The late Edward Fudge (d. 2017), who many proponents of conditionalism appeal to for support of their position, taught that a person is annihilated after he has suffered for his sins for an appropriate amount of time. But this has a problem.
- “…when God destroys both soul and body in hell, the destructive act or process will be based on perfect divine justice in each individual case, and will allow infinite latitude for degrees of conscious punishment, whether differentiated by its kind, its intensity, or its duration.”1
- This “death,” not annihilation in some technical literal sense, is the penal consequence of wrong-doing committed during earthly life. We may be sure that the process of dying the second death will encompass whatever type, intensity, and duration of conscious torment divine justice might require.”2
So, Fudge is saying that “the destructive or process will be based on perfect divine justice in each person’s case…” with “degrees of conscious punishment…” which is the “penal consequence of wrongdoing” and will encompass a “duration of conscious torment divine justice might require.” In other words, after the required amount of suffering is completed according to the law (penal), the sinner is annihilated.
The problem with Edward Fudge’s position
But the problem is that Fudge is teaching that a person suffers before he is annihilated and that the suffering is corresponding to his sin. Sin is breaking the law of God (1 John 3:4). But, once the sinner has paid his due penalty for his sin, why isn’t he justified because he has fulfilled the penalty requirement of the law through his suffering? If the annihilationist says that the sinner is not justified because the unbeliever has not trusted Christ, then isn’t not trusting in Christ also a sin that is paid for through his suffering? So, why isn’t the person saved? Fudge’s position is a problem, and it cannot be true.
Return to Annihilationism Page
