Some conditionalists present an argument that the idea of eternal conscious torment is too horrible to be true. Unfortunately, such an argument is based on subjective emotion.

Let me [Clark Pinnock] say at the outset that I consider the concept of hell as endless torment in body and mind an outrageous doctrine, a theological and moral enormity, a bad doctrine of the tradition which needs to be changed.”¹Morgan, Christopher W.; Peterson, Robert A.. Hell Under Fire: Modern Scholarship Reinvents Eternal Punishment (Kindle Locations 578-579). Zondervan. Kindle Edition

While we ought to agree that eternal conscious torment is a terrifying prospect, it does not mean is not true. Certainly, ECT is difficult to grasp in its enormity and eternal consequence. In fact, it may be repulsive to some and terrifying to others. But it should be affirmed or denied based on what people see in Scripture. The quote above by Clark Pinnock, who is a staunch proponent of conditionalism, is an example of inserting emotion into an argument. Of course, people are certainly entitled to their emotions and their opinions generated from them, but we must all be careful not to let those emotions govern how we understand God’s word.

Nevertheless, conditionalists, as well as those affirming eternal conscious torment both, appeal to Scripture as the final authority. The problem, of course, rests in our presuppositions which then govern our interpretations.  This is why we are seeking to examine the issues in Scripture is related to the topic here on this section of CARM.  Therefore, we leave it to you to make up your mind as you examine God’s word.

Return to Annihilationism Page