• **Notifications**: Notifications can be dismissed by clicking on the "x" on the righthand side of the notice.
  • **New Style**: You can now change style options. Click on the paintbrush at the bottom of this page.
  • **Donations**: If the Lord leads you please consider helping with monthly costs and up keep on our Forum. Click on the Donate link In the top menu bar. Thanks
  • **New Blog section**: There is now a blog section. Check it out near the Private Debates forum or click on the Blog link in the top menu bar.
  • Welcome Visitors! Join us and be blessed while fellowshipping and celebrating our Glorious Salvation In Christ Jesus.

Kirk Cameron Rejects Eternal Conscious Torment, Embraces Conditional Immortality

Appeals to authority?

Amen.

Oh! (josh repeatedly jumps up and down) Me! Me! Can I join in? Can I join in? LOL

Can we amend that to say, these men based their opinions on prevailing tradition and doctrinally biased theology/exegesis?

Then why make it?

:cautious:

The annihilationists here can provide a response - a polite, respectful, well-reasoned and exegetical response to any exegesis you provide (although I, personally, hope it is not copied and pasted from Sproul, White or JMac). I'll wager all of us annihilationists 1) were former ECTs, and 2) were persuaded to our position by scripture and not an annihilationist theologian. We did not trade one set of theologians for another. It was only after being persuaded (or perhaps, in the beginning, perplexed over the conflicts perceived between scripture and ECT) that we (re-)searched to see if there was any history for that position. I've laid out some of the basics for the conditional mortality/annihilationist position (see Posts 2 and 8) so as you lay out a case for ECT you have a means for anticipating objections and preemptively addressing them. I, for one, would like to read it.
Just curious —have you considered my take (that it may be better understood as a matter of intensity than of time spent)? (I don't claim it is right, but sees both expressions as possible; it fits). Certainly it is not a comprehensive treatment, but I can find nothing wrong with it. The annihilationist has to "explain away" expressions of infinite time, and the ECT proponent has to explain away expressions of utter destruction. Mine doesn't have to explain away anything—at least, from my POV of it.
 
These men based their opinions on prevailing tradition and doctrinally biased theology/exegesis

Exactly, as evident in any reading of their arguments for eternal conscious torment or against annihilationism (and I have read many of them).

I'll wager all of us annihilationists were (1) former ECTs, and (2) persuaded to our position by scripture and not an annihilationist theologian.

That is certainly the case for me. I discovered the likes of Edward Fudge after adopting the conditional immortality doctrine (from which annihilationism logically follows).
 
Back
Top