WEBVTT - Kirk Cameron Doubles Down on Hell: My Response (w/Gavin Ortlund) 0:00:02.720 --> 0:00:03.640 Life Audio. 0:00:05.559 --> 0:00:08.680 There's a whole lot of thinkers over the centuries who 0:00:08.800 --> 0:00:09.479 thought about this. 0:00:09.760 --> 0:00:12.400 The idea here is the damned in Hell are not 0:00:12.560 --> 0:00:16.960 eternally in conscious existence. Annihilationists will just say death means 0:00:17.000 --> 0:00:18.520 death and they cease to exist. 0:00:18.600 --> 0:00:20.680 Maybe just kind of briefly tell us why you are 0:00:20.800 --> 0:00:22.400 not an annihilation. 0:00:22.200 --> 0:00:25.200 When I look at the whole of scripture, I don't 0:00:25.480 --> 0:00:28.200 think the annihilationist view is the best way to take 0:00:28.360 --> 0:00:31.040 the texts. From a personal standpoint, my heart kind of 0:00:31.040 --> 0:00:33.839 goes out to Kirk Cameron in the situation he's in 0:00:33.840 --> 0:00:37.000 where there's a lot of reactivity on the Internet that 0:00:37.120 --> 0:00:39.040 shapes how these conversations play out. 0:00:39.840 --> 0:00:43.040 Actor and evangelist Kirk Cameron has stirred up quite the 0:00:43.120 --> 0:00:46.720 online controversy by asking if we have gotten the doctrine 0:00:46.760 --> 0:00:50.680 of hell wrong. He's adopted a controversial view known as 0:00:50.760 --> 0:00:56.080 annihilationism or conditionalism, which we will define and discuss. Cameron 0:00:56.160 --> 0:00:58.920 has responded to the criticism and let's just say things 0:00:58.960 --> 0:01:03.160 have gotten even more heated here to discuss with me 0:01:03.240 --> 0:01:06.640 what a wise, measured and biblical response might look like 0:01:07.200 --> 0:01:10.119 is doctor Gavin Ortland. Gavin, thanks for coming on. 0:01:10.800 --> 0:01:12.440 Hey, looking forward to it. Thanks for having me, Sean. 0:01:13.000 --> 0:01:14.600 I want to have you on for a number of reason, 0:01:14.680 --> 0:01:17.440 but one being both of us were recently guests on 0:01:17.560 --> 0:01:21.440 his podcast. We are friends of Kirk Cameron and care 0:01:21.560 --> 0:01:26.319 about theological issues, but also how these conversations take place 0:01:26.520 --> 0:01:29.480 just in the wider Internet and beyond. So we're going 0:01:29.560 --> 0:01:32.440 to get into that. We're going to focus on really 0:01:32.480 --> 0:01:36.560 three questions today. Is annihilationism a heretical view, is this 0:01:36.640 --> 0:01:39.920 an indication of a slippery slope? And how can we 0:01:40.040 --> 0:01:44.360 best respond going forward? But with that said, a few 0:01:44.400 --> 0:01:48.040 preliminary issues, just kind of to catch people up to speed. 0:01:48.560 --> 0:01:51.800 Some people might not be familiar with the term annihilationism 0:01:51.960 --> 0:01:56.360 or conditionalism. Essentially, I explain it this way, that those 0:01:56.400 --> 0:02:00.880 who do not believe in Jesus after death, at some point, 0:02:01.000 --> 0:02:06.160 rather than living with eternal conscious torment, they will be 0:02:06.480 --> 0:02:12.720 snuffed out or annihilated in some sense and sees to exist. Agreed, disagree, 0:02:12.760 --> 0:02:14.840 expand on that definition in any way. 0:02:15.760 --> 0:02:16.680 No, I think that's good. 0:02:16.720 --> 0:02:19.320 I think the idea here is the damned in hell 0:02:19.440 --> 0:02:24.760 are not eternally in conscious existence, but they know they'll 0:02:24.800 --> 0:02:27.800 Annihilationists will just say death means death, and they cease 0:02:27.880 --> 0:02:31.400 to exist. There's variation on the details of that, though, 0:02:31.480 --> 0:02:34.480 so some annihilationists will still think there's a long duration 0:02:34.639 --> 0:02:39.680 of conscious suffering prior to annihilation. And the only other 0:02:39.720 --> 0:02:42.000 thing I might throw on the table is the label 0:02:42.200 --> 0:02:47.120 conditional immortality is sometimes one that our annihilationist friends prefer, 0:02:47.680 --> 0:02:49.920 and one of the ways sometimes they'll explain it is 0:02:49.960 --> 0:02:53.880 to say that immortality belongs properly to God alone. And 0:02:53.919 --> 0:02:57.120 so the way they might tease this out is not 0:02:57.200 --> 0:03:00.239 even with the word annihilation, but just to say only 0:03:00.320 --> 0:03:04.160 the righteous in Heaven are given immortality, and so they'll 0:03:04.160 --> 0:03:06.280 make the appeal, you know, what would keep some a 0:03:06.360 --> 0:03:07.919 damned soul alive in hell? 0:03:08.040 --> 0:03:10.120 What would cause it to endure? 0:03:10.639 --> 0:03:12.920 So that's another I'm just throwing that out as a 0:03:13.000 --> 0:03:15.200 label and as a way they might explicate their view. 0:03:16.120 --> 0:03:19.480 Very helpful clarification. I appreciate that now you have a 0:03:19.520 --> 0:03:22.720 whole video on this you did before this controversy erupted, 0:03:23.080 --> 0:03:25.200 and this conversation we're having right now is not going 0:03:25.280 --> 0:03:30.560 to be a biblical point counterpoint or debate about it, 0:03:31.120 --> 0:03:33.160 But maybe just kind of briefly tell us why you 0:03:33.280 --> 0:03:35.040 are not an annihilationist. 0:03:36.560 --> 0:03:40.160 Sure, the long answer of course, would be my video. 0:03:40.640 --> 0:03:43.960 The summary here will be that while I think and 0:03:44.080 --> 0:03:48.440 as I try to carefully consider this idea, I think 0:03:48.520 --> 0:03:52.560 there are some theological appeals that have force in its favor, 0:03:52.840 --> 0:03:56.360 and some biblical texts that can be interpreted in an 0:03:56.400 --> 0:03:59.960 annihilationist way when I look at the whole picture, especially 0:04:00.160 --> 0:04:03.520 the whole of scripture. So when I'm approaching a topic 0:04:03.600 --> 0:04:05.960 like this, I'm not looking to my own wisdom because 0:04:06.000 --> 0:04:08.280 I don't know what God is going to do, So 0:04:08.360 --> 0:04:10.520 I have to lean on divine revelation and say, what 0:04:10.600 --> 0:04:13.880 is God revealed of what will be the ultimate fate 0:04:14.040 --> 0:04:17.480 of those who are cast away into the outer darkness? 0:04:17.560 --> 0:04:20.599 And when I look at the whole of scripture, I 0:04:20.760 --> 0:04:23.680 don't think the annihilationist view is the best way to 0:04:23.760 --> 0:04:26.480 take the texts. And in my video on this, I 0:04:26.520 --> 0:04:29.960 put a lot of emphasis on Revelation twenty in Revelation fourteen. 0:04:30.320 --> 0:04:32.880 These are two texts where it seems to me that 0:04:32.920 --> 0:04:37.760 the idea of torment is explicit. I think that is 0:04:37.800 --> 0:04:41.479 explicit in Revelation twenty ten, and then in Revelation fourteen 0:04:41.520 --> 0:04:44.640 the language of no rest day or night. But I 0:04:44.680 --> 0:04:47.480 wouldn't say those are the only two texts. There are 0:04:47.600 --> 0:04:50.920 other texts that I think are suggestive that the fire 0:04:50.960 --> 0:04:54.839 of Hell is not just to destroy and extinguish life. 0:04:55.240 --> 0:04:58.320 Another would be Mark nine forty seven to forty nine, 0:04:58.720 --> 0:05:01.440 where Jesus says, and boy, I just want to acknowledge 0:05:01.520 --> 0:05:04.320 talking about this topic is painful and sad, and so 0:05:05.440 --> 0:05:07.960 here I am talking about fire and so forth, and 0:05:08.279 --> 0:05:12.000 we want to acknowledge this is a difficult doctrine. Let's 0:05:12.200 --> 0:05:15.279 let the I think it's designed to kind of shatter 0:05:15.320 --> 0:05:16.960 our hearts in a way, and so let's allow it 0:05:17.000 --> 0:05:18.880 to have that effect upon us and cause us to 0:05:19.240 --> 0:05:22.240 grieve and be sobered at the reality of evil and 0:05:22.320 --> 0:05:23.200 God's justice. 0:05:23.600 --> 0:05:24.600 But Jesus says. 0:05:24.360 --> 0:05:27.960 Mark nine forty nine, everyone will be salted with fire. 0:05:28.800 --> 0:05:31.960 This doesn't sound so a lot of these earlier texts 0:05:31.960 --> 0:05:35.520 before you get to revelation seems suggestive that there's an 0:05:35.640 --> 0:05:41.240 experience going on in Hell, and I just find that 0:05:41.360 --> 0:05:45.200 a tough passage to interpret in an annihilationist framework. So 0:05:45.240 --> 0:05:46.919 the full case for this is in my video. But 0:05:47.200 --> 0:05:49.040 what I'm just trying to lay out here is the 0:05:49.040 --> 0:05:52.479 best interpretation of the Bible as a whole seems to 0:05:52.480 --> 0:05:55.279 me to point toward Yeah, there is an ongoing experience 0:05:55.320 --> 0:05:56.520 for the damned in hell. 0:05:57.120 --> 0:05:58.960 And as far as you understand, this is what can 0:05:59.000 --> 0:06:02.560 be called the tradition or the classic view of Hell 0:06:03.320 --> 0:06:09.120 across even like Orthodox and Protestant and Catholic views. And 0:06:09.160 --> 0:06:14.200 so there may be some annihilationist type positions held in 0:06:14.279 --> 0:06:17.599 the past and in the somewhat present, people like F. F. 0:06:17.680 --> 0:06:22.680 Bruce and John Stott, but these are very much minority voices. 0:06:23.120 --> 0:06:24.719 This is what I've heard. I haven't done a deep 0:06:24.760 --> 0:06:25.240 dive on it. 0:06:25.279 --> 0:06:30.360 Is that your understanding, I would probably say minority voices, 0:06:30.440 --> 0:06:32.640 but not very much minority voices. 0:06:33.000 --> 0:06:34.680 So in other words, I do. 0:06:34.640 --> 0:06:37.839 Think actually the early Church, the Patristic era, first five 0:06:37.920 --> 0:06:40.800 hundred years or so of church history roughly, is a 0:06:40.800 --> 0:06:42.000 little more diverse. 0:06:43.160 --> 0:06:45.279 Once you get after Augustine. 0:06:44.920 --> 0:06:49.440 I think you get ect or eternal conscious torment as 0:06:49.600 --> 0:06:52.200 pretty much the backbone or the mainstream view. 0:06:52.640 --> 0:06:55.240 But in the early Church it does look more scattershot 0:06:55.320 --> 0:06:55.560 to me. 0:06:56.520 --> 0:07:01.800 You've got explicit affirmations of annihilationism from Christians like Arnobius, 0:07:02.040 --> 0:07:04.200 and then you have a lot of Christians who are 0:07:04.200 --> 0:07:07.200 a little bit underdetermined in their language. It's debated a 0:07:07.200 --> 0:07:09.360 little bit how to read them, but they seem more 0:07:09.400 --> 0:07:12.560 pushing it toward an annihilationist view in the way they 0:07:12.600 --> 0:07:15.520 speak of immortality and the way they speak of death 0:07:15.600 --> 0:07:18.880 with respect to the final state. So I would think 0:07:18.960 --> 0:07:22.600 of Irenaeus in that category, for example. So I'm not 0:07:22.600 --> 0:07:26.080 trying to remove all the ambiguities from the interpretation of 0:07:26.120 --> 0:07:29.600 some of these figures, but I would say I would 0:07:29.600 --> 0:07:32.760 say annihilationism is a minority report in the tradition, but 0:07:32.880 --> 0:07:35.520 it is present, especially in the early Church, so far 0:07:35.520 --> 0:07:36.200 as I can see. 0:07:36.880 --> 0:07:39.400 This is an important distinction because when you take issues 0:07:39.480 --> 0:07:44.440 like the current in the past fifty years redefinition of marriage, 0:07:44.880 --> 0:07:48.840 there was not any debate whatsoever in the history of 0:07:48.920 --> 0:07:53.040 the Church about this until modern times. There are no 0:07:53.920 --> 0:07:57.560 voices arguing that we should change the definition of marriage 0:07:57.960 --> 0:08:01.040 to be non gendered. When it comes to annihilationism, this 0:08:01.120 --> 0:08:05.720 is not a new debate. This debate has existed in 0:08:05.800 --> 0:08:09.320 the Church in various ways throughout its history. Now it 0:08:09.400 --> 0:08:12.080 feels new, and between you and I, I didn't have 0:08:12.160 --> 0:08:14.560 on my Bengal card this year that Kirk Cameron was 0:08:14.840 --> 0:08:17.640 to video in favor of annihilationism. I think I was 0:08:17.680 --> 0:08:21.520 about as surprised as anybody, but it feels new to 0:08:21.600 --> 0:08:24.679 us in this moment, but there's precedent in the church 0:08:25.000 --> 0:08:30.080 wrestling with this question going way back. Now, with that said, 0:08:30.400 --> 0:08:33.640 part of what stirred this in his response video, I 0:08:33.679 --> 0:08:39.280 think Kirk framed for everybody why he ended up really 0:08:39.320 --> 0:08:41.400 what started this conversation for him, and it was a 0:08:41.400 --> 0:08:45.760 conversation with his son about the fate of non Christians, 0:08:45.760 --> 0:08:49.520 the fate of those who are damned. And he said, basically, 0:08:49.800 --> 0:08:54.240 you know if he asks right, opening in only the 0:08:54.280 --> 0:08:57.440 way that like somebody who's good on camera can draw 0:08:57.600 --> 0:09:01.079 you in with drama, like he's so good painting the picture. 0:09:01.520 --> 0:09:04.600 He's like, what would you do to the audience if 0:09:04.600 --> 0:09:07.960 your son or daughter came to you and asked you 0:09:08.320 --> 0:09:12.199 what you believe the Bible says and will non Christians 0:09:12.360 --> 0:09:17.800 experience eternal conscience torment? He framed it that way. So 0:09:17.960 --> 0:09:19.840 I'm really curious. I'm going to give my two cents 0:09:19.840 --> 0:09:22.480 in a second, but how would you respond if one 0:09:22.520 --> 0:09:25.240 of your own kids came to you and asked you 0:09:25.280 --> 0:09:25.880 that question? 0:09:27.360 --> 0:09:32.880 It depends upon which child and which age, because I 0:09:33.640 --> 0:09:37.559 have five kids ages three to twelve, and the truth 0:09:38.160 --> 0:09:41.600 of scripture would not change from one child to another, 0:09:42.160 --> 0:09:45.480 but the language I would use and the way I 0:09:45.520 --> 0:09:47.480 would interface with them would be different for the. 0:09:47.440 --> 0:09:49.800 Three year old, the five year old, the twelve year old, etc. 0:09:50.640 --> 0:09:53.280 I think we can be I just think we want 0:09:53.280 --> 0:09:57.040 to be sensitive to the age dynamics there in terms 0:09:57.040 --> 0:10:00.760 of how we unfold a biblical view. Now, I would 0:10:00.840 --> 0:10:04.839 teach them about the debate, Okay, I would talk. I 0:10:04.920 --> 0:10:06.960 don't want them to go through their whole life and 0:10:07.040 --> 0:10:10.400 never learn about this discussion and then suddenly hear about 0:10:10.440 --> 0:10:12.480 it later on. So I'd want to talk them through 0:10:13.440 --> 0:10:17.400 where Christians are disagreeing on these topics, and then I 0:10:17.440 --> 0:10:19.760 would just invite them to study the scripture with me. 0:10:19.800 --> 0:10:22.240 I actually do have a lot of theological conversations like 0:10:22.280 --> 0:10:24.800 this with my kids, especially around the bedtime routine as 0:10:24.800 --> 0:10:27.520 I'm putting them to bed and we talk theology. Sometimes 0:10:27.520 --> 0:10:30.679 they're trying to prolong bedtime by exactly. 0:10:31.640 --> 0:10:33.160 But I'll still go there and we'll talk. 0:10:33.200 --> 0:10:36.120 And so one thing I've found helpful is to invite 0:10:36.160 --> 0:10:38.640 them into the study of scripture and try to model 0:10:38.679 --> 0:10:42.160 for them. Hey, dad doesn't have all the answers, but 0:10:42.520 --> 0:10:46.680 let's study the scripture and here's what I'm doing. I'm 0:10:46.720 --> 0:10:51.040 looking to what God has revealed about this, and then 0:10:51.240 --> 0:10:52.840 what I'm trying to do is model this sense of 0:10:52.880 --> 0:10:56.320 discipleship in our theology. That to be a theologian doesn't 0:10:56.320 --> 0:10:58.680 mean I'm sort of dictating the shots based on my 0:10:58.760 --> 0:11:01.800 intuitions and my feeling. But I'm looking to the scripture 0:11:01.800 --> 0:11:04.440 and I'm seeking to follow and submit to what God 0:11:04.480 --> 0:11:06.960 has revealed best I can. I want to model that 0:11:07.000 --> 0:11:09.240 to my kids, and then we talk through the arguments, 0:11:09.280 --> 0:11:11.680 and I'll try to, of course, shepherd them along that 0:11:11.800 --> 0:11:14.200 process as we work through text by text. 0:11:14.960 --> 0:11:15.360 I love that. 0:11:15.440 --> 0:11:17.440 I think that's a great model. What you're doing for 0:11:17.559 --> 0:11:21.200 your family. We can do in the larger body of 0:11:21.320 --> 0:11:24.439 Christ and the Church family. But we'll come back to that. 0:11:25.120 --> 0:11:26.960 For me, one thing I would do is, and again 0:11:27.000 --> 0:11:28.839 it does depend upon the age. My kids are a 0:11:28.880 --> 0:11:33.240 little older thirteen, eighteen twenty one. But the first thing 0:11:33.280 --> 0:11:35.880 I would not do is show any fear. I wouldn't 0:11:35.880 --> 0:11:39.480 show any disgust. I wouldn't show any anger. I would 0:11:39.520 --> 0:11:42.760 not show that I'm threatened by this. In fact, if anything, 0:11:42.800 --> 0:11:44.880 I'd try to show that I love that my kids 0:11:44.920 --> 0:11:49.480 are asking theological biblical questions I would invite it from 0:11:49.559 --> 0:11:52.800 my kids. One of the things we see from kids 0:11:53.280 --> 0:11:56.600 leaving the faith is not questions and doubts, but when 0:11:56.600 --> 0:12:01.199 they have unexpressed questions and doubt. So creating a culture 0:12:01.200 --> 0:12:03.959 in our immediate families. And I would argue the larger church, 0:12:04.320 --> 0:12:07.400 where we're not threatened by questions and we invite questions, 0:12:07.960 --> 0:12:13.600 I think can help limit the deconstruction slash deconversion story 0:12:13.640 --> 0:12:17.679 we've heard so frequently from people who have questions that 0:12:17.720 --> 0:12:20.800 were really shut down. Then I would ask back. One 0:12:20.800 --> 0:12:23.000 thing my kids will learn is I often ask when 0:12:23.000 --> 0:12:25.880 I'm asked a question, I ask a question back. So 0:12:25.880 --> 0:12:28.600 I would say, well, that's a really interesting question. I 0:12:28.640 --> 0:12:30.760 will tell you what I think, But why do you 0:12:30.800 --> 0:12:35.599 ask that question? I want to know the story behind 0:12:35.760 --> 0:12:37.440 why you know? Again, a six year old is going 0:12:37.520 --> 0:12:39.200 to be different than a twelve year old versus a 0:12:39.280 --> 0:12:43.160 twenty one year old. Why is that question bothering you 0:12:43.280 --> 0:12:46.360 right now? Is it a debate you saw online? Are 0:12:46.360 --> 0:12:50.000 you troubled by loved ones? Is it emotional? Is an electual? 0:12:50.080 --> 0:12:54.160 Like what's driving this? I want the story beneath the story. 0:12:54.600 --> 0:12:56.880 And then i'd probably third say tell me what your 0:12:56.960 --> 0:12:58.800 view is again, I'll give you my two cents, but 0:12:58.840 --> 0:13:00.840 if you had to articulate what you think about this, 0:13:01.160 --> 0:13:04.120 what you say, and then finally I'd say, let's go 0:13:04.200 --> 0:13:07.480 to the Bible, let's have this conversation, and then we 0:13:07.520 --> 0:13:11.280 would jump into the text. That's how I would navigate this. 0:13:11.360 --> 0:13:14.200 And like you, I've had many of these conversations with 0:13:14.280 --> 0:13:16.920 my kids. And one thing that's been lost here is 0:13:16.960 --> 0:13:20.320 that I haven't heard many people say good for Kirk 0:13:20.360 --> 0:13:23.800 Cameron for having the kind of relationship with his son 0:13:24.480 --> 0:13:27.960 that as his son is older, he wants to come 0:13:28.000 --> 0:13:30.920 with him and ask him questions, he wants to discuss 0:13:31.000 --> 0:13:35.120 theology with him. Kirk has clearly done something right in 0:13:35.240 --> 0:13:39.280 his family to have that kind of dialogue, and to me, 0:13:39.440 --> 0:13:43.320 that's vital and lost amidst some of the craziness of 0:13:43.360 --> 0:13:46.360 how people have responded. Now that said, we're not going 0:13:46.440 --> 0:13:48.400 to do so much a deep dive on this, but 0:13:48.440 --> 0:13:50.520 i'd love your take on three questions, and I'm gonna 0:13:50.520 --> 0:13:54.240 give my two cents. Is this question this issue of 0:13:54.679 --> 0:14:01.360 conditionalism annihilationism? Is it a heretical view? What's your take, Kevin? 0:14:02.080 --> 0:14:04.320 Before I answer that, I just want to say one 0:14:05.000 --> 0:14:08.520 adding on your answer to this last question helped me 0:14:08.559 --> 0:14:10.600 think this through even a little more fully because I 0:14:10.600 --> 0:14:13.600 love what you're saying. Of this non fear based response, 0:14:13.640 --> 0:14:15.800 I found this to be so helpful. Sometimes Christians we 0:14:15.800 --> 0:14:18.280 feel on our heels when a question comes up, and 0:14:18.360 --> 0:14:21.560 I think this idea of calm curiosity to draw out 0:14:21.560 --> 0:14:23.920 the question, and then I just the one thing I 0:14:23.920 --> 0:14:28.600 wanted to say is I believe Christianity is intellectually robust 0:14:28.960 --> 0:14:33.280 and it has answers to these difficult questions, and the 0:14:33.320 --> 0:14:37.920 doctrine of hell is very difficult, but there are strong 0:14:38.000 --> 0:14:41.160 defenses for why this is a rational thing to believe. 0:14:41.360 --> 0:14:44.720 One of the embasies in scripture is the justice of God. 0:14:45.240 --> 0:14:49.280 Hell is not an arbitrary torture chamber. Hell is God's 0:14:49.680 --> 0:14:53.800 just response to unrepentant evil. And the reason it is 0:14:53.840 --> 0:14:56.880 so terrible is because God is so good. If God 0:14:56.960 --> 0:14:59.240 is the light, hell is the darkness. And so the 0:14:59.280 --> 0:15:01.480 reason there's a hell is because of the glory of 0:15:01.520 --> 0:15:05.360 God and the possibility of being banished from it. I 0:15:05.440 --> 0:15:06.840 just want to So that's the other thing with my 0:15:06.920 --> 0:15:08.640 kids is I want to shepherd them toward the truth 0:15:08.680 --> 0:15:12.920 of the Gospel with a non fear based response, commending 0:15:12.960 --> 0:15:15.240 the truth of Christ, but without a sense of panic 0:15:15.360 --> 0:15:17.720 or fear. That's just something that was in my heart 0:15:17.760 --> 0:15:18.200 there as you. 0:15:18.160 --> 0:15:20.120 Were a love responding well. 0:15:20.360 --> 0:15:24.880 So well said, now to your question about heresy, I'll 0:15:24.960 --> 0:15:27.560 lay out my thoughts here and welcome any pushback from you. 0:15:27.640 --> 0:15:31.240 I would give three appeals for why I don't see 0:15:31.240 --> 0:15:31.920 it as. 0:15:31.960 --> 0:15:33.880 Heretical by heresy. 0:15:34.480 --> 0:15:36.800 The way I use this term is as a first 0:15:36.880 --> 0:15:40.720 rank issue that separates Christian orthodoxy from that which is 0:15:40.760 --> 0:15:44.600 outside of Christianity. And we have to have some category 0:15:44.760 --> 0:15:50.520 for that because Christianity is a definite, specific religion. It's 0:15:50.560 --> 0:15:54.240 not just this amorphous entity that can be a shape shifter. 0:15:54.800 --> 0:15:58.200 So there's boundaries about what Christianity is and isn't. But 0:15:58.320 --> 0:16:01.800 of course the key here is out putting every doctrinal 0:16:01.840 --> 0:16:05.280 disagreement on that fault line, because there's lots of in 0:16:05.320 --> 0:16:07.920 house debates and even second and third rank. I find 0:16:08.000 --> 0:16:10.600 Christians are often very black and white, all or nothing 0:16:11.040 --> 0:16:15.960 in thinking about things. So it's either heresy or it's unimportant. 0:16:16.600 --> 0:16:18.720 And I wrote a book Finding the Right Hills to 0:16:18.760 --> 0:16:21.800 Die on trying to lay out a schema or a 0:16:21.840 --> 0:16:25.480 spectrum of different rankings, because some doctrines can be very 0:16:25.520 --> 0:16:29.240 important but not heretical. You can be a genuine believer 0:16:29.480 --> 0:16:32.040 even if we say this really matters about who's right 0:16:32.080 --> 0:16:34.560 who's wrong. But the three appeals I would give would 0:16:34.560 --> 0:16:39.160 be scripture, church history, and then a pragmatic appeal, saym 0:16:39.160 --> 0:16:40.000 each in one sentence. 0:16:40.040 --> 0:16:40.240 Here. 0:16:40.680 --> 0:16:44.040 Biblically, I think this is a legitimate issue of the 0:16:44.080 --> 0:16:52.880 interpretation of scripture, not one side rejecting the authority of Scripture. Second, 0:16:53.000 --> 0:16:56.680 church history wise, I think there's precedent for both sides 0:16:56.760 --> 0:16:58.280 in the. 0:16:57.760 --> 0:16:59.280 History of the church. We've mentioned that before. 0:16:59.480 --> 0:17:04.320 And Third, pragmatically, this is not something that has that 0:17:04.960 --> 0:17:09.399 requires division in terms of its practical consequence in church life. 0:17:09.960 --> 0:17:12.399 It's not like church government where you kind of just 0:17:12.440 --> 0:17:15.320 have to decide something one way or another just for 0:17:15.480 --> 0:17:18.879 unity and the way the church is going. It's not 0:17:18.920 --> 0:17:21.800 gonna be something that is as obviously showing up in 0:17:21.840 --> 0:17:25.359 the actual day by day, Sunday by sunday worship of 0:17:25.400 --> 0:17:25.800 a church. 0:17:25.960 --> 0:17:27.280 You know, it's a little bit more. 0:17:28.520 --> 0:17:30.280 I don't want to say it's theoretical, but it's just 0:17:30.359 --> 0:17:33.480 not as consequential at the street level. 0:17:33.560 --> 0:17:35.399 And if I could say one more sentence on the 0:17:35.400 --> 0:17:37.679 biblical biblical issue. 0:17:37.680 --> 0:17:41.480 There while some Christians will, especially if they're not familiar 0:17:41.480 --> 0:17:44.919 with the discussion, say well, obviously it's not a legitimate 0:17:44.960 --> 0:17:47.280 issue of interpreting the Bible. The Bible is so clear 0:17:47.560 --> 0:17:50.840 about eternal punishment. I would love to encourage them to 0:17:50.960 --> 0:17:54.399 wrestle with the best arguments from the other side to 0:17:54.520 --> 0:17:58.159 understand this is more complicated, and to wrestle with versus 0:17:58.200 --> 0:18:01.520 like Jude seven, which use is the language of eternal 0:18:01.560 --> 0:18:05.600 punishment for a historical judgment of Sodom and Gomorrah and 0:18:05.640 --> 0:18:09.000 says Sodom and Gomorra suffered the fire of eternal punishment. 0:18:09.720 --> 0:18:12.720 So the language of eternal punishment can be used for 0:18:12.800 --> 0:18:18.919 the consequence of a judgment, not necessarily the punishment itself ongoing. 0:18:19.359 --> 0:18:21.359 And that's just one example the kind of issue we 0:18:21.359 --> 0:18:22.200 need to be careful about. 0:18:23.200 --> 0:18:25.639 That's great. I went back and listened to a number 0:18:25.640 --> 0:18:27.800 of voices on this just to see where other people 0:18:27.840 --> 0:18:33.199 were landing, people like Wes Huff, Greg Cocheal Calvinist scholar 0:18:33.320 --> 0:18:36.560 James White, and none of them placed it in a 0:18:36.760 --> 0:18:42.679 first tier issue that if somebody embraces annihilationism, they are 0:18:42.880 --> 0:18:47.200 outside the fold of the faith. James White distinctly said, 0:18:47.320 --> 0:18:50.680 I don't think Stott went to Hell or F F. Bruce, 0:18:50.920 --> 0:18:54.280 and I agree with him, and so that it should 0:18:54.280 --> 0:18:58.320 not be a first tier issue such as the trinity, 0:18:58.960 --> 0:19:03.760 the deity of Jesus, this salvation by faith alone, that 0:19:03.920 --> 0:19:08.080 Jesus was human and divine. Of course, it's not a 0:19:08.119 --> 0:19:12.000 first tier issue on that level. James Watte also says 0:19:12.040 --> 0:19:14.760 something really interesting, and this is my words, but I 0:19:14.760 --> 0:19:17.080 think it's the point he was making. He says, there's 0:19:17.160 --> 0:19:20.480 no other issue for which people hold the traditional view 0:19:20.600 --> 0:19:26.600 so firmly without justification. In other words, people hold this 0:19:26.800 --> 0:19:32.199 view so passionately and yet haven't really thought through and 0:19:32.359 --> 0:19:35.840 wrestled with why they hold it. And some of this 0:19:35.920 --> 0:19:39.159 might be we don't preach on Hell a ton, we 0:19:39.200 --> 0:19:42.320 don't walk through these passages and make the case because 0:19:42.359 --> 0:19:46.280 it's so widely held the standard view within the church, 0:19:46.359 --> 0:19:49.560 so it's not explained. But I think about my own life, 0:19:49.600 --> 0:19:51.760 Gavin and I have not done as much of a 0:19:51.800 --> 0:19:54.640 deep dive on this, as I have some other issues 0:19:54.760 --> 0:19:58.280 as well, and so I try to hold my level 0:19:58.280 --> 0:20:02.800 of confidence for this based on the study that I've done, 0:20:02.920 --> 0:20:06.560 and so I love your pushback to say we got 0:20:06.560 --> 0:20:10.080 to go to the text. It's not a first tier issue. 0:20:11.119 --> 0:20:14.919 This is something one of my colleagues, Eric Taunas, wrote 0:20:14.960 --> 0:20:18.760 about in theology. He put a piece that's in ESV 0:20:18.880 --> 0:20:24.359 study Bible, and there's like certain first tier core essentials 0:20:24.800 --> 0:20:28.480 that if you compromise those, you were talking about a 0:20:28.520 --> 0:20:34.040 different faith, not another denomination, literally a different faith. And 0:20:34.080 --> 0:20:37.400 that's not what's at stake here when it comes to annihilation. 0:20:38.119 --> 0:20:40.640 I viewed it not perfectly, but a little bit more 0:20:40.760 --> 0:20:45.440 like debates over origin for example, so Biola. We hold 0:20:45.520 --> 0:20:50.439 to ect eternal conscious torment at Talbot specifically, but we 0:20:50.480 --> 0:20:55.240 don't think people who are annihilationists are necessarily heretics. We 0:20:55.440 --> 0:20:58.080 just disagree with that and don't hold that it's a 0:20:58.119 --> 0:21:01.399 part of our doctrinal commitment. Well, the same as too 0:21:01.440 --> 0:21:06.880 with creation. We do not teach or accept evolutionary creation 0:21:07.119 --> 0:21:11.840 within Talbot School of theology. We're not convinced biblically or scientifically, 0:21:12.320 --> 0:21:15.480 but we don't think that people who embrace that are 0:21:15.680 --> 0:21:21.280 necessarily heretics. Outside of the fold, the key issue at 0:21:21.280 --> 0:21:27.359 stake is will God judge are the unborn damned? That's 0:21:27.480 --> 0:21:31.639 kind of at stake with the issue of annihilationism, although 0:21:31.680 --> 0:21:34.600 the details of how he does so are important. When 0:21:34.640 --> 0:21:38.240 it comes to creation, the core issue is is God 0:21:38.440 --> 0:21:43.760 the creator? The secondary question, which is important is how 0:21:43.920 --> 0:21:48.000 did God create? Now by saying that, does that make 0:21:48.040 --> 0:21:51.840 annihilationism therefore not that significant? And I think both you 0:21:51.880 --> 0:21:55.560 and I would say no, time out a lot matters. 0:21:55.640 --> 0:21:58.840 It's important, like you said, for the character of God, 0:21:59.400 --> 0:22:03.280 how we under stand the scriptures, And honestly, I would argue. 0:22:03.320 --> 0:22:05.359 I was talking with an atheist recently who was like, 0:22:05.480 --> 0:22:09.880 I don't fear death at all because I didn't exist 0:22:10.000 --> 0:22:13.320 before I came along and had no suffering, and so 0:22:13.520 --> 0:22:16.840 I won't exist afterwards. And I thought, well, that's interesting. 0:22:16.880 --> 0:22:20.000 Could you make the same kind of argument against annihilationism. 0:22:20.080 --> 0:22:22.600 I don't fear God or as judgment as much because 0:22:22.640 --> 0:22:23.919 I didn't exist before. 0:22:24.520 --> 0:22:24.680 Now. 0:22:24.680 --> 0:22:27.240 Of course there's responses to that, but my only point 0:22:27.280 --> 0:22:30.119