You can listen to me reading this article here:
My personal journey
It was around 2013 when my sister first urged me to explore alternative views of hell. But I didn’t want to do it.
Part of my resistance was simple overwhelm. My life was already very full, and the idea of diving into a huge controversial theological topic felt extremely daunting.
Another part was this: The only view of hell that was acceptable was the traditional one of eternal conscious torment. All through my life, any other views had been mocked as being emotional arguments to try to water down God instead of taking the text at face value.
I knew there was the belief of Universalism. From what I understood, it taught that everyone would be saved, so no one would experience hell.
Then there was the belief of Annihilationism. From what I understood, it taught that unbelievers would just cease to exist, so they wouldn’t experience hell either, or if they did, it was only for a moment to be quickly burned up.
I certainly didn’t want to believe either of those, because they seemed so far off from what the Bible actually taught. Their proponents had apparently wandered into the Land of Wishful Thinking.
Yes, the view of eternal conscious torment (ECT) made God seem unjust to me, but because it was the correct view, I didn’t want to face those feelings. It was one of those topics that tied my stomach in knots if I thought about it.
But of course, I knew that if a doctrine was true, I HAD to believe it, no matter how horrible it seemed to be. And so, the idea that every person who didn’t receive Christ would be unspeakably tortured forever and ever and ever–equally the satanist and the former child that the satanist had horrifically abused while mocking God (if that child didn’t eventually trust in Christ)–was something I kept pushing out of my mind.
A few significant experiences, though, made me finally become willing to explore the doctrine . . . about four years after my sister first mentioned it to me.
For one thing, my sister didn’t stop. She kept urging me to investigate. She kept sending me links.
For another thing, I heard a sermon that mentioned hell in which the preacher said something like, “It may not seem just to us for God to punish everyone forever, but God gets to define justice.” I had heard this so many times before, but this time I had been working on my first Untwisting Scriptures book, and in the process I’d been studying that concept of “justice.” I knew something was off.
And for another thing, somewhere along the way, I learned that John Stott, a theologian I respected, didn’t believe in hell as eternal conscious torment. I had assumed that rejecting ECT automatically meant abandoning Scripture and going liberal. But here was John Stott, respected by conservative Christians, who didn’t believe it.
That cracked the door open for me.
Meeting Edward Fudge
Finally I said to my sister, “The only way I’ll ever change my mind about hell is if someone walks through every single Scripture and shows me what it actually means without playing fast and loose with the text.” My top priority was that the Bible be treated with integrity.
Honestly, I didn’t really expect my mind to be changed, because from everything I understood, the Bible was very clear that hell is eternal conscious torment, and every effort to make it be something else was just weaseling out of the truth.
But I was finally willing to let someone talk to me about it.
When I began exploring, I turned to Edward Fudge, one of the names my sister had given me. I listened to one of his lectures with my Bible open so I could look up every passage he referenced.
I watched hours of his lectures, Bible and lexicon beside me, looking up every Scripture. After that, I read his book, Hell: A Final Word.
And slowly, carefully, I became convinced.
I had never wanted to change my mind about hell simply because I disliked the doctrine I grew up with. I wanted to believe what the Bible actually taught.
But I’ll give you a spoiler.
When my mind finally changed, I found myself loving the Lord more, rejoicing in the Spirit, and delighting in His justice. What a great, glorious, and just God we serve.
Let’s look at what I learned.
The 3 basic views of hell
The first lecture I listened to was Fudge’s one-hour overview, which you can find here. I appreciated that he started with fire, since in the Bible, the fire imagery is so clearly associated with hell.
Here are his 3 basic views of hell:
- The fire that punishes (forever) — Eternal Conscious Torment.
- The fire that purifies — Universalism.
- The fire that consumes — This is Annihilationism.
After a year of intensive Bible study on the topic, Edward Fudge adopted the view of modified Annihilationism.
Annihilation means complete destruction. Fudge’s modified Annihilationism allows for punishment—but a punishment that fits the crime, followed by complete destruction.
This made sense to me, but I absolutely did not want to adopt a belief just because it made sense. I wanted to believe what was true.
But this was the first time I learned that throughout history faithful Christians have not been united on believing that hell means Eternal Conscious Torment. In long ago days there was charitable disagreement about how to understand these Scriptures.
So, aren’t souls naturally immortal?
This is one of the biggest questions. If the human soul is naturally immortal, then it has to exist somewhere for eternity, right?
But what if you go to the Scriptures and find out that they never teach natural immortality of the soul?
I learned that the idea of inherent soul immortality comes from Greek philosophy rather than the Bible, specifically from Socrates and Plato.
As it turns out, the Bible applies the concept of immortality only to the saved, never to the lost. It is the redeemed who will inherit eternal life (the fullness of life of the age to come).
I was so surprised to find that this was true.
This is why the view I’m presenting here–besides being called “modified annihilationism” (the negative perspective) is often called “conditional immortality” (the positive perspective). This means that immortality is not intrinsic to humanity, but is rather given to those who meet the condition of believing on Jesus Christ for salvation.
Asking a better question
Edward Fudge encouraged me to start my Bible study with a different question. Instead of “What does the Bible say about hell?” I could ask, “What does the Bible say about the final end of the wicked?”
With that, the picture becomes much clearer, and we find that the Bible has a lot to say about the final end of the wicked.
The “final end of the wicked” in the Old Testament
The Old Testament consistently depicts the end of the wicked as destruction, most often a consuming fire. Psalm 37 is a key example. It’s one I memorized in years past but apparently never really thought through.
1-2 Fret not yourself because of evildoers;
be not envious of wrongdoers!
For they will soon fade like the grass
and wither like the green herb.
10 In just a little while, the wicked will be no more;
though you look carefully at his place, he will not be there.
20 But the wicked will perish;
the enemies of the Lord are like the glory of the pastures;
they vanish—like smoke they vanish away.
34 Wait for the Lord and keep his way,
and he will exalt you to inherit the land;
you will look on when the wicked are cut off.
35-36 I have seen a wicked, ruthless man,
spreading himself like a green laurel tree.
But he passed away, and behold, he was no more;
though I sought him, he could not be found.
37-38 Mark the blameless and behold the upright,
for there is a future for the man of peace.
But transgressors shall be altogether destroyed;
the future of the wicked shall be cut off.
All the language of this psalm points to an ultimate end, rather than a punishment that continues forever.
The complete destruction of the Flood in Genesis was referenced by Peter as a parallel to teach the ultimate complete destruction of the ungodly. Peter and Jude both referenced the complete destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah to teach the same thing.
Passages like Isaiah 66:24 and Malachi 4:1-3 consistently portray the wicked as perishing, not suffering endlessly. Jesus alluded to Isaiah 66:24 hundreds of years later. It says,
“And they shall go out and look on the dead bodies
of the men who have rebelled against me.
For their worm shall not die,
their fire shall not be quenched,
and they shall be an abhorrence to all flesh.”
The bodies the worms are eating are dead. The fire cannot be quenched in the sense that no one can put it out, the same as a forest fire that rages out of control. It does eventually end, after it has consumed everything in its path, but it cannot be quenched by human means.
This passage is not about eternal torment.
Malachi 4:1-3 does the same thing, with a prophecy that is almost universally believed to be about the great Day of the Lord.
“For behold, the day is coming, burning like an oven,
when all the arrogant and all evildoers will be stubble.
The day that is coming shall set them ablaze, says the Lord of hosts,
so that it will leave them neither root nor branch.
But for you who fear my name,
the sun of righteousness shall rise with healing in its wings.
You shall go out leaping like calves from the stall.
And you shall tread down the wicked,
for they will be ashes under the soles of your feet,
on the day when I act, says the Lord of hosts.”
I was left astonished at “the final end of the wicked” as presented by the Old Testament.
The New Testament follows the same trajectory
John the Baptist spoke of the chaff that would be burned with “unquenchable fire”—again rather than a fire that burns forever, this is a fire that no one can extinguish until its work is done.
When Jesus mentioned “the worm” in Mark 9, His listeners would have known it referred to the Isaiah 66:24 Scripture. They knew the worm ate only dead corpses, not living bodies.
And then there’s John 3:16. Those who believe are the ones who will have eternal life (the fullness of life of the age to come). They will not “perish” in the age to come. It takes some hefty theological gymnastics to say that “perishing” means living forever being tormented. The natural understanding of the word, and the way it’s normally used in Scripture, is about complete destruction.
The Book of Acts mentions judgment only three times, never describing ongoing torment. This is the book that is all about world evangelism, so you might think if unbelievers faced eternal conscious torment, the evangelists would have mentioned that as a motivating factor to try to get their listeners to trust in Jesus. But they never did, not once.
Paul’s letters use words like death, perish, destruction, wrath, trouble, and being cut off.
Second Thessalonians 1:9 is one of the most disputed Scriptures. It’s the only one I’ll go into here, but I’ll be glad to discuss others in the comments. Here are verses 8 and 9 in the KJV:
In flaming fire [God] taking vengeance
on them that know not God
and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:
Who shall be punished [judged] with everlasting destruction
from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;
These are sobering Scriptures no matter which slant you put on them. There is a day of judgment coming for those who reject Jesus Christ. But this verse appears to teach eternal conscious torment, doesn’t it? That’s what I thought, anyway.
To my surprise, I found that the little word “from” had bearing on this passage’s interpretation, “from the presence of the Lord.”
“From,” as you know, in English can refer to separation, as in “away from,” or it can refer to origin, as in “came from.” The same is true in the Greek. It can mean either one.
Some translators, instead of just saying “from” as the Greek does, have gone a step further to decide which “from” it’s talking about. (Just a note, that’s interpretation rather than translation, which translators aren’t supposed to do.) Here’s a sampling:
Amplified: “banished from the presence of the Lord”
ESV: “away from the presence of the Lord”
CJB: “far away from the face of the Lord”
TLB: “forever separated from the Lord”
NASB: “away from the presence of the Lord”
NIV: “shut out from the presence of the Lord”
RSV: “exclusion from the presence of the Lord”
All of these show a bias toward the view of eternal conscious torment instead of letting the text speak for itself. As it turns out, that word “from” can just as easily and often mean “origin,” as in “coming from.” So we could legitimately say this:
They will be punished/judged with everlasting destruction
coming from the presence of the Lord.
That puts a very different light on it.
This is not a twisting of the Scriptures. It’s a legitimate way to interpret this word “from” that is consistent with the rest of Scripture.
I would also argue that “eternal destruction” doesn’t mean “destruction that keeps on happening for eternity.” That doesn’t even make sense, since God would have to keep the unbelievers alive so that they can continue to be “destroyed,” when “destroying” means obliterating. Instead it is consistent with the rest of Scripture to say it means “the destruction of the age to come, destruction that will be complete and permanent.”
How the traditional view of eternal conscious torment became dominant
As I mentioned earlier, the teaching that the soul is inherently immortal didn’t come from the Bible, but from Greek philosophy, specifically Socrates and Plato. Early church fathers who had been steeped in Greek philosophy just assumed the soul could not be destroyed.
Augustine, who was also steeped in Greek philosophy and believed that the soul could not be destroyed, with his out-sized influence, solidified ECT as the view of Christendom, just as he did with so many other doctrines.
And then, of course, if the unbeliever’s soul cannot be destroyed and if it must be punished, then the punishment must be ongoing forever. This only makes sense.
Because of Augustine, the Catholic Church famously taught eternal conscious torment as a doctrine that could not be questioned.
Edward Fudge points out this interesting contradiction, though, from Augustine’s The City of God:
“When a man is punished by death for some great crime, do the laws reckon his punishment by the time in which he is being executed, which is very short, or by this, that he is removed forever from the society of the living? For just as the laws of this present city do not provide for the executed criminal’s return to it, so neither is he who is condemned to the second death recalled again to life everlasting.” — Augustine, City of God (Book XXI, Chapter 11)
In the 12th century, Anselm–one of the most influential theologians of the Middle Ages–added the new twist that sin against an infinite God requires infinite punishment.
I mention this argument for ECT in particular because it’s one that I’ve heard often even today. But Fudge argues that Anselm did not get this teaching from Scripture, but from the concept of tiers of justice in the feudal system of the Middle Ages (basically, if a lord kills a serf, it’s nothing, but if a serf kills a lord, it’s a capital offense, etc).
The Reformers, who went back to Augustine for so many of their beliefs, largely didn’t question the concept of hell as eternal conscious torment. Calvin especially radically defended it.
Why this matters . . . and why I waited so long
I confess that I still haven’t read Edward Fudge’s full 500-page tome, The Fire That Consumes, but I know that it painstakingly addresses every Scripture and thoroughly examines the original languages. The third edition, which you can see here, also addresses all the objections that had been raised to his earlier editions of the book.
However, his later book Hell: A Final Word, is written to be more accessible for those who want the basics of the teaching, and I think you’ll enjoy it. I found it on my library’s Hoopla connection, but you can see it on Amazon here.
Like Edward Fudge, I believe this topic is of secondary importance–that is, it is not central to the gospel message. I would love to see Christians disagree on this topic charitably.
But like other secondary topics, it does matter. Because how we understand hell shapes how we see God and how we present Him to others.
For me, discovering modified annihilationism / conditional immortality brought relief I didn’t even know I had been longing for. I no longer had to contort myself to defend a view that seemed inconsistent with God’s justice . . . or try to keep a wall of cognitive dissonance up in my mind about it.
And why did I wait eight years to talk about it?
For one thing, in 2017 I had just recently published my first Untwisting Scriptures book. I feared that the people I most wanted to reach with the truth of God’s goodness, love, and actual justice might be turned aside without consideration if they had found I had departed from what many believed to be, as the Catholics teach, an unquestionable doctrine. I needed time to let my readers know I truly do love the Scriptures and want to take them very seriously and honestly.
For another thing, part of me wanted to test the view in my own life. Would I become a liberal? Would believing that those who reject Christ don’t suffer torture for eternity mean I would start believing that what the Bible calls sin really isn’t sin and really isn’t to be taken seriously?
And, to be honest, I was a little scared. I was already sticking my neck out on many topics. This was a big one, and I didn’t feel ready for the blowback.
So . . . I apologize. I made it about me. But this is really about God and His perfect justice. Though His justice includes retribution, the heart of it is restoration: to restore all things to the way they ought to be. As the Old Testament demonstrates throughout, the work of justice is accomplished by cleansing the land of evil.
And this is about you. About all people. Because with the modified annihilationist view that Edward Fudge and others have faithfully presented from Scripture, we can rejoice in the justice of a God who judges justly and does not need to eternally torture anyone to do it.
I don’t expect your mind to change after reading one relatively brief article. Instead, I want to invite you to explore the possibility that “conditional immortality” (aka “modified annihilationism”) is not heresy. It has every bit as much Biblical support as the belief of hell as eternal conscious torment. (I believe it has more.)
And I want to invite you to be willing to explore further, through Edward Fudge’s lectures and books, as well as through the many others who have studied the Scriptures for themselves, come to the same conclusion, and faithfully written about the topic.
After all, if God really does torture every unbeliever forever and ever without end, satanists and their victims alike (if their victims didn’t trust in Christ), then that’s a truth we shouldn’t shy away from.
But if there is another possibility that fits with the Scriptures and the very sense of justice that God put within His people, then that possibility is worthy of exploration.
Let me know your thoughts, questions, challenges, and observations in the comments. Again, I don’t want to believe a view just because it makes sense and helps me love the Lord more. I want to believe what is actually true.
I know the same holds for you. If we study and come to different conclusions, I hope we can remain friends. Remember, this is a secondary issue. It doesn’t determine what we believe about Jesus Christ and His salvation, but like all secondary issues it does affect how we live our lives and how we interact with others.
I’m praying for you as you prayerfully consider this view and ask the Lord to guide you into truth.
*****
Go here to download your free Guide, How to Enjoy the Bible Again (when you’re ready) After Spiritual Abuse (without feeling guilty or getting triggered out of your mind). You’ll receive access to both print and audio versions of the Guide (audio read by me). I’m praying it will be helpful.
Go here to download your free audiobook of Untwisting Scriptures to Find Freedom and Joy in Jesus Christ: Book 6 Striving, Dying to Self, and Life. I pray that it will truly help you find more freedom and joy in Him!
I don’t agree or disagree, because I think I’m a little confused about exactly what conclusion you’ve come to. Before I can form an opinion at all, I want to make sure I’m understanding. Are you saying, (I think), that Hell is not eternal conscious torment, but basically a fire that destroys the soul until it is simply no more? And then does that mean that when the final judgment has happened, all those who didn’t know Christ will simply be no more, and the fires of Hell will go out because their work is complete, so to speak? And then I wonder: what does this mean for Satan and those angels (now demons) who followed him? Do they suffer eternal conscious torment because they are truly immortal in ways the human soul is not, or do they end in destruction that makes them no more as well? Again, these are genuine questions so I can understand, not arguments against your points.
Actually, I don’t mind arguments, as long as they’re respectful. But yes, modified annihilationism means that after a punishment that fits the crime, the soul is destroyed.
Regarding the devil and demons, Romans 20:10 says that the devil, the beast, and the false prophet will be tormented day and night forever. As far as I know, the Bible doesn’t mention anything about the end of demons or fallen angels.
Rebecca,
I respectfully disagree with your point of view…..at this point in my life. My mind can be changed but it will take more time for me. I went to the book you recommended and one of the one star reviews hold similar beliefs to mine as I’ve been studying this topic SLOWLY for a while now.
I started wrestling with this topic myself years ago when I let a Jehovah’s Witness into my house and they tried to convert me to this point of view or one similar to it, I can’t recall which, I just remember it was different from mine. Since then I’ve been slowly collecting all the scriptures on hell as I stumble across them in my daily reading. I’ve also been open to hearing points of view that differ from mine. If I’m viewing this wrong I want the Holy Spirit to correct me, like He has on so many other topics. He may, but he hasn’t yet. I do however appreciate your heart in how you wrote this.
I agree, it’s a secondary issue. I still have all of your untwisting books on my 2026 reading list. I’ve only read the first one and even though we don’t agree on this topic, I still plan to read the rest of your books.
So, unless the Holy Spirit leads me to where you are, which I’m open to Him doing, we can agree to disagree and I still love you and respect you and recommend you.
Much love,
Cheryl Bennett
Oh Cheryl, I love your heart. This is exactly what I’m asking of my readers. We can still disagree on this issue as we study the Scriptures, but we can do it with mutual respect. Thank you, and let’s continue the dialogue.
Thank you for your reply. I’ve re-read this article a few times, as well as read many of the comments and your replies to them. Like you, I want to believe what’s true, not what’s emotionally easier. As I continue to read up on this, (and I will do more of it in the days and weeks to come), I’m finding this really does make more sense than the idea of eternal conscious torment. This makes more sense and seems to line up with the rest of Scripture on a lot of levels, yet it’s a view I’d never remotely heard of until your article. So, thank you!
I hadn’t heard of it either. Until I did.
Once I did, I found that a whole big conversation was going on about it. I can send you quite a few websites, big and small, that talk about it. Also YouTube conversations. Let me know if you’re interested.
And of course, the thing about YouTube . . . once you show you’re interested in a certain topic, YouTube will feed you more and more of that topic. So once you start you’ll realize there’s more than you could possibly watch. It’s also good for seeing the ECT refutations of Conditional Immortality, so you can weigh both belief systems and seek the Lord regarding which you believe to be more faithful to the Scriptures.
Ezekiel 28:16-18 speaking of Satan via a symbolic representation says God will destroy him, devour him with fire and turn him to ashes. So yes, Satan and his evil angels will als have an end. Of course their sentence will be longer than everyone else but eventually they will be consumed and also be no more.
For an explanation of fire that burns forever and ever you need to consider all uses and definitions of “forever” in Scripture. An employee could commit to serve his employer “forever” which obviously meant as long as he lived.
Wow! The take on our soul actually not being immortal has just rocked my world – in a good way!! Eternal life truly is a gift!! Praise God!
Thank you for your bravery to share this, Rebekah!!
It rocked my world as well, so I get what you’re saying. Thank you, Katharina. Keep searching the Scriptures to see if these things are so!
The idea of immortality of the soul goes back to the Egyptians, ie their pyramids and was perpetuated by the Greek philosophers, especially plato who had a lot of influence on Augustine who had a lot of influence on Calvin.
Yes, for sure.
My study of scripture has led me to see humans as tri-partite beings with a body, a soul, and a spirit. I haven’t heard anyone mention this nuance regarding this subject, but I actually think seeing the spirit and soul as separate parts helps in studying and better understanding the doctrine of hell.
I have a view of Hell as a state of shame proportional to what someone deserves. So the victim would be living in a state comparable to living in a trailer park. Annihilation vs enernal punishment reminds me of the death penalty vs life in prison debate. And there are prisons that seem worse than my (technically some other person on the internet)interpretation of hell. My problem with universalism is that it would be like forcing a wild animal to be a pet when it doesn’t want that.
Evangelical Universalists believe that at the end, everyone will come to Jesus Christ and be truly saved.
I believe in partial universalism for all who never reach an age of accountability….
Thank you for posting this, I was raised in the church and am on a journey for truth in the Bible. This has also been a topic I have been avoiding because of how I was raised. Thank you, I feel like my eyes have been opened a little more and will dig deeper into the resources you talk about.
I hope you don’t take as long as I did to dig into it. There are truly helpful resources out there, some that are very accessible. So many conversations going on online about it now.
Oh Rebecca – 20 years ago in House Church someone first introduced me to the idea that perhaps hell was 3 days and then done. That people weren’t burning forever. My belief shifted to that, but just recently I learned that this belief is not orthodox in the church I’m attending – although I don’t feel any pressure from them to believe ECT.
Your article here is so helpful because you address the same things that I hear about God’s justice not being the same as our idea of justice, etc. Last night I said something along these lines to my daughter: “I don’t want to believe a view just because it makes sense [and makes me feel good] . . . I want to believe what is actually true.”
This is what I love about you is that you love scripture so much and yes you showed us all of these years in Untwisting Scriptures how much you love scripture – so when I hear a teaching from you, I know you have wrestled in the Spirit with the Lord to understand with earnestness and integrity – aligned WITH scripture.
God bless you dear friend!!
And you as well, my friend. Yes, so many of my “Scripture wrestlings” have come out on the other side with “God is absolutely overwhelmingly good, right, and just, and I love Him more than ever.” I’m eager to share this good, right, true, and just God with others.
I absolutely love that you published this. I’ve been quietly believing this for the past five years, but have kept it to myself because of the stigma surrounding it. The concept of hell and eternal torment grated on me as incongruent with what I knew about God, but I’d never looked at it. Then I took a college level class on Genesis taught by my pastor, with focus on the first few chapters. At one point we discussed the Tree of Life, and how death came into the world when we were cut off from the Tree. Then the pastor tied it into the messiah, and how Jesus is the Tree of Life. Therefore every soul connected to him has eternal life. I remember sitting in class with the pieces clicking together. If Jesus is the Tree of Life, and only by being connected to him do we have eternal life, then those who are not connected to him do not have eternal life, and are bound by the earth’s rules of life and death. That moment marked a complete worldview shift for me. I talked with my pastor and realized he never once preached on the traditional concept of hell. Then when I started looking further into it scripturally, it tracked that there is more basis in scripture for conditional annihilation than eternal torment. That perspective lines up with the other teachings in scripture and with the character of God as shown throughout scripture, while the concept of eternal torment does not.
By the way, your first Untwisting Scriptures book absolutely changed my life 8 years ago, and was the catalyst that set me on a path of learning and actions that eventually pulled me out of oppression and the despair that went with it. I am now free physically, emotionally, and spiritually. I also want to affirm you in waiting to share this perspective; because of the spiritual oppression I was in at the time, if I’d known that you didn’t believe in a traditional concept of hell, I would have hesitated in reading that very first book. I’m not sure if it would have completely deterred me given the point of desperation I was at, but it would have been a significant roadblock. Thank you for publishing this now, though. It makes me wonder how many Jesus-followers actually quietly believe this, but don’t speak up for similar reasons. Regardless, I want to dig into some of these resources you mentioned.
This is beautiful, Bethany. Thank you for sharing your own journey.
And I’m so thankful the first book was helpful to you.
Interesting comments and thoughts here. The question that comes to my mind then is what about the final judgment one day?
Scripture talks about God separating the sheep from the goats. Matthew 25:41 & 46 says the goats go to “eternal fire prepared for the devil and his demon”, “eternal punishment”. What does eternal mean here? Does this not mean eternal then?
Second question, scripture says everyone will be judged one day for their works, Rev. 20:11-15. Does this mean that wicked people from milleniums past are still in torment waiting for annihilation, according to this approach? While Hitler is in torment/punishment a much shorter time before annihilation?
That does not seem to fit the justice theme either. I ask these questions genuinely, not to be difficult.
Thank you, Alisa. These are great questions.
The great Day of the Lord is the day of judgment. There is a view that says everyone who dies is in a “holding state,” so to speak, until the Day of the Lord. Since time is a measure only of this physical world and not of the afterlife, they would go to sleep in death and wake up the next moment at Judgment Day. They wouldn’t be in torment while they wait for Judgment Day.
Matthew 25:41 tells us that the fire is eternal, but eternal fire does not necessarily mean eternal torment. (Revelation 20:10 says that the devil, the beast, and the false prophet will be tormented day and night forever, but those are the only beings that is said about.)
Matthew 25:46 speaks of “eternal punishment” for the wicked, the punishment with death and destruction that is eternal and irreversible.
I am wowed. I am exhilarated.
I am thinking how I secretly thought this but never had the ability to bring it to the forefront enough to really study it. As has been said, it doesn’t change and make me more liberal minded. It just helps me appreciate the unspeakable gift he has given me of eternal life. The only last question in my mind is the story of Lazarus and Abraham. How does that fit in with annihilation theory?
I love your stuff because your stuff loves the Lord and His word. Thank you
Thank you, Jeanette!
Regarding the parable of the rich man and Lazarus: I believe this parable isn’t talking about heaven and hell, since the rich man and Lazarus can actually see each other and communicate across the chasm that divides them. Lazarus is “in Abraham’s bosom”–that is understood as something other than heaven. The rich man is in “Hades,” the land of the dead, not Gehenna (which is the Greek word that we know as “hell”).
Many of those who teach eternal conscious torment admit that this passage is not to be taken as a literal representation of heaven and hell.
Like many of the parables, this story would have been at least somewhat familiar to the listeners: versions of it were around at the time of Jesus. Like several of His other parables, Jesus was using this one to urge repentance on his wealthy and uncaring listeners, primarily the Pharisees. Jesus also used extreme language and word pictures in many of His parables. I believe this parable is indicating to His hearers that there is a time to repent of hard-heartedness, and that is NOW. Once this life ends, there will be no more opportunity.
If we take this passage literally, though, it does still fit with modified annihilationism: There is no reason not to think that the rich man was undergoing his just judgment before annihilation.
But I don’t believe that’s what it’s about.
One must keep in mind the audience to which Jesus was speaking. Luke 16:14-15 shows that the story of Lazarus and the Rich man was in response to the ridicule of the Pharisees and “lovers of money”. The Rich Man was directed straight at them.
Also, Lazarus is the Greek rendition of Eleazer, who, if we remember was Abraham’s servant who stood to inherit everything if Abraham had no children. Isaac came along and took the inheritance. Isaac had Jacob (Israel) and Jacob had six sons by Leah–Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar and Zebulun. Through various mis-deeds, Rueben, Simeon, and Levi all had the inheritance stripped from them and Judah ended up being the “oldest son” and got the lion’s share of the inheritance.
Judah was also the ONLY tribe to return from exile, (and where we get the name “Jew”). Judah is the Rich Man in the story who didn’t help Lazarus (representing how the Jews were treating their own people). Even after death, the Rich Man still tries to “boss” Lazarus around.
The Rich Man switches to a plea for his “five brothers, another clue that Jesus was talking specifically about Judah.
Side note: ALL of the passages people use to defend an eternal conscious torment depict punishments –not for not having faith in Jesus, but for how they treat other people. Abraham tells this to the Rich Man in very clear language.
Even Matthew 25, Jesus is clear that the goats enter into discipline because of how they treated people. And churches will teach that having faith in Christ is what saves from Hell. Not according to Jesus
I think it’s dangerous to build a doctrine from a parable, which the Rich Man and Lazarus so clearly is.
This – the Tree of Life — actually has the strongest tie – like the cherry on top – to making the point of eternal life with Christ as the joy of a soul, and would also, I think, help some of the more conservative Christians think more deeply about the topic than they might without Genesis involved.
Well, stink, my original draft had a paragraph that referenced the tree of life:
“In fact, as the author of this website points out, the reason Adam and Eve were driven out of the Garden of Eden was so they would not eat of the tree of life and live forever.” (This is the website I was referencing: http://www.gentlegod.org)
I took out that paragraph because it seemed stuck in and didn’t seem to flow. Now I wish I’d left it in. Thank you for making this important observation.
Thank you!
Most of my life I have simply avoided thinking about hell, because ECT was the only possibility I was aware of. But once the ‘Traditions of men’ cage was opened, there was little doubt in my mind that eternal conscious torment was one of those perverted beliefs destined to be rejected as poppycock. There is simply no way the loving, gracious, merciful, kind God who left all to suffer and die for the sake of rebellious mankind had such a ‘mean streak’ in Him. Nor do I think for one moment that any decent being could enjoy immortality in the presence of countless creatures suffering unthinkable torture without end – God nor men.
Not only does exploring this topic free the believer to adore and worship our glorious God as He deserves, it also allows us to present a truer picture of a loving God who desires to grant forgiveness and life to those who do not yet know Him. ECT seems to me, like Calvinistic total depravity, limited atonement and irresistible grace, to be a doctrine – if you’ll pardon the expression – straight from the pit of hell. The fact that so many of these faulty traditions of men arose from the same corrupt root (Augustine) might make one question the integrity of his teaching and personal relationship with the living God.
Well, Janice, once again we prove to be twinsies in unexpected ways. “Most of my life I have simply avoided thinking about hell, because ECT was the only possibility I was aware of.”
I think you came to the realization sooner than I did, though, that if there’s a doctrine you have to actively spend time trying not to think about, maybe there’s something wrong with it.
Yes, it mystifies me how much credence the reformers gave to Augustine, and in turn how much credence modern theologians give to the reformers. All of us need to keep going back to THE BIBLE to see what the Biblical support is, and be willing to listen to voices who–while still giving utmost respect to the Bible–have a different Biblically-supported viewpoint.
And it’s always good to hear from you.
Thank you so much for posting this. I grew up in a “hell and brimstone” church that taught ECT. ECT has always bothered me deeply. While I’m still not 100% convinced just yet (I’m, 90%), modified immortality makes so much sense and fits with a God that is both a God of justice and mercy. Considering this possibility of hell allows me take a deep sigh of relief, and as you said, love our wonderful God of mercy even more. I will look into the resources you provided and pray God reveals truth and solidifies it for me.
I do have a few questions.
1. When Jesus is crucified and goes to hell to free the prisoners, how does that align with modified immortality. I’ve never really understood that portion of scripture anyway, but that doesn’t seem to line up with modified immortality because the inhabitants of hell would have been destroyed.
2. What about the final judgment when God judges the world, is that only the living and not those who have already died and gone to hell?
Thank you so much for having the courage to write about this.
1. I think you may be talking about 1 Peter 3:18-20, which says this: “For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit, in which he went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison, because they formerly did not obey, when God’s patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared…”
This doesn’t say anything about Jesus going to hell or anyone being freed from prison. This verse is hotly debated, but I don’t think it has bearing on what we’re talking about here.
2. One view says that there is a “holding space” where souls will be held until the final judgment. Another view says that the judgment is immediate. Either way, modified annihilationism (conditional immortality) teaches that when the judgment does take place–whether at the end of the world or immediately after the person dies–the person will be punished and then destroyed.
Thank you for sharing this. It seems sound and feels right. Of course, I will read Fudge’s book for myself and continue to explore related scriptures. But, I would like to share a few personal reflections.
First of all, as a survivor of sexual abuse, I have not taken comfort in the thought of my abuser, whom I once loved so much and prayed would be saved, burning forever and ever. The thought of him being judged then no more if he refused Christ in the end, however, frees me from concern about his fate and allows me to focus on my own recovery moving forward.
Secondly, as a missionary to international students, the teaching of eternal torment was the hardest doctrine to share with people who had previously never been exposed to the gospel and who had family members (parents in some cases) who had already died. I myself struggled with the idea that eternal suffering like that was indeed just.
Lastly, just last night I had a conversation with my daughter about how my grandsons are turning away from the gospel because of the way other teenagers speak of hell to nonbelievers as a threat. In effect, the Good News has been reduced to nothing more than a means to avoid eternal punishment. If what you are sharing today is correct, it shifts the message to “knowing God and enjoying Him forever,” as Good News that truly needs to be discovered and embraced.
Again, thank you, Rebecca. You always give me much to think about, and I sincerely appreciate your ministry.
Thank you, Lynn, and I agree that it’s important to keep thinking, especially as we’re seeking Holy Spirit truth in it. Though we’ll err, as all humans do, the more we seek the Lord, the closer we’ll get to the truth. God bless you as you continue to follow Him.
Though in 2014, I had never dreamed of considering alternative views of hell, we were hosting a Muslim international student and this subject came up—in one of the first church services she joined with us. I sat cringing through the entire sermon, for even then, on some level, eternal conscious torment did not feel like “good news” to me. After the sermon, though, she came to me ecstatic: She had no idea we had a theory of the afterlife that matched hers! She was so excited about it. I should have taken a clue from that. That of all the doctrines my culture might share with the Muslims, it would be the most heinous one. Read Hannah Hurnard’s story about her work among missionaries for more inspiration on this subject. (Find her story on the Tentmaker website).
I look forward to reading that. Thank you!
Just an FYI, I understand that Hannah Hurnard eventually went into New Age, or New Thought, and left traditional Christianity.
That is very disappointing to learn. Do you have more information on that?
A translation of unique pedigree I’ve been reading lately is the Jubilee bible and it words 2 Thess 1:9 as
“who shall be punished with eternal destruction by the presence of the Lord and by the glory of his power”
I’m of the annihilation opinion based on the Matthew 13 concept of wheat and tares. I experienced it myself with friends who came into adulthood and went bad inherently. It is consistent that bad plants are burned up (by the presence of the Lord) along with every other bad thing and that’s that. It satisfies justice and reason and it is forever.
What a difference a translation can make!
So true! I too have come to love the Jubilee translation, and I used it exclusively in my book about spiritual warfare. I wrote about its author, Russell Stendal, in one of my missionary books (the one about Colombia), back when I was writing those. What a wonderful, exemplary life he lived!
This is great! And so needed for the body of Christ! Thanks be to God & His grace He showed me truths re: hell thru my questions that needed answering & thru Samuel G. Dawson! Here’s the FREE PDF online although I also have his book entitled: “The Teaching of Jesus – From Sinai to Gehenna: A Faithful Jewish Rabbi Urgently Warns Rebellious Israel” https://www.scribd.com/document/336947755/Jesus-Teaching-on-Hell
Thank you for this, Donna. This is actually one of the articles my sister sent me back in the day.
I just asked the Lord a couple of days ago to help me understand His grace to a deeper level and your article shows up today. There is a movie on You Tube called Hell and Mr Fudge based on Edward Fudge’s journey to his conclusion concerning Hell. I watched it… I think it is worth watching, certainly as well as reading his book. Anyway, thank you Rebecca. I am starting a new journey.
Yes, thank you, Sally. I did watch that movie at the same time I was studying everything else. Very well done.
I already believed this way before the controversy erupted over Kirk Cameron’s discussion with his son, because that’s what I have come see for myself in the Scriptures, despite what I had been taught for decades in the church. The other night I came across the movie Hell and Mr. Fudge on YouTube, and I loved it! It validated what I believe is true.
The apostle Paul didn’t mind being checked up on, he commended the Bereans for searching the Scriptures to see if what he was teaching was true. Fudge is a true Berean, Rebecca is one, we all should be one, and continue to be.
“If you continue in my Word, then you are truly my disciples; and you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” John 8:31-32
Excellent, thank you, Ellen!
As a universalist who believes in the reality of hell (as a place of restorative punishment–the key word being “punishment” or “kolasis” which is always for the purpose of bringing one back, rather than pushing one away; see William Barclay’s explanation), I am long past being afraid of hell discussions. Who of us really “knows”? I have many annihilationist/conditionalist friends, two of whom have mailed me copies of Edward Fudge’s book…in two different editions. I kept one and passed the other on. I no longer feel “threatened” as I once did, by other beliefs, and if annihilation also seems unFatherlike to me, I don’t mind if others believe it.
I came to my beliefs in a solo scriptura way, by making three columns in a physical tablet and filling in verses which seemed to “prove” each of the three views. For me, it was a no-brainer. Like you, I was chary of changing my mind on such a basic belief. But, again like you—oh, the relief and delight in changing my view of God in this way! I don’t know how believers in ECT can walk down the street and stay sane.
I’ve certainly read outside of Scripture by now, and, besides, of course, the universalist texts which I appreciate (most recently Until the Last One’s Found by Curt Parton), I think the best “hell” books are those which give a fair and non-defensive exploration of each of the three views. Steve Gregg’s All You Want to Know About Hell is a great place to start, if Fudge feels too weighty a tome.
Again like you, I learned to ask a different question, at the gentle teaching of an Amish friend and theologian’s daughter. She told me the question to ask is not, “How long does hell last?” but “How far does salvation extend?”
Thank you, Sheila.
I’ve struggled with this, too. There are several aspects to what you’re saying that make sense with who I’ve learned God to be and how He works. But how does the rich man and Lazarus in Luke 16 fit into this explanation?
Jeanette asked about the rich man and Lazarus too, and I responded to that above.
Hi Rebecca, thanks so much for this careful overview. How have you grappled with the parable of the rich man and Lazarus in Luke 16? The passage uses “torment” twice, but notably doesn’t seem to refer to a length of time.
Thank you for all your work!
Thank you, Rachel. Jeanette asked about the rich man and Lazarus too, and I responded to that above.
Revelation 14:10-11 describes those who receive the mark of the beast. Their torment will be fire and brimstone . The smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever. They have no rest day or night. So, I would have to disagree with you. I cannot imagine it and how horrific it will be, but that is what I read in the scripture. That’s why the price Jesus paid for our sins was so awesome and incredible and we can’t fully fathom the price He paid for our sins. And sin separates from God. He willingly came because He knew what the alternative is. That’s how much He loves us. He doesn’t want anyone to go to hell. He provided a way out and everyone has a choice.
Thank you for your thoughts, Cin, and for your respectful disagreement.
I am in a place of deep grief over my children who have walked away from the Lord.
While I believe He is still pursuing them, this idea of modified annihilation is a comfort to me. In addition, having grown up under a fiery tempered father, I have always been terrified of hell and judgement and the fierce God of the OT. There is a great deal of cognitive dissonance in me that keeps me from drawing near to God….fearful of His wrath over my mistakes….and clearly not supported by scriptures speaking of His everlasting love. Thank you for opening the possibility of relief.
Oh, I’m so sorry that the face of your father overshadowed the face of our loving Lord. I’ve written about this kind of thing many times. No matter what is true about hell, if you are a child of God through Jesus Christ, you can joyfully draw near to Him knowing that you are greatly beloved of Him. You can pray for your children knowing He is a just and good Lord who does all things well.
I just have one simple comment Rebecca, and it is a revelation that came to me while reading this article. All through the scriptures I’ve read about the concept of a “second death,” which I have always taken to mean the soul. However, I have also always been taught that hell meant eternal conscious torment and never questioned that…until now.
Here’s why your article on this makes perfect sense to me: if the scriptures say there is NO second death for believers (which they do), then it stands to reason there is, in fact a “second death” for unbelievers. And in that case, I have to agree with your conclusion.
As you have said, it may be a secondary truth with nothing to do with salvation, but I believe that understanding the scriptures is of the utmost importance and is a life-long pursuit of knowing our Lord completely.
Yes, I didn’t mention it in this article, but Edward Fudge has a good bit to say about the second death. He equates it with the judgment day and the lake of fire and annihilation. Second DEATH. Death meaning, end of life. Once the blinders were off, it seemed so clear.
Hi, Rebecca. This is all very thought provoking. Thank you for your continued, diligent, thoughtful approach to Scripture.
I have a question about a possible dilemma: In Jesus’s parable about Lazarus and the Rich Man, in Matthew 16:24, the Rich Man says, ” ‘Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.’” And in verse 28, the Rich Man refers to “this place of torment.”
How should we properly interpret this parable — and how does that relate to the idea of modified Annihilationism?
Hi David. It’s good to hear from you. Jeanette asked about the rich man and Lazarus above, and I responded there. Let me know if you have other thoughts about it.
Thank you, Rebecca.
I cannot even express how ecstatically excited I am at the wave the Spirit is doing in these days! Another influential Christian speaking out against ECT!!!
Learning that Reformers used ECT for fear-based evangelism, even though they knew it wasn’t true, as the end justified the means for more conversions was disheartening, to say the least.
Learning that ECT was a Greek/Roman belief woven throughout their mythologies was eye-opening as well.
When I came to a full realization of the truth about ECT, it radically transformed my life. I felt more love from God and toward others. The judgmental, critical spirit I had prayed God would remove from me for years fell away I an instant.
We left Costa Rica specifically to join and support a church we had been following online, here in Denver. Peter Hiett stays faithful to Scripture as he teaches the Relentless Love of God.
While my conclusion is a bit different from yours, as I am fully convinced Scripturally that the wicked who are destroyed are every single one of us- the version of us we create- our flesh/ego that Paul talks about, I am thrilled beyond expression that well-respected Bible teachers like you are speaking out.
God is so much better than humans. Our idea of justice is nothing like God’s. His vengeance IS kindness. His justice IS mercy.
When we know as we are known, when our eyes are opened to Truth, when we stand in the presence of Love, all wickedness is destroyed. (Our physical death is not a deadline for coming to know Christ.)
He is so faithful and powerful to save us from our own bad decisions (as well as the bad decisions of not choosing Him).
“For every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that He is Lord.” Gladly confess, in the Greek. Swear allegiance, in the Hebrew.
“As in Adam all die, so in Christ all live.”
❤️❤️❤️
(Thank you for creating a safe space for discussion.)
Thank you, Amy. In a comment above I mildly defended evangelical universalism from a misrepresentation, haha.
I have thought for a long time that ECT was a handy tool for fear manipulation in the iron rod rule of the Middle Ages religion. But I’ve never heard that the reformers knew it wasn’t true. I’d like to see more information about that, if you would.
I appreciate the care taken in this article to wrestle honestly with Scripture and with the moral weight of judgment. These are not light matters, and it is right to approach them with humility.
As I listened and read your article, I found myself struggling with how a modified annihilationist view accounts for Jesus’ own warnings. In Matthew 25:46, Jesus uses the same word (aiōnios) to describe both outcomes: “everlasting punishment” and “life eternal.” Grammatically and contextually, there is no indication that the word carries two different meanings within the same sentence. If aiōnios describes unending life for the righteous, it is difficult to see how it could describe a temporary punishment for the wicked without breaking the symmetry of Jesus’ warning.
Related to this is how Jesus frames judgment itself: not as a transaction to be worked through, but as a verdict that places a person into a final state. That distinction matters. If punishment is finite and the final end is non-existence, then suffering becomes something that can, at least in principle, be endured if the sin felt worth it. Judgment shifts from a final declaration to a cost–benefit calculation. Yet Jesus warns precisely against that logic: “What is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?” (Matt. 16:26). Losing the soul is presented as an enduring forfeiture, not a temporary penalty followed by erasure.
I also find it significant that Scripture presents both salvation and judgment with a parallel structure. For the redeemed, there is an intermediate state often described as being with the Lord (heaven), followed by the permanent dwelling of the New Jerusalem (Rev. 21–22). For the lost, Scripture likewise distinguishes between hell as a temporary holding place and the lake of fire as the final, permanent state after judgment (Rev. 20:11–15).
That parallel is significant, because God’s dealings with humanity are consistent rather than asymmetrical. In Scripture, resurrection and final judgment—both for the saved and the lost—do not lead to temporary processes that eventually resolve themselves, but to enduring states. Just as salvation culminates in a settled, permanent reality, so judgment does as well. The biblical pattern is resurrection followed by a final condition: everlasting life or everlasting exclusion (Heb. 9:27; Dan. 12:2).
For that reason, a modified annihilationist reading seems to change the nature of judgment itself. Punishment becomes something that is worked through and exhausted, rather than a final reality that one enters and remains under, and sin becomes a transaction rather than a catastrophic loss.
I say all of this with respect, not as a dismissal. I’m processing and thinking, but at this point, I remain persuaded that Jesus’ warnings only retain their full weight if judgment involves an enduring loss of relationship with God, not eventual non-existence.
Thank you for your thoughtful reply, Tricia. When all is said and done, we may disagree on this topic, but I hope we can remain friends. I appreciate the thoughtfulness you’ve put into your pondering over these weighty matters.
As it turns out, αἰώνιος (aiōnios) is one of the words that Edward Fudge spent much time examining in his works. As you know, the word aiōn means “eon,” “age,” “era.” So the word aiōnios means “pertaining to an age” or “belonging to the age to come.” So it would be a faithful reading of Matthew 25:46 to read it as “life of the age to come” and “punishment of the age to come.”
Another way to consider the word aiōnios is to see how else it’s used in the New Testament. For example, Hebrews 9:12 speaks of “aiōnios redemption.” That’s translated “eternal redemption.” But it doesn’t mean our Lord Jesus keeps on eternally doing the work of redemption. No, the work has been accomplished, with effects that continue throughout the age to come.
Regarding God’s judgment/justice, I wouldn’t describe it as either “a transaction to be worked through,” or “a verdict that places a person into a final state.” Rather, I believe the Bible shows judgment/justice to be “setting things right.” (I researched and wrote a good bit about this in my first Untwisting Scriptures book, a process that prepared me to rethink other things I had believed about God’s justice.) In the Old Testament we see several examples of the process of “setting things right” through a cleansing of the land, even through destruction of the wicked.
This article may be helpful to see more of what I mean about justice: https://heresthejoy.com/2024/06/fake-justice-vs-real-justice-walk-away-from-the-courtroom-part-3/
Matthew 16:26 implies that the wicked will lose his soul. Not that his soul will be retained throughout eternity.
Regarding the permanent state of the redeemed and the wicked, both living forever in different conditions, we would have to believe that the human soul is inherently immortal. But the Bible never teaches that–it comes from Greek philosophy.
In order for God to be consistent in His dealings with humanity, He wouldn’t need to keep the unredeemed alive forever to torture them forever. The lake of fire IS the second death. I believe that the Bible teaches this is the final death, the death of the soul. This is the enduring state of permanent destruction. This is the settled, permanent reality for those who do not trust in Jesus Christ.
Daniel 12:2 may seem like it teaches eternal conscious torment, but what it says is that “some [will awake] to shame and everlasting contempt.” This refers to enduring disgrace in the eyes of others, not eternal conscious suffering.
Modified annihilationism / conditional immortality does indeed teach that judgment involves “an enduring loss of relationship with God.” When we present the gospel to others, we can assure them that if they die in their sins, they will lose the eternal relationship with God that He offers them. This is an immeasurable loss, a catastrophic loss.
We will do well to help others know what relationship with God can be like in this life, so they can have a taste of what that wonderful relationship will be like in the eternal life to come. It is our joy to invite others into this life.
Thank you for your careful response. I have followed your work for some time and own all but one of your books. I have long appreciated your evident desire to pursue truth. It is in that same spirit that I engage you in this discussion, grateful for the opportunity to think carefully together about matters of such importance.
First off, I think we may differ in how we understand the purpose of hell. From my reading of Scripture, hell is less about God “setting things right” through a corrective process and more about God ratifying human choice. It is the final consequence of persistent rejection of God: a state of separation that God permits, rather than a punishment He administrates. Judgment, which is received upon death (Heb. 9:27 ), is in this sense a verdict rather than a process. It is the natural consequence of human choice: people enter hell as the result of their own persistent rejection of God’s grace and authority, and God ratifies that choice upon death. This does not deny God’s role as judge, but understands His judgment as a final verdict received upon death whereupon people fully experience the results of their own choices and desires.
This raises several questions:
1. If punishment prior to annihilation is meant to vindicate God’s justice or “set things right”:
A. How is it determined that sufficient punishment has occurred?
B. Why is Christ’s infinite atonement necessary if finite suffering can ultimately satisfy justice?
C. How do we account for vastly unequal durations of postmortem suffering (for example, those who have already been dead for centuries versus those who die near the end of history)?
2. Regarding repentance after death: the rich man in Luke 16 remained unrepentant even in torment. How does limited punishment “set things right” if the unrepentant do not change after death?
I also think part of our disagreement rests on how we weigh different kinds of biblical material. Scripture calls us to “rightly divide the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15), which includes interpreting passages according to genre, context, and purpose. Poetical books (like Psalms, Song of Solomon, or parts of the Prophets) use highly figurative, symbolic, or hyperbolic language. Their goal is often to evoke emotion, praise, lament, or moral reflection, rather than to define precise doctrinal formulas. If we build key doctrines solely on poetic imagery without cross-referencing historical narrative or apostolic teaching, we risk misinterpreting metaphorical language. This is especially important when Jesus’ own didactic teaching speaks directly to the nature and duration of judgment.
In my pre-field missionary training, I studied Bible translation principles, and one of the key tenets emphasized is distinguishing literary style from doctrinal intent. Poetic language communicates truth powerfully, but it must be interpreted in harmony with clear, doctrinal passages that define belief and practice.
I offer these thoughts respectfully and gratefully. Even where we disagree, I value the opportunity to think carefully and charitably about these weighty matters.
Thank you, Tricia. There is much we agree on.
God’s judgment/justice, as I understand the Scriptures, is about “setting things right.” Hell is one tool He uses to do that. I wouldn’t say I consider it a corrective process–I would agree that it could be seen as “ratifying human choices.” The “verdict,” as you say, of death is part of God setting all things right.
About your numbered questions (and just a note, I wouldn’t use the word “vindicate,” I would use the word “accomplish”):
1A. God is the one who determines just punishment.
1B. Christ’s atonement delivers eternal life and relationship with God for those who believe on Him. The wicked do not receive this. (Also, I wouldn’t use the term “satisfy” in reference to justice. This sounds like God needs to be appeased, and I believe the Bible doesn’t teach that. Instead, I would use the term “accomplish.”) Justice is accomplished when all is set right, for both the righteous and the wicked.
1C. I don’t believe postmortem suffering is happening now while waiting for the last day. (I’ve addressed this in a couple of other comments above.) Beliefs differ on this point, but I believe that each person falls asleep in death and awakens immediately on the Judgment Day. That is, there is no time to be measured once a person has died.
2. The “setting things right” of justice, in my understanding, is not about bringing every wicked person to repentance. (That’s universalism.) It is about cleansing the land of wickedness.
I agree that different parts of the Bible must be read different ways according to their genre. I agree that the New Testament carries far more weight than the Old. I would never want to build key doctrines solely on poetic imagery. I want to handle all the word of God with faithfulness. Thank you for continuing to ponder through these challenging topics with me.
Thank you both for your respectful conversation. You’ve both given me many scriptures that I’m adding to my list to study.
I hope we can continue the dialogue.
This article means everything to me.
Although I plan to study more in order to see for myself, I already sense that it makes more sense than my former beliefs that I had accepted unquestioningly (but also felt guilty for questioning the severity of God’s justice)
Thank you for your courage in sharing this.
I will probably look back years from now and count this as one of the most consequential articles I have ever read.
Praise God, April. Continue to search the Scriptures to see if these things are so.
I disagree with the Old Testament references made. The deaths described are physical in this world. People could not see in the supernatural to see if they were alive somewhere else. That didn’t make sense
Thank you for your thoughts.
So good to read your post! I’ve believed in conditionalism for probably 20 years now. I haven’t talked about it much, except with people who were upset with the idea of ETC, because conditionalism brings so much relief to their angst.
It may have been Clark Pinnock who first gave me words for my discomfort with ECT. But at some point I did a study on the words “mortal, immortal, immortality” as well as “perish.” Then a study on all the challenging passages. It seemed clear that conditionalism was the idea held by all the NT authors; that immortality is something we gain from regeneration! And that the “second death” mentioned near the end of Revelation is the death of the soul for those who have never experienced regeneration. Jesus said that only He and the Father have life within themselves. If you are separated from God, you do not have the eternal kind of life. Once we see this, it makes sense of so many passages, like, “He who believes in me shall never die.”
Thank you for bringing out and providing such great resources for those who want to be sure of this idea.
I always appreciate your contributions, David. When you say you haven’t talked about it much, could it be for a similar reason–not wanting to be seen as a heretic? I’m meeting more and more people who have “secretly” changed their views but who, like me, found it difficult to talk about because of the overwhelming support for ECT. But this is definitely a conversation worth having. Even if readers go away with their views unchanged, it will be after considering the actual alternative rather than a misunderstanding of it the way I used to have.
I love all your observations. Happy 2026 to you and yours!
Yes, that’s basically it. Why get dismissed as a heretic when there are so many important things that need to be addressed.
Exactly how I felt for so long, but here I am sticking my neck out, haha. I’m aware of many for whom the threat of eternal conscious torment for all equally has caused them to walk away from what they see as an unjust God. And He’s not unjust, and I long for others to see what I’ve seen.
I think that everyone starts with their names written in the Book. Moses begged God not to blot out the names of the children of Israel who were rebellious. In Revelations it says that for some, their names were not found in the Book so those must have been removed. Romans argues that the conscience accuses or excuses those who have not the Law because it is written on their hearts and can be followed. Jesus separates the sheep and goats based on doing the deeds or not rather than facts that are believed. I think it will be the very willfully wicked that end up in complete annihilation. As I read through this, I realized that the second Passover might be foretelling the second chance to partake of the Lamb that most were not able to access in this life through no fault of their own. What do you think? I had not considered that we are not born eternal but of course we need to get to that Tree of Life and eat it! It is such a big topic, and I also hesitate to bring it up with people. I think that most people will get refined by the fire and purified and saved by just a very little bit remaining after rubbish is burned up. It thought about the principle of an eye for an eye and of equal punishment to fit every crime. I think it is possible that God plans to put the perpetrator of crime through the suffering that they caused by their crime, as a way of getting them to understand it’s enormity and impact. I think this will cause all that gnashing of teeth, rather than actual flames. At the end of this lengthy process the person should be sorry. Maybe even repentant when nothing else would get through to them. I think it doesn’t take literally forever but it would feel like it. Whether they go on to be annihilated or to a very humble restoration depends on them. The Leaves of the Tree are for healing of nations, after all. Thank you for this wonderful article and all the comments.
Lots of fascinating thoughts here! We’ll keep searching the Scriptures and asking the Lord for Holy Spirit insight.
My understanding of hell has also changed in recent times to reflect this understanding of Scripture. I appreciate that this can be viewed as a sensitive subject and one that might meet with a lot of pushback—I haven’t really talked it over with anyone but my husband. I want to thank you for presenting your conclusions with humility and with a heart that wants to read and interpret Scripture as God intended. I am grateful that you have been a big part of my spiritual journey over the years. Thanks be to God! With love from Tina Wood
Good to hear from you, Tina. Thank you for your thoughts and your encouragement.
Hello again dear Rebecca,
I read all the comments here ( and on Facebook) and honestly, I feel so ignorant.
I am not a scholarly person by nature…so all the in depths of studying this subject of annihilation goes right over my head…
It’s very difficult for me to follow all the thoughts and words used by these very intelligent people.
…yet, I am curious…
What are your beliefs about Heaven?
Does the “believer,” one who believes Jesus, when they die, do they go to Heaven?
Or are they in a state of “sleep” until the judgment day?
Can we truly say to one who has lost a loved one who also was a Jesus believer, that their loved one is with Jesus?
….as to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord?
I long for simple language to explain the Gospel.
Thank you Rebecca.
I believe that to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord. Amen. Thank you for writing, my friend.
Interesting the timing of this article. I’ve been drawn to this topic lately and just last week thought to email you, Rebecca, and ask your thoughts. I have been coming to the same conclusions, so imagine my surprise to see this in my inbox today! Certainly, the words “gift of eternal life,” in the Bible, now make me marvel and ask, is becoming truly eternal not a given, but a gift of sonship?!
Yes, it does make so much sense.
Over the past 8 years, several people have written to me to ask me what I believe about hell, and I’ve given them a greatly condensed version of what I’ve written here. I’ve known for a long time I needed to write this. I’m thankful it came up for you today.
And as always, it’s so good to hear from you, Danielle.
Thank you for this article, Rebecca. I’ve kind of put all of this stuff out of my mind. As you know, I’ve been through some things where these doctrines really screwed with my head in unhealthy ways. It didn’t bear good fruit in my life. I can relate to what you said that if it’s true, then you HAVE to accept it, even if it doesn’t sit well with you.
And when I see the acronym “ECT” I can’t help but think of Electroconvulsive Therapy.
Umm, yes, I think of that too, haha.
I pray that when you’re ready you’ll be able to think this through to prayerfully consider what the Bible says. I pray that the Lord continues to bring you healing. It’s always good to hear from you, Lila.
A turning point for me was when I began to pay attention to the emphasis Jesus (and later, Paul) put upon the parent-child relationship we’re to have with God. It was the primary mode Jesus used, not just to describe his own relationship to the Father, but to describe the Father’s relationship to us. If one of my teenagers was lost in some way–literally or figuratively–I would go “to hell and back” to find them. I would wait forever if need be. I would welcome them back again and again and again and again (not 7 times, but 70 times 7). So shouldn’t I except the same from our Heavenly Father? Why would he give up? Why would he let something like Death stop him from rescuing us? This is why I think modified annihilation doesn’t go far enough. It still puts God in a box. It says that God is unable to save some people. Shouldn’t we reject anything that puts limits on the power and love of God?
I respect the view of universalism, but I haven’t been able to reconcile it with Scripture.
I have read about annihilation in a book written by Dr. David Reagan. You are the second person I have ever heard of talking about it. It makes me wonder how much of our beliefs are shaped by Socrates and Plato without even realizing it.
I’m guessing more than we realize.
If you say the punishment fits the crime (abuser and victim) are you talking about a purgatory type of punishment for all the earthly sins?
All those who go to hell have rejected Christ as Savior and therefore are being punished for the same sin. I believe that includes eternal separation from God.
I am honestly asking this question to better understand where you are coming from.
As I understand it, the Roman Catholic teaching of “purgatory” is that it’s a place for sins to be burned away so that the soul can be fit for heaven. As I understand it, in Roman Catholic doctrine, only those proclaimed by the pope to be “saints” skip purgatory while most other people experiences it. As I understand it, prayers and indulgences made for a loved on in purgatory can shorten the time there.
The teaching of modified annihilationism has nothing in common with “purgatory.” This doctrine teaches that those who have put their faith in Jesus Christ will experience eternal life with Him. Those who have not put their faith in Jesus Christ will by judged by their works (as Romans and other books mention), will experience a just punishment, and then will be destroyed.
Your article makes a case for the human soul not being inherently immortal, but what about each human spirit? It is my understanding that the soul and the spirit are not the same.
1 Timothy 6:15b-16a says, “[Jesus Christ] is the blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone has immortality . . .”
It can be argued Biblically, from this verse and others, that neither the soul nor the spirit is inherently immortal. Only God is immortal, and immortality is given as a gift to the redeemed.
The soul (nephesh/psyche) is the living person, the self.
The spirit (ruach/pneuma) is the life breath given by God, the God-given life force. The spirit is the power of life, and just as God gives breath, so God withdraws breath.
Genesis 2:7 says “The Lord God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living soul.”
The dust of the ground became the man’s body. The breath of life was the life-force spirit of man (ruach), and the living soul was the man’s self or nephesh.
At death, the body returns to dust. The spirit returns to God (as life breath, not as a conscious entity), and the person, the self, will go on to immortality if that person has trusted in Christ, or to judgment if that person has not trusted in Christ.
The Bible never teaches that the human spirit is inherently a conscious, immortal self that continues to think, feel, and experience apart from the body. Again, that comes from Greek philosophy and medieval conjecture, not from the Scriptures.
But wouldn’t annihilation mean there was a limit to the love or the power of God? He either didn’t want to save them, or didn’t have the power. Both of those ideas are anathema.
Yes, I do understand that this is the argument for universalism–there is no limit to the love and power of God, and anything less than universal salvation limits that love and power.
It’s a compelling argument.
But I don’t see how it answers the many Scriptures about the destruction of the wicked.
Then wouldn’t that leave us with a dichotomy? On the one hand, God has no choice but to destroy the wicked, and the most compassionate thing he can do is annihilate them (unlimited love but limited power). On the other, God has no limits but chooses to annihilate souls anyway (unlimited power but limited love). Can we agree that both hands are terrible? And if so, maybe we need to reevaluate the meaning of “the destruction of the wicked”?
Perhaps this is a conversation we could continue via email.
Thank you, Rebecca, for your courage to broach this subject, a long-standing protected “darling doctrine” of the fundamentalist and evangelical streams of the church. I so appreciate your brave, open-minded digging into Scripture. I’ve had many questions about this and you have given me much to ponder. I think you were very wise (not selfish) to wait till now to reveal the results of your study, and the way your thinking has evolved.
Thank you, Tammy. I pray if nothing else it causes everyone to prayerfully ponder Scriptures on the subject.
Thank you for posting this. A perusal through church history shows that the doctrine of eternal conscious torment has been used by powerful church leaders over the centuries to manipulate and control people. Your writing on this topic is so important because it exposes the abuse and fraud of religious power.
I saw in my Europe travels, for example, Gothic cathedrals with carved and stained glass images of Jesus and faithful followers in heaven, contrasted by images of crazed demons tormenting lost souls in hell and purgatory. (The cathedral in Bern, Switzerland has a particularly graphic one over the main door entitled “The Last Judgment.”) I kept thinking, why wouldn’t illiterate congregants give money and free labor to the church after seeing these sensationalized images?! Dante’s “Inferno” came out of that era as well (14th century). The fear provoked is not fear of a loving, holy God who hates how sin harms his children; it’s a traumatizing fear riveted upon the diabolical evil. We know how ironic that was/is, the way evil lurks in positions of church power in the name of Christ.
Seeing what the Bible says about the end of the wicked is a great starting point on a study about hell. The Lord will destroy the wicked, and not build them up (Psalm 28:5). The wicked are like chaff and will not stand in the judgment (Psalm 1:4-5). The wicked shall be ashes under the soles of your feet (Malachi 4:1-3). Their end shall be according to their works (2 Cor. 11:15). These promises are for those who feel the deep longing for divine justice and righteousness. And though we can’t know all the details of how this will play out, we can trust down to our core that the Judge of all the Earth will do what’s right.
Thank you, Shari–so true. The historical piece about the cathedrals telling a story of terror is fascinating.
Oh my goodness, Rebecca! This helps me in such a big way. It has never sat well with me that a loving, just God would punish the unbeliever – simply put, someone who opted not to accept the gift of salvation that leads to eternal life – the same as an unrepentant, psychopathic murderer.
It’s a lot to ponder, for sure, and a lot to search the Scriptures over.
Thank you, Rebecca, for daring to bring this field of thought to our attention.
It took me a few days to process the new point of view. My husband and I are currently watching the Edward Fudge video. We listen in segments in order to thoroughly absorb this approach. We are still shocked at how much we accepted as final truth over the years. It feels good to listen with a clean slate and no preconceived ideas.
Thank you again.
Anna
Yes, “shock” is one of the words I would use to describe my own response. (“Relief” is another.) To think that there are alternative views that before Augustine could be held by many Christians without their being called heretics. Astonishing.