the

reader to follow him into the historical and theological background, Hayes takes an excursion

into the works-based approach to salvation of the Roman Catholic Church.

THE CONDITIONAL VIEW

Pinnock closes out the book with his section on the conditional view of hell. He suggests

that hell is indeed a reality, however that this cannot mean an ongoing eternal punishment of the

lost as this is out of character with God. A large portion of his argument hinges on the

understanding of immortality, which Pinnock claims has been misunderstood to apply to all

humans. Instead he argues that “God alone has immortality”15, based on 1 Tim. 6:16. He

concludes that instead of granting immortality to all, God simply withholds immortality from

those who ultimately reject Him. The outcome then is nevertheless final. As Pinnock states,

“though annihilationism makes hell less of a torture chamber, it does not lessen its extreme

seriousness.”16

DISCUSSION

Based on church upbringing, for many readers Walvoord’s view will be by far the most

comfortable one as it stays within the confines of the traditional view on hell. In particular, his

discussion of the term aionios adds much to the validity of his argument. It is interesting to note

that some sources give slightly different definitions, such as The Complete Word Study

Dictionary: “Denotes duration or continuance of time, but with great variety.”17 However, this

14. Ibid., 115.

15. Ibid., 148.

16. Ibid., 165.

17. Spiros Zodhiates, The Complete Word Study Dictionary: New Testament, electronic ed. (Chattanooga,
TN: AMG Publishers, 2000).
 2

should not be enough to throw out Walvoord’s argument of an everlasting punishment. To him,

the punishment is also literally through fiery flames eternally consuming bodies. Walvoord

clearly allows for no deviation from a literal interpretation, which he underlines by speaking to

prophetic fulfillments, which have already occurred - and to him, have been fulfilled literally.

However, also here a bit of caution might be appropriate as to how very literal the fulfillments

were. Sandy shares several examples of how prophecy was fulfilled and achieved the end goal,

but was not fulfilled completely in every detail as announced. He offers that “the already fulfilled

prophecies demonstrate a pattern of translucence rather than transparency”18, which seems to

amend Walvoord’s pronouncement of absolute literal fulfillment. Pinnock picks up on this

criticism when he writes in his response that “Walvoord must know…that not all Scriptures lend

themselves to literal interpretation.”19 Pinnock offers one other argument, which needs to be

considered in this discussion: the discussion of a literal hell can be held by people for the

purpose of “teaching about hell for pragmatic and not biblical reasons”.20 Yet, Crockett’s

comment that Walvoord’s view does not come from “an uncaring spirit, but because he believes

it to be the clear teaching of Scripture” 21 seems to underline Walvoord’s life’s testimony.

Walvoord’s interest is not in scaring people into faith, but in being faithful to the Scriptures.

Crockett’s view by name (“metaphorical view”) seems to be a direct contradiction of

Walvoord’s position, yet there seem to be more similarities than dissimilarities. As a reviewer of

the book comments, “Walvoord and Crockett clearly refute the purgatorial and annihilationist

views. Together they argue persuasively for eternal, conscious punishment.”22 However,
18. D. Brent Sandy, Plowshares & Pruning Hooks: Rethinking the Language of Biblical Prophecy and
Apocalyptic (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2002), 146.

19. Walvoord, Hayes, and Pinnock, Four Views on Hell, 39.

20. Ibid.

21. Ibid., 29.

22. R. Michael Duffy, “Book Reviews,” in Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society Volume 07, 1 (Irving,
TX: Grace Evangelical Society, 1994), 75-76.
 3

Crockett’s critique of Walvoord centers on physical improbabilities, such as darkness and flames

of fire co-existing or fire working eternally on physical bodies.23 Crockett confirms hell as a real

place, but states it cannot be known “precisely what it will be like”24. He bases this on a

discussion of the symbolic use of words and takes a close look at the hyperbole displayed in even

some of Jesus’ words.25 Crockett ends with what appears to be a natural conclusion based on his

evaluation of language: “The most we can say is that the rebellious will be cast from the

presence of God, without any hope of restoration.”26

Hayes’ discussion of purgatory seems like a strange inclusion in this book, in particular

as it does not directly deal with the topic of hell, but rather focuses on the historical and

theological background behind the purgatory views of the Roman Catholic Church. The key

take-away out of this discussion is the clear perspective of the works-based theology, which

becomes very obvious in some of Hayes’ statements, such as the one already cited above. His

only support of the doctrine comes from the deuterocanonical book of 2 Maccabees27.

Ultimately, as some of his respondents also state, Hayes’ discussion of the Roman Catholic

understanding of grace and justification eliminates the purgatorial view from one that could find

supporters in the Protestant theological corner. Nevertheless, as Pyne points out in a review of

the book, “Of particular interest is Pinnock’s response to Hayes, in which he expresses

considerable openness to the idea of purgatory.”28 As will be seen in the next paragraph,

Pinnock’s views also fall outside of the mainstream orthodox thinking on hell.

23. Walvoord, Hayes, and Pinnock, Four Views on Hell, 30.

24. Ibid., 49.

25. Ibid., 51.

26. Ibid., 61.

27. Ibid., 104.

28. Pyne, 500.

 4

For Pinnock the discussion on hell is an emotionally charged one as this brief excerpt

from another one of his writings suggests: “How should I begin? Shall I treat the subject in the

calm way one would when dealing with another issue? Would it be right to pretend to be calm

when I am not? To begin calmly would not really communicate a full account of my response. I

do not feel calm about the traditional doctrine of hell, and so I will not pretend”29. Pinnock’s

irritation seems to have led him down a rather dangerous theological path, including charges that

he had left behind the affirmation of biblical inerrancy, which caused a lot of controversy and

even resulted in his almost getting voted out of the Evangelical Theological Society in 2003,30

leading to the very outspoken resignation by Norman Geisler because of the vote that allowed

him to stay.31 This background alone makes him suspect of exegetical error. Yet, Pinnock does

offer up an emotionally appealing discussion on why God could not possibly create an eternal

punishment, such as the one advanced by Walvoord and Crockett, and why he himself believes

that those who do not accept God’s offer of mercy will be annihilated: “Any doctrine of hell

needs to pass the moral test.”32 To Pinnock, God is “morally justified in destroying the wicked

because he respects their human choices.”33 Yet, he cannot support views such as the ones

Walvoord and Crockett offer as he does not see a possibility of evil and good to co-exist

eternally, as this would speak against the victorious image of a triumphant Christ: “The doctrine

creates a lurking sense of metaphysical disquiet.”34 In order to circumnavigate this dichotomy,

29. Clark H. Pinnock, “The Destruction of the Finally Impenitent,” Criswell Theological Review 4, (March
1, 1990): 243. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed February 26, 246.

30. http://blog.christianitytoday.com/ctliveblog/archives/theology/, Inerrancy, Trinitarianism, and … ?:

Evangelical Theological Society Will Vote on Changing Its Theological Basis.

31. Norman Geisler, Why I Resigned from the Evangelical Theological Society (2003),
http://www.normangeisler.net/etsresign.htm (accessed February 26, 2010).

32. Walvoord, Hayes, and Pinnock, Four Views on Hell, 151.

33. Ibid.

34. Ibid., 154.

 5

Pinnock argues for the immortality of the soul as an erroneous teaching. In his repeated

reasoning that this is a Hellenistic belief35, he somehow resembles a precursor to the Brian

McLarens of 2010. While the human spirit can find much to like about a position that the wicked

will simply cease to exist as God simply doesn’t “renew the lease” on these lives, the biblical

evidence does not seem to agree with this view. As Peterson writes, “Evangelical annihilationists

use theological arguments as well as biblical arguments in seeking to defend their position.”36 He

continues by citing John Piper, “But more and more it seems contemporary evangelicals are

submitting to what ‘makes sense’ to their own moral sentiments.”37 This is ultimately what one

walks away with after reading Pinnock’s discussion of what is termed in the book “the

conditional view”. It seems that God already knew of such discussions that would ultimately

dishonor His perfectly just character, when He had Moses write down Balaam’s words, “God is

not man, that he should lie, or a son of man, that he should change his mind. Has he said, and

will he not do it? Or has he spoken, and will he not fulfill it?” (Num. 23:19, ESV)

CONCLUSION

This book is an important book. Hell, as already mentioned, is not discussed very often in

today’s Christian circles or preached from the pulpits, yet it needs to be. There has to be a clear

position taken to ward off erroneous teachings and especially those that put into question biblical

inerrancy. D. A. Carson said it well when he said:

Despite the sincerity of their motives, one wonders more than a little to what extent the
growing popularity of various forms of annihilationism and conditional immortality are a
reflection of this age of pluralism. It is getting harder and harder to be faithful to the ‘hard
lines’ of Scripture. And in this way, evangelicalism itself may contribute to the gagging
of God by silencing the severity of his warnings and by minimizing the awfulness of the
punishment that justly waits those untouched by his redeeming grace.38
35. Ibid., 147.

36. Robert A. Peterson, “Does the Bible Teach Annihilationism,” in Bibliotheca Sacra Volume 156, 621
(Dallas, TX: Dallas Theological Seminary, 1999), 19.

37. Ibid., 26.

38. Peterson, 27.

 2

Yet, even within the lines of orthodoxy, there needs to be room for interpretation.

Walvoord’s strictly literal reading seems to not take in to account the nuances of language styles

within the pages of the Bible. This seems to be a critical argument in favor of Crockett’s

position. While God will most definitely bring about what He has planned, how exactly He will

fulfill this will only be visible, or rather reviewable, from eternity. And we, as His creatures,

should allow God to be sovereign in this eschatological fulfillment.

 3

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Duffy, R. Michael. “Book Reviews.” In Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society Volume 07,
75-76. 1. Irving, TX: Grace Evangelical Society, 1994.

Geisler, Norman. Why I Resigned from the Evangelical Theological Society. 2003.
http://www.normangeisler.net/etsresign.htm (accessed February 26, 2010).

http://blog.christianitytoday.com/ctliveblog/archives/theology/. Inerrancy, Trinitarianism, and

… ? Evangelical Theological Society Will Vote on Changing Its Theological Basis
(accessed February 26, 2010).

http://www.mcmaster.ca/mjtm/bio1-3.htm. Clark H. Pinnock (accessed February 26, 2010).

http://www.nyackcollege.edu/content/ATSFaculty. William Crockett (accessed February 26,

2010).

http://www.walvoord.com/author_bio.php?author_id=1. John F. Walvoord: Theologian.

Educator. Author. 2007 (accessed February 26, 2010).

http://www.zondervan.com/Cultures/en-US/Authors/Author.htm?
ContributorID=HayesZ&QueryStringSite=Zondervan. Zachary J. Hayes (accessed
February 26, 2010).

Peterson, Robert A. ““Does the Bible Teach Annihilationism.” In Bibliotheca Sacra Volume 156.
621. Dallas, TX: Dallas Theological Seminary, 1999.

Pinnock, Clark H.. “The Destruction of the Finally Impenitent.” Criswell Theological Review 4,
(March 1, 1990): 243. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost
(accessed February 26.

Pyne, Robert A. “Book Reviews.” In Bibliotheca Sacra Volume 150, 500. 600. Dallas, TX:
Dallas Theological Seminary, 1993.

Sandy, D. Brent. Plowshares & Pruning Hooks: Rethinking the Language of Biblical Prophecy
and Apocalyptic. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2002.

Walvoord, John F., Zachary J. Hayes, and Clark H. Pinnock. Four Views on Hell. Edited by
Stanley N. Gundry and William Crockett. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996.

Zodhiates, Spiros. The Complete Word Study Dictionary: New Testament. Electronic ed.
Chattanooga, TN: AMG Publishers, 2000.