I have more reading for you, dear readers, gathered from around the internet. This week’s topics are the doctrine of annihilationism (conditional immortality), Christian parenting, creationism, complementarian women, and the question of rape and abortion. Let me know what you think of the posts, and be sure to let the authors know as well. This is a snowy owl edition because it snowed here yesterday.
Death After Death– The concept of annihilationism, or, as its proponents prefer to call it: conditional immortality, is gaining more traction. It ought not be dismissed simply because it feels new or different. Here is a thoughtful post engaging with conditional immortality from a perspective of disagreement. What do you think about this issue?
Can We Tolerate Creationists?– Is it permissible to give a creationist a job anywhere? This might sound hyperbolic, but this post investigates a controversy that has surrounded the hiring of a young earth creationist for a BBC television spot. It ends with an insightful comment from the National Secular Society.
10 Ways to Get Your Kids More Interested in Their Faith– Developing faith is an important aspect of Christian parenting. Here’s a post that discusses how we might get kids interested in their faith.
Remember the Complementarian Woman– A call to egalitarians to not portray complementarian women in a way that isn’t true to their experiences and beliefs.
Responding to the Question of Rape with Wisdom and Compassion– “we should clearly express the genuine compassion we have for survivors of rape” [emphasis in the article]. These are words that pro-life people need to read and understand. Turning to an argument immediately is not always the best choice. If we don’t genuinely show compassion and care for those involved in making these horrific choices, then how can we truly call ourselves “pro-life”?
J.W. Wartick - Reconstructing Faith 
Thanks, J.W.
For the record, I wrote that post some time ago and am on the fence more so now that when I wrote it. I see good arguments for both conditional immortality and traditional views of the human soul being immortal (notwithstanding the considerable Platonism that is entrenched here and which I’m less inclined towards [see Joel Green on a unity of body and soul]). In reading through Four Views on Hell: Second Edition (http://smile.amazon.com/dp/0310516463), Stackhouse and Burk have good arguments, but I think Stackhouse has the stronger position.
Most importantly, I’ve a paper (unpublished and not available to the public) written by John Stott who considerably qualified his stance on annihilation and, despite the press that he received, concluded that he was ambivalent whether annihilation or eternal conscious torment was the better view from the biblical data.
Posted by Paul D. Adams | March 26, 2016, 7:52 AM