LIBERTY UNIVERSITY
CRITIQUE OF THE BOOK, “FOUR VIEWS ON HELL”
A BOOK REVIEW SUBMITTED TO
DR. TIMOTHY CHONG
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE CLASS
SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY II
THEO 530
LIBERTY BAPTIST THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
BY
JUSTIN LOWRY
Introduction to the Critique:
The word, “Hell” can scare both believers and non-believers… Therefore, this topic is very uncomfortable for many to talk about openly in our culture today. Some churches here in the US don’t bring up the topic very often, because it can run some away that have had a bad experience at church or just that they too are too uncomfortable with the topic, that they shy away from coming back to church, all denominations apply here.
So why does something the Bible say, make us so uncomfortable? We, as the church can’t shy away from this topic, because the Gospel isn’t fully engaged without the consequences in the text about what or why we would go to hell. How literal is the word Hell and how do we interpret what the Bible is saying about Hell?
1We will learn here about four main theological doctrines, which are found in, “Four View on Hell” by Grudem and Crockett. We will see the breakdown of each view and the difference in which stance or interpretations they take on. We can’t really know what side is right or wrong, all we can do is take the information presented and make our own suggestions or opinions. We must find in all of these views, what the Bible says about them. That is the most important aspect in all of this, what scripture says about this, not humans.
Key Points/Background Info on Stances:
1We get to see the very interesting and intriguing view-points from John F. Walvoord, Crockett, Zachary J. Hayes, and Clark H. Pinnock, which all come from very different backgrounds and beliefs, which will be interesting to see. Walvoord, one of the most well respected scholars, is one that takes the literal meaning of Hell being a fiery torment and everlasting state. Crockett, who is on the side of Walvoord, believes that this should be interpreted metaphorically. 1
1Hayes believes that Hell is a purgatory of sorts and Pinnock believes there is a total destruction with view of hell. We are going to see with all of these positions, that there is biblical truth provided and philosophical arguments within each scholar’s viewpoint. Each writer will give the views in an eschatology, which will be followed by the author’s contributions in the works. The reader will then be able to see all of the information laid out fairly to make his/her own interpretation and opinion.
Literal View:
1Walvoord argues that there is an everlasting punishment for the wrong doers and the wicked. This is eternal, non-redemptive state, which is not a single period of time for transgressions or “purgatory”. Walton on the other hand, states that this is presented in both NT and OT to be true. The inter-testament period proves this to be endless. We see that his argument is one that takes on the “literal” meaning of hell in his agreement with the interpretation. 1
METAPHORICAL VIEW:
1Crockett’s beliefs are inline with Walvoord and Pinnock, but Crockett insists that Walvoord is mistaken that his views on hell are exactly that of fire and of a furnace burning intensely like we know here on earth. Crockett on the hand in his own theological interpretation of Walvoord’s ideas leaves out the literal interpretation of hell. Also, Crockett believes that we are to treat each of the views in the images of hell to be undefined and attainable in the human status we know today. Symbolism is Crockett’s viewpoint, which have to do with the words darkness and burning. He states that scripture depicts the literal meanings of Heaven and hell as real places that bring happiness or torment.
PURGATORIAL VIEW:
1Hayes, with his Roman Catholic background, contends that we shouldn’t just focus on hell but we should rely on the fact that we are far from perfect, needing God and that we are far from what Christ who is, perfection. Hayes takes on the Catholic Theologians to prove his works- based arguments for what the idea of Hell actually is and that purgatory exists.
CONDITIONAL VIEW:
1We then end the book with Pinnock giving his view on hell, which is conditional. Pinnock believes that the reality of hell is scriptural and just… but contends that this is not within the character of God. He states, ”We are to fully understand the character of God and the misinterpretation of God”, that us humans take on daily. He argues with 1 Tim 6, that God alone, is immortal and is the only one that can grant this status.2 He states, that God offers the gift of immortality and those that reject his name with be punished eternally. “This is final and just with God.” The actual place and term for hell is a chamber of torture, but doesn’t down play the state in which the word hell is taken seriously, which we sometimes like to do as humans…
My Thoughts:
1To most that are reading, Walvoord’s view on hell is the most traditional view and one that most can identify with. His word study adds the substance to which his argument, although we can’t just throw out his interpretation of hell being an existence of a fiery flame consuming bodies.1 With his interpretation there is no room for leaving the realm of the literacy of the interpretation, which are the fulfillments of prophecy. Pinnock is one that states not all scriptures are themselves in fact literal. Some are stories and some are other interpretations by previous scholars. Pinnock is also controversial in that his discussion on the literal form of hell can be discussed for the purpose of weighing the biblical-non-biblical reasons and pragmatic teachings of hell. Crockett holds that Walvoord’s points are not of a caring spirit, but that of a teacher that is straight to the point. Like many in his time, would not scare people in to believing, but keep the integrity of the Bible and its teachings.
1Crockett’s view- metaphorically the opposite of Walvoord’s, yet they are alike more often then not. They both refute the purgatory beliefs and the destruction possibilities within the views and together, they both argue eternal punishment. Crockett believes we can’t know what Hell will be like, because we can’t know or fathom the idea the actual place. Walvoord sees the literal meaning of hell being that of burning flesh and darkness. We are taken to the words of Jesus and his symbolic words to understand the discussion in which his arguments follow. Like scripture says over and over again, those that call out for Him, will be thrown out or spit out, which Crockett concludes his argument with.
1Hayes brings his own twist in that he doesn’t say much on hell, but points us to Roman Catholic historical and theological backgrounds of purgatory. Works-based theology is key here…, which is obvious to see with his statements about purgatory in his statements above. With no real support from the cannon, Hayes points his discussion to the Roman Catholic beliefs of justification and grace, which eliminates the view from the Protestant background and beliefs.3
4Pinnock seems to fall outside the realm of normal orthodox teachings of hell. Pinnock’s frustrations and irritation lead him down a path that would bring him and others consequences that would almost ultimately have him thrown out of the ETS, Geisler’s resignation kept him in or we wouldn’t even be having this discussion. This whole story makes him guilty of his errors in biblical interpretation.
2Yet, he does openly appeal to believers to why God would create such a place for punishment, which Walvoord and Crockett have agreed on. Also, why he believes that those that are not found accepted by God and handed the rights to mercy will indeed be destroyed. Pinnock believes that God is justified to permanently destroy the worst, because of the free will the human has made, only because he can’t constructively identify that good and evil can exist in the afterlife. This can be seen to one that agrees with these statements as what Christ wouldn’t do…
CONCLUSION
Very confusing topic, 5Francis Chan takes on this topic very seriously and is very informative source as well. We don’t discuss this topic enough in church, because of it past usage of “doom and gloom”. It was unclear in my research, which is the right way to view this and maybe it my fault. There is so much information to cover here, that a paper can’t cover or give it the attention it deserves. We have to be clear on our position and the position the scholars are taking here, for those that are called in to question given the possibility of biblical inerrancy.
Chan takes on hell with this in scripture…
2“When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. And he will place the sheep on his right, but the goats on the left. Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’ Then the righteous will answer him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’ And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.’ Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.’ Then they also will answer, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to you?’ Then he will answer them, saying, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’ And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”
5I had to use this, because I see such an importance here. Despite what the motive is, we all have an inclination to wonder ourselves if there is a literal meaning of hell. We might find it hard to find the faithfulness to scripture, because of our own desires for others fate alone. We can’t ignore the warning and minimize what the book of truth says about this topic. We can’t silence God in this, because there is undoubtedly, a consequence for not receiving God’s grace in the end. Within all of this, we must interpret the bible for what is says and means to understand the heart of God. Without taking the literal meaning out, we find that Chan has studied this matter and checked his sources through and through to serve the purpose of explaining this subject. It is literal and this is in line with Crockett’s interpretation.
While we can’t fully know, God will show his will to us in time. He will show those that don’t believe that there is a place for them and that he is sovereign and just in His own way. No one can corrupt or change the position God takes. We, as his followers, have a responsibility to allow God to be just that… Sovereign in his own eschatological filled prophecy.
Chan’s final thoughts in his chapter three…“We are bound by the words of the Creator, the One who will do what is right. The One who invented justice and knows perfectly what the unbeliever deserves. God has never asked us to figure out His justice or to see if His way of doing things is morally right. He has only asked us to embrace His Word and bow the knee, to tremble at His word, as Isaiah says (66:2)”5
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
1- 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.
2- Zodhiates, Spiros. The Complete Word Study Dictionary: New Testament. Electronic ed. Chattanooga, TN: AMG Publishers, 2000.
3- Pyne, Robert A. “Book Reviews.” In Bibliotheca Sacra Volume 150, 500. 600. Dallas, TX: Dallas Theological Seminary, 1993.
4- Pinnock, Clark H.. “The Destruction of the Finally Impenitent.” Criswell Theological Review 4
5- Chan, Francis; Preston Sprinkle (2011). Erasing Hell: What God said about eternity, and the things we made up. David C. Cook. ISBN 978-0781407250.
6- 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).
7- http://www.walvoord.com/author_bio.php?author_id=1. John F. Walvoord: Theologian.Educator. Author. 2007 (accessed February 26, 2010).
