Rating: 
Summary: Four Views of "Hell-ologists"
Review: Four Views of Hell is one of the best books available on the subject. Unlike other books on the same topic, the book dares to allow differing voices to be heard. But, this book may tell us even more about the prejudices and preconceptions of those who contributed to it than about the afterlife.
John Walvoord is dogmatic in his "Literal" view that hell is a place of actual flames combining physical pain with mental and emotional depression and misery. I believe that literal is a particularly bad naming and this should have been called the "Traditional" view instead.
William Crockett allows more credence to other views but still suggests that his "Metaphorical" view, hell is a state of mental and emotional depression and misery without physical features, are the only reasonable views.
In the "Purgatorial" view, Zachary Hayes, gives an excellent synopsis of the development of this controversial idea, but the reader is left to wonder whether purgatorial is 'hellish' in the traditional sense or merely cleansing and refreshing. His treatment of the Roman Catholic doctrine is historical, fair, and unapologetic.
Clark Pinnock writes one of the best articles, to date, on the "Conditional" view. This view holds that in the end, most of the unsaved will become saved, and those who persist in rebellion and hold fast to doing evil will enter a state of oblivion and annihilation. Pinnock's article and counterpoints are excellent and by far the least prideful of the lot.
The flaw, not with the book but with the contributors, is that they don't seem to read what the others have written. In their rebuttals they pick and choose their attack points often missing the very solutions to the problems they point out.
I would be delighted if this book were revised in the future to include views on "Soul Sleep" and deeper coverage of the included views. Despite the pugnatious attitudes of some of the contributors, I would want to read a broader and deeper coverage of the different views rather than avoiding them or this book.
While Hell-ologists (to coin an understandable term) may be dogmatic and sometimes arrogant in their views, the book allows the reader to see what their views are about and to fairly weigh the views. I've yet to find another book on the subject which accepts counterpoints as well as this book in Zondervan's Counterpoints Series.
Rating:
Summary: Four Views of "Hell-ologists"
Review: Four Views of Hell is one of the best books available on the subject. Unlike other books on the same topic, the book dares to allow differing voices to be heard. But, this book may tell us even more about the prejudices and preconceptions of those who contributed to it than about the afterlife.
John Walvoord is dogmatic in his "Literal" view that hell is a place of actual flames combining physical pain with mental and emotional depression and misery. I believe that literal is a particularly bad naming and this should have been called the "Traditional" view instead.
William Crockett allows more credence to other views but still suggests that his "Metaphorical" view, hell is a state of mental and emotional depression and misery without physical features, are the only reasonable views.
In the "Purgatorial" view, Zachary Hayes, gives an excellent synopsis of the development of this controversial idea, but the reader is left to wonder whether purgatorial is 'hellish' in the traditional sense or merely cleansing and refreshing. His treatment of the Roman Catholic doctrine is historical, fair, and unapologetic.
Clark Pinnock writes one of the best articles, to date, on the "Conditional" view. This view holds that in the end, most of the unsaved will become saved, and those who persist in rebellion and hold fast to doing evil will enter a state of oblivion and annihilation. Pinnock's article and counterpoints are excellent and by far the least prideful of the lot.
The flaw, not with the book but with the contributors, is that they don't seem to read what the others have written. In their rebuttals they pick and choose their attack points often missing the very solutions to the problems they point out.
I would be delighted if this book were revised in the future to include views on "Soul Sleep" and deeper coverage of the included views. Despite the pugnatious attitudes of some of the contributors, I would want to read a broader and deeper coverage of the different views rather than avoiding them or this book.
While Hell-ologists (to coin an understandable term) may be dogmatic and sometimes arrogant in their views, the book allows the reader to see what their views are about and to fairly weigh the views. I've yet to find another book on the subject which accepts counterpoints as well as this book in Zondervan's Counterpoints Series.
Rating: 
Summary: Just to wild for words
Review: I read this book as part of my seminary training. To be honest it was a waste of money. The topic is a non-starter. Hell either exists as Jesus, the bible, Muslims, Jews have taught for many thousnads of years, Or it DOSEN"T. If it does, then you better be prepared, if it doesn't then why worry. Dr Walvoord's view is the classic biblical treatment of Hell. It is well written and his concern for humamity and their decision it ignore the facts is well presented. The other three views are well presented but NOT supported, by anything other than simply saying so. If you want to waste your money and time, then good ahead and buy this. If you want to know the truth, just read the source material- The BIBLE
Rating: 
Summary: Good-Natured Debate on a Difficult Subject
Review: I think it was Spurgeon who said one should never preach on hell without tears in one's eyes. Do not be worried - none of these men presenting their views would disagree with that quote. None disavow that there is indeed a hell and that some people will end up there. What they are debating is how to read the biblical texts about hell, it's nature, etc. The book starts with the most traditional view, which it seems to me is the weakest one presented (or the weakest presentation) followed by the metaphorical - which seems so close to the traditional (especially when compared to the last two) as to render the differences nearly useless. Whether or not there are actual flames? Is this a burning question (pun intended ;))? After these two are the most interesting essays. A Catholic writer defends the idea of purgatory (technically not about hell, but about suffering in the afterlife) and makes a fairly good case. To do so, he must address differences that are basic to Catholic and Evangelical soteriology - justification and sanctification. I learned a bit I did not know. Finally, comes Clark Pinnock and the conditional view. Dr. Pinnock takes quite a bit of heat for some of his views including this one. He believes that the biblical data and what we know and believe about God tell us that the unrepentant sinner will not be kept alive merely to experience punishment and torment forever, but will be annihilated - eliminating rebellion from the Kingdom of God. Many tangential issues such as post-death salvation and redemptive suffering are addressed, especially in the last two essays. This volume really opened my eyes and made me dive back into the Bible to see what it had to say. I won't divulge my opinions - but they were different than what they were before I read this book!A useful reference to different views and a plus for the Counterpoints series.
Rating:
Summary: Good-Natured Debate on a Difficult Subject
Review: I think it was Spurgeon who said one should never preach on hell without tears in one's eyes. Do not be worried - none of these men presenting their views would disagree with that quote. None disavow that there is indeed a hell and that some people will end up there. What they are debating is how to read the biblical texts about hell, it's nature, etc. The book starts with the most traditional view, which it seems to me is the weakest one presented (or the weakest presentation) followed by the metaphorical - which seems so close to the traditional (especially when compared to the last two) as to render the differences nearly useless. Whether or not there are actual flames? Is this a burning question (pun intended ;))? After these two are the most interesting essays. A Catholic writer defends the idea of purgatory (technically not about hell, but about suffering in the afterlife) and makes a fairly good case. To do so, he must address differences that are basic to Catholic and Evangelical soteriology - justification and sanctification. I learned a bit I did not know. Finally, comes Clark Pinnock and the conditional view. Dr. Pinnock takes quite a bit of heat for some of his views including this one. He believes that the biblical data and what we know and believe about God tell us that the unrepentant sinner will not be kept alive merely to experience punishment and torment forever, but will be annihilated - eliminating rebellion from the Kingdom of God. Many tangential issues such as post-death salvation and redemptive suffering are addressed, especially in the last two essays. This volume really opened my eyes and made me dive back into the Bible to see what it had to say. I won't divulge my opinions - but they were different than what they were before I read this book! A useful reference to different views and a plus for the Counterpoints series.
Rating:
Summary: Do You Burn, Cry, or Die
Review: I've been raised in numorous Christian traditions and therefore, find these types of books (comparisions on doctrine) interesting and insightful. Out of these series of books, this one is probably the best. The contributors get right to the point and state their claims concisely. Let me give an example on how this book affects one like myself. See, my uncle Jim was a Baptist minister and I often went to his church only to hear "fire and brimstone" sermons. Once, I even watched a film on hell. Needless to say, he believed in the literal view. For a couple of years, I became a Presbyterian and hell was hardly preached. When it was spoken of, it was in a "metaphorical" sense. Then during my teens, my mom converted to Seventh-Day Adventism and then I was fully indoctrinated into the "conditional" mortality view. This book was good, because being an advid student of theology, I find this issue, though not essential, greatly interesting. Each side is represented by a highly qualified biblical expert. I was disappointed with Dr. Walvood who defended the "literal" view of hell. He was the least logical and in fact distorted the positions of others. Since he is so well known and qualified, I find it curious that he didn't build a stronger case. I was looking for a stronger case - something to challenge my presuppositions. William Crockett (Metaphorical) and Clark Pinock (Conditional) presented their views the best. Both supported their views from scripture and with sound logic and biblical hermeneutics. Anyone with an open mind can see that these two positions call for more dialogue and study. It is easy to dismiss the conditional view because it is held by cults like the Jehovah's Witnesses and border line Christian sects like the Seventh-Day Adventist. To do this however, is to neglect the study of scripture with an earnest heart and mind. I left the SDA denomination long ago (1989), but still find the conditional view a compelling doctrine, however, Crockett presented a great case and now for about seven years, I have had to re-think my position and seek further study into God's word.
Rating: 
Summary: nice to have open dialogue
Review: One thing I like about this type of book is different views are juxta-positional and short rebuttals are presented as well by all authors, leaving thr final outcome to the reader to make his own decisions. The conditional view seems to carry the most weight in my opinion, but the others did a good job at describing their views. However, one thing that is not really brought out is the fact that some Conditionalists differ amongst themselves as to whether unbelievers will be raised at all. Some disagreements will always exist, but this is the way to do debates in my opinion, though the answers and rebuttals should have been longer to present more of Scripture. For example in disproving the "immortality of the soul" it would be more of a benefit to have the reader search all instances where the Hebrew and Greek word appears and the different variants in which it was translated to demonstrate that the "soul" is never once connected with immortality in all 857 instances. However, this book is a good introduction to different schools of thought.
Rating:
Summary: One View of Hell - Jesus Christ's
Review: Since God created hell for the devil and his angels, and Jesus spoke more about the horrible, unnecessary tragedy of most people choosing to go there than any other subject to warn humanity of its all too real finality (Matt. 25): 'outer darkness', 'weeping and gnashing of teeth', 'eternal fire', 'lake of fire', 'second death', 'eternal condemnation', 'damnation', 'tormented day and night', 'gnawed tongues in agony', regardless of the palatability or rationality of hell, Jesus' view is the only credible/authoritative one. C.S. Lewis books Screwtape Letters, Mere Christianity, et al are most helpful in digesting how hell can be true given a loving God Who sincerely yearns for all men to be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth. Lewis said, "The gates of hell are locked from the inside"; also, "During this life, men say to God 'My will be done'; on Judgment Day, God says to those who rejected Him 'Thy will be done.'" If people are unwilling to spend time with God on earth, why would they want to spend eternity with Him? Hell is the only option - complete absence of God. Those in hell basically get what they want since Jesus and all He had to offer was spurned. Heaven is by grace, hell is by choice. There is just enough heaven and hell on earth to choose wisely one's eternal destiny. If you're born only once, you die twice - physically and eternally; if you're born twice(again), you die only once, not eternally. Whether 'lake of fire', 'outer darkness', or other Biblical descriptors are literal, the actual reality must be infinitely worse (weeping, gnashing, agony, eternal, torment are inadequate words to describe the true state of affairs) otherwise God would not have gone to such extremes as sacrificing His innocent Son Jesus on the cross to save us. If there were another way to rescue us, or if our state of judgment before a Holy God were not so bad after all, such valiant, self-sacrificial efforts of agonizing torture of crucifixion for Jesus would be unnecessary. "For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son, that WHOEVER should believe in Him would not perish, but have eternal life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through Him. Whoever believes in Him is not condemned; whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the Name of God's one and only Son." (John 3:16-18) Logically, Biblically,exegetically, grammatically, metaphysically and philosophically, hell must be the directly proportionate alternate/opposite to heaven. What heaven is, hell is not, except eternal/consciously/body and soul experienced. If heaven is all Light, hell is all Darkness; if heaven is bliss, hell is torment; if heaven is God's full Presence, hell is God's complete absence; if heaven is rejoicing/celebrating, hell is weeping, regretting, gnashing teeth, gnawing tongues, agonizing. Any reductionism of hell (annihilation, temporary, purgatorized, softened, lessened, eased, emptied via universalism, figuratized, mythologized), so too must be the corresponding effect on heaven. Tampering with one dimension of eternity tampers with the other. You can't counterfeit one side of Eternity's Coin without affecting the whole coin! Human nature would crave only good news (God's Love, Gospel, Gentle Jesus) and ignore, downplay, dispense with the bad news (God's wrath at sin/sinners, Holiness/Justice, Judgment Day, Accountability, Judge Jesus). Once again, the Cross intuitively and theologically shouts otherwise at humanity with Jesus' blood and tears. Unfortunately this book does not emphasize Jesus' View of Hell.
Rating:
Summary: Boo
Review: This book accomplishes its objective of presenting four differing views on hell. Obviously, it consists of four authors submitting defenses of their particular positions. A couple of the writers are more persuasive than their colleagues. This persuasiveness, however, stems more from the positions themselves rather than from the skill of the persons penning them. Walvoord begins with a simplistic, fundamentalist position of literal, eternal fire. Walvoord does a decent job of making his point. The issue is muddled, unfortunately, with the mantra of literal interpretation as the only method for persons who believe the Bible is inerrant. The connection with dispensationalism is apparent in the frequent, literal application of passages in Revelation. Crockett steps to the plate next with the metaphorical view. His presentation is the most convincing of the four, partially because of his skill but mainly because of the strength of the argument itself. Crockett sticks to the point and drives it home. Hayes takes his turn defending the purgatorial position. I was a bit surprised to find a serious consideration given to the idea of purgatory in a work of this nature. Hayes deserves credit for making a valiant attempt to communicate a Catholic belief to a predominantly Protestant audience. He offers little Scriptural support for his position, simply because there is little Scriptural support to be found. Pinnock concludes the presentations with his view of annihilation. Pinnock is not as convincing as Crockett, but gives some substantial Scriptural evidence and theological reasoning to support his position. Crockett does an excellent job of refuting Pinnock's argument in the brief response he offers. I intially planned to give this volume three or four stars, because at least two of the arguments presented are extremely weak. On second thought, however, the presentations are all fairly well done -- the problem is with the positions themselves. For anyone wanting a good overview of four doctrines of hell, I strongly recommend this book.
Rating:
Summary: Good Overview of Four Doctrines on Hell
Review: This book accomplishes its objective of presenting four differing views on hell. Obviously, it consists of four authors submitting defenses of their particular positions. A couple of the writers are more persuasive than their colleagues. This persuasiveness, however, stems more from the positions themselves rather than from the skill of the persons penning them. Walvoord begins with a simplistic, fundamentalist position of literal, eternal fire. Walvoord does a decent job of making his point. The issue is muddled, unfortunately, with the mantra of literal interpretation as the only method for persons who believe the Bible is inerrant. The connection with dispensationalism is apparent in the frequent, literal application of passages in Revelation. Crockett steps to the plate next with the metaphorical view. His presentation is the most convincing of the four, partially because of his skill but mainly because of the strength of the argument itself. Crockett sticks to the point and drives it home. Hayes takes his turn defending the purgatorial position. I was a bit surprised to find a serious consideration given to the idea of purgatory in a work of this nature. Hayes deserves credit for making a valiant attempt to communicate a Catholic belief to a predominantly Protestant audience. He offers little Scriptural support for his position, simply because there is little Scriptural support to be found. Pinnock concludes the presentations with his view of annihilation. Pinnock is not as convincing as Crockett, but gives some substantial Scriptural evidence and theological reasoning to support his position. Crockett does an excellent job of refuting Pinnock's argument in the brief response he offers. I intially planned to give this volume three or four stars, because at least two of the arguments presented are extremely weak. On second thought, however, the presentations are all fairly well done -- the problem is with the positions themselves. For anyone wanting a good overview of four doctrines of hell, I strongly recommend this book.
|
