The Basics of Conditionalism

In the coming weeks I'll be going into more detail on each of the three views held by christians historically on the nature of hell. This week we'll look at conditionalism.

The three main views historically held on the subject alphabetically:

Conditionalism - The belief that the unrepentant will experience a second death of both body and soul in hell passing out of being.

Traditionalism - The belief that the unrepentant will experience conscious torment of both body and soul in hell for all eternity

Universalism.- The belief that the unrepentant will experience conscious torment of both body and soul in hell until they repent and are saved.

The view most frequently called 'conditionalism' goes by two other names: annihilationism and conditional immortality. Many other suggestions have been made but, as with many things in this post, it's probably best to leave it for another day and not get bogged down. They are basically synonymous terms, but they are actually describing two different realities. Annihilation refers to what happens to the lost who do not receive Christ, whereas conditionalism or conditional immortality refers to what is given to the saved.

I think the most important thing to understand about this view is that it presents a drastically different anthropology than the other two views. Those who hold this view do not believe that all human beings are immortal inherently, by nature, or through God's unwavering sustaining of life or existence. They argue that the only people who are immortal are those who receive it through faith in Jesus and thereby through union with him. This immortality, which they take as basically equivocal with 'eternal life', is something that is only given to the saved and therefore 'conditional' as apposed to the other views which hold that all humans are immortal or live forever unconditionally.

They get this from texts such as

Rom 2:7 NIV, "To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life." 

2 Tim 1:10 NIV, "but it has now been revealed through the appearing of our Savior, Christ Jesus, who has destroyed death and has brought life and immortality to light through the gospel." 

1 Tim 6:15b-16 NIV, "...God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Amen."

They would also point to the fall of man and the punishment described there as proof positive, because when Adam and Eve were kicked out of the garden, the punishment was clearly that they would no longer have access to the tree of life.

"And the Lord God said, 'The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.'" (Gen 3:22 NIV)

This is the same tree of life said to be in the New Jerusalem/heaven/renewed earth in Rev 22:2. Something only the redeemed will have access to. What is disputed is what the tree of life provides and what the words mean.

Much is dependent on the definition of terms such as 'immortality', 'eternal life', 'death', 'perish', 'destroy' 'destruction', etc., which they claim to be taking in the most normative sense and, when found in Scripture, the most plain sense and meaning in context. They would ask how it is possible that when the Bible uses these terms they can never mean what we normally think of when we use these words in any other context. Something that perishes remains forever? Something that is destroyed remains intact? Something that dies continues on for all eternity? Eternal life never means living forever? A lot of linguistic debate is had between the three views on a variety of words and these are the ones the conditionalist pushes most often.

But what about those who do not receive this eternal life? What happens to them? There are a few ways conditionalists have put it and they often struggle to use language not already found in Scripture: Cease to be, cease to exist, cease to live or have life in any sense, die a second time, cease to be conscious, be no more, be annihilated, etc.. Some of these ways of describing what happens to the lost may be problematic if pressed, but the result in mind is clearly that the lost will not eventually be saved, nor will they be tormented for all eternity, but that they will experience nothing in any way. Life, in any sense, will be over.

The amount of places they draw from Scripture on this point is staggering and hard to choose from, but here are a few.

Mt 10:28 NIV "Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell. " 

Jn 3:16 NIV "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. " 

Rom 6:23 NIV "For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." 

Jude 7 NIV "In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire."

In combination with their view of immortality being conditional, it is clear how they read these texts and come to their conclusions about the fate of the unrepentant. They think that it is a very poor assumption to hold that all human beings will live forever when not a single scripture states it anywhere in the entire bible. They grant that some texts could imply the immortality of the lost if read a certain way, but they argue that this puts the cart before the horse.

The last reason they give that I will cover today, is the atoning death of Jesus. This is an argument that has gained a lot of traction recently. I have noticed the frequency of its use increase to the point where there is scarcely a time where it isn't brought up in debates or online articles. The reason should be immediately clear: Jesus died for us. He didn't just suffer, he died and the primary focus in scripture is his death. Even when it mentions his suffering it is in conjunction with his death. The argument basically says that since Jesus died for us, then those who do not receive this substitute have to bear that punishment themselves.

Conditionalists believe that all human beings are mortal. That we all die once. That Jesus died and was raised back to life defeating death for us. That we are all resurrected and will face judgment. That those in Christ will be given immortality and that those who are not will die a second time and be lost forever.