Episode 57: Our House

Episode 57 of the Theopologetics Podcast is now available! Stephen Atkerson from the New Testament Reformation Fellowship joins me to discuss house churches and New Testament patterns of church practice. This episode contains part 1 of the interview. Stay tuned for episode 58, "God is in the House," for part 2.

Episode 56: Everlasting God

Episode 56 of the Theopologetics Podcast is now available! Dr. Glenn Peoples joins me to discuss Christology, philosophy of mind and the crucifixion of Christ. Was God the Son alive and conscious while the man, Jesus, lay dead and unconscious in the tomb? Or did the Godman die both as man and as God? And can either of these views be considered orthodox?

Analyzing Annihilation: JPH vs. EWF (Round 2)

In round 1 we looked at J.P. Holding's claim in "An Examination of Annihilationism" that the Greek word apollymi, rendered "perish" in describing the final fate of the wicked, more strongly supports the traditional view of hell than it does the conditionalist position. I concluded such was not the case at all, and that the word more strongly supports conditionalism than traditionalism. My friend Michael Burgos agreed that Holding was running away from the clear meaning of the word, and that apollymi clearly fits within a conditionalist framework, but did not feel that it was any less consonant with traditionalism. So I gave the round to Fudge, and Mike would say, I guess, that round 1 was a draw (though he does find statements in Revelation compelling, which we'll get to later in this series). And so the bell rings in round 2.

The Day God Fell Asleep?

In the comments thread following my previous post, listener Ronnie pointed out that it's possible to be a dualist and yet maintain mortalism, that immaterial human souls are completely unconscious in death awaiting the resurrection. I pointed out, hastily and perhaps incorrectly, that that would still be considered heresy by those who can't accept that as deity, Jesus either remained alive while His body lay dead in the tomb, or died along with His body.

Ronnie suggested in email that this objection seems to be to the death of the soul, not necessarily its being rendered unconscious. He pointed out the seeming likelihood that while living but asleep, the Word was likewise unconscious. Because I don't want to derail that conversation from conditionalism, I pose the question here:

Could it be that for three days God the Son was, as God, unconscious, and that not violate the immutability and triunity of God?

Analyzing Annihilation: JPH vs. EWF (Round 1 Post Mortem)

In round 1 of my series analyzing annihilation, I argued that the meaning of apollymi used to describe the final state of the wicked more heavily favors Edward Fudge's view of hell, commonly called "annihilationism" or "conditionalism" or "conditional immortality," than it does J.P. Holding's somewhat more traditional view of hell as argued for in his article, "An Examination of Annihilation." My post received a lot of great comments and the discussion is ongoing.

The latest comment posted there was made by my friend, Michael Burgos of Grassroots Apologetics. As I began to respond, however, I realized that I had so many thoughts to articulate that it would make more sense to write a whole blog post rather than squeeze my large response into the comments area at the end of the previous post.

Analyzing Annihilation: JPH vs. EWF (Round 1)

It was my immense pleasure to recently interview Dr. Edward Fudge on the topic of annihilationism or conditional immortality. The first half of that interview can be heard in episode 54, "Burn It Up;" the second half is in episode 55, "Eternal Fire." As I stated when that interview was over, I felt left with little reason--apart from tradition--to maintain the traditional view of hell as eternal conscious torment. And I was pleased to hear from a friend of mine who, having been skeptical of Fudge's view in the past, found his case compelling.

However, my friend did ask what I thought of an article by J.P. Holding, "An Examination of Annihilation," in which Holding argues for the traditional view and against annihilation. As I began to read it, I was at first disappointed. The earliest points made in the article are, in my humble opinion, very weak. However, as the article progresses, Holding makes some points deserving of examination.

I told my friend that I'd like to discuss those points together, one-by-one, taking them as seriously as we are both beginning to take annihilationism. It dawned on me, however, that our mutual examination of Holding's article might prove helpful to those who, like us, are beginning to consider this minority alternative to hell. So, assuming my friend does not mind (he is a fellow blogger), I'll publish that interaction here, and I welcome your feedback.