Christian, wife, mom, homeschooler, podcaster
Sola Deo gloria
Verbum Dei manet in aeternum
Christian Theology and Apologetics
Philosophy, Religion and Spirituality
This WordPress.com site is the bee's knees
Discussing books - theological, historical, and biblical - from a Reformed Christian perspective...
"And the daughter of Zion is left as a cottage in a vineyard, as a lodge in a garden of cucumbers, as a besieged city." - Isaiah 1:8
Reblogged this on Talmidimblogging.
LikeLike
Annihilationism- the final disposition of unredeemed humanity after due suffering for “things done while in the body” (2Cor. 5.10). This has never by any church group (as far as I know) been considered heresy.
Maybe you want to go on record as saying it is heretical?
LikeLike
There hasn’t been an ecumenical council declaring it to be heresy, but it has never been accepted as orthodox. There is no ecumenical council declaring justification to be by faith alone, but to deny justification by faith alone is to put oneself outside the christian faith.
I have identified annihilationism as heresy. I don’t view all heresies as “damnable,” as it were. There is a broad sense of heresy in which the doctrine is a complete departure from the faith, and a narrower sense in which specific deviations from orthodoxy exist but don’t bring one’s salvation into question.
I think annihilationism is heresy, but not damnable heresy.
LikeLike
Your position I held 40 years ago while I was in seminary. I used to sit smugly while the president of the seminary (Richard V. Clearwaters) spoke since he held to annihilation of the unsaved. I thought I was more orthodox too.
If you want to debate me, bring it. I will only deal with scripture however and not what people believed or didn’t (historical positions of the church fathers are not authoritative to me).
However, you need to drop sweeping statements without proof. In your article above, you make several statements without a shred of support. The church fathers all held to immortality of the soul? prove it! You can’t. No serious scholar would say such a thing. Your confident pronouncements about the nature of the soul that it is indestructible are hollow. Academics have studied these concepts thoroughly and none, that I know or have read, have ventured so confidently as you. You are an empty drum. I doubt you have exegeted and of the relevant passages.
LikeLike
I hold the position I do because of scripture. It isn’t a mark of intellectual or spiritual pride, seeing as it is the Spirit of God who reveals the truth to his people.
I’m not sure where your statement about debating comes into the picture, especially in the context of a book review’s comment section.
As for the fathers and their doctrine of immortality, I didn’t give any citations because this is a book review, not a scholarly paper. However, if you want to read up on the issue I’d recommend the works of John Behr, Robert M. Grant, Eric Osborn, and Khaled Anatolios.
My statement about the indestructibility of the soul is taken from Irenaeus’ Against Heresies. It’s the same doctrine, unless he lied, that his mentor Polycarp held, and Polycarp was the disciple of John the Apostle. Unless, of course, Irenaeus was lying.
I’ve studied conditionalism/annihilationism for a while now, and I have studied the passages of scripture they think support their doctrine. I’ve Fudge, Pinnock, Constable, and quite a few others. And none of these writers presents a logically coherent case for their doctrine from the Scriptures.
This is a comment thread on a book review, so I’m going to leave my comments at that. Suffice it to say, I have studied the issue at length.
LikeLike
Is not the thrust of your site focused on countering Conditionalism? (that’s why I thought you debate).
LikeLike
Not the thrust of it. I write about a myriad of things. Don’t really know if I have one narrow focus or not.
LikeLike