Part 3 of a massive three-part review of Chris Date's debate with Len Pettis of the Bible Thumping Wingnut. See also Part 1 and Part 2.

Episode 98: Date vs. Pettis Debate Review (Part 3)

Rethinking Hell contributors William Tanksley and Daniel Sinclair, and guest contributor Peter Berthelsen, join Chris Date for a massive five-hour review of his recent debate with Len Pettis of the Bible Thumping Wingnut, and of some of the conversations that have taken place since.

This episode contains part three of three.

Debate and Follow-Up Audio

Chris Date and Len Pettis Debate Hell
http://rethinkinghell.com/2016/09/episode-94-is-conditional-immortality-biblical-chris-date-and-len-pettis-debate-hell/
Len Pettis is Second Caller Into Matt Slick Radio
http://carmpodcasting.blogspot.com/2016/09/carm-podcast-912.html?m=1
Conversations from the Porch Reviews the Debate in Episode 21
https://m.soundcloud.com/biblethumpingwingnut/cftp-episode-21-hell-debate-brother-rc-striving-for-eternity-discussion-hangout
The Bible Thumping Wingnut Reviews the Debate in Episode 202
https://soundcloud.com/biblethumpingwingnut/btwn-episode-202-ending-well

Links Discussed

“A Seat at the Table: An Appeal for Dialogue and Fellowship,” by Chris Date
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdTc-EQ1XPY
“The Same Before and After: A Response to Matt Slick,” by Chris Date
http://www.rethinkinghell.com/2012/07/the-same-before-and-after-a-response-to-matt-slick
“Cross Purposes: Atonement, Death and the Fate of the Wicked (Part 2),” by Chris Date
http://rethinkinghell.com/2016/08/cross-purposes-part-2/
“A Philosophical Case for Conditional Immortality,” by Daniel Sinclair
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NsJ0-X78R9Y
“Intrinsic Value, Sanctity of Life, and Capital Punishment: A Response to J. P. Moreland,” by Chris Date
http://www.rethinkinghell.com/2013/03/intrinsic-value-sanctity-of-life-and-capital-punishment-a-response-to-j-p-moreland
“Conditionalism and Evangelism,” by Daniel Sinclair
http://www.wholereason.com/2014/07/conditionalism-and-evangelism.html
“Five Reasons Why Len Pettis is Wrong About Μενω,” by Peter Berthelsen
https://medium.com/@_berthelsen/five-reasons-why-len-pettis-is-wrong-about-%CE%BC%CE%B5%CE%BD%CF%89-ad7e9a78ce50#.pv2hlfjw1
“Whatever death means, it supports conditionalism,” by Joseph Dear
http://www.rethinkinghell.com/2012/11/whatever-death-means-it-supports-conditionalism
“Traditionalism and the (Not So) Second Death,” by Chris Date
http://www.rethinkinghell.com/2012/09/traditionalism-and-the-not-so-second-death
“Lazarus and the Rich Man: It’s Not About Final Punishment,” by Chris Date
http://www.rethinkinghell.com/2012/06/lazarus-and-the-rich-man-its-not-about-final-punishment

Ministry Links

2016 Rethinking Hell Conference Website
http://www.rethinkinghellconference.com/
Conference Ticketing Page at EventBrite
http://www.eventbrite.com/e/rethinking-hell-conference-2016-tickets-26518320009
Debates Podcast
Bookmark the permalink.
  • Webb Mealy

    In relation to Len’s accusation of obscurantism around apocalyptic imagery…

    I would say that it gets you nothing to talk about apocalyptic imagery being wild strange and difficult to interpret. It may be that, but traditionalists are going to pounce on that because they are wary of anything that looks like it could be a Procrustean bed tactic–namely, an attempt to use verses like Rev. 20:14b to chop off any meaning in other punishment passages that does not conform to the meaning you prefer, namely death.

    There is no benefit in saying anything that could be construed as meaning, “These are hard passages to understand, so we are safest to flee to easier to understand passages.” That is a game that everybody plays when they are confronted with passages that seem to convey unwelcome information: “interpreting the obscure by reference to the clear,” and that sort of thing. But we don’t have to do that–in fact, we should show confidence in going deeper into the question of apocalyptic imagery, rather than retreating to the literal as the key to the imagic. It’s part of the mix, but the most powerful key to apocalyptic imagery is the intertextual fabric of biblical apocalyptic imagery in which it takes part. In the case of Revelation’s use of burning day and night forever and ever (14:10-11; 20:10), a careful look at how John uses phraseology from Isaiah 34 offers a definitive answer as to the significance of the “to the ages of the ages” terminology.

    I posted on the RTH forum recently (see link below) a color-coded synopsis of Isa. 34:9-10, Rev. 14:10-11, Rev. 18:8-9; 19:3, Rev. 20:10, and I gave an exegesis of the four passages that made it clear that you run into very ugly contradictions on any reading that takes the temporal language of everlastingness literally. This post is a digest of material that I’ve published at greater length in two of my books. I’m convinced that this is the proper answer to the question of imagery of everlasting burning and/or torment.

    http://rethinkinghell.com/forum/2-general-discussion/4723-revelation-20-10-matthew-25-41#4733

Featured audio: Dr. Al Mohler & Chris Date debate
"Should Christians rethink Hell?" on Unbelievable?