Larry Dixon's The Other Side of the Good News is a clear and compelling defense of the traditional view of hell. Dixon begins by analyzing and critiquing three contemporary challenges to the traditional view -- universalism, post-mortem conversion, and annihilationism. Following this, Dixon makes a case from the New Testament for the traditional view of hell. In his final chapter, he argues that it is vitally important to maintain the traditional view, regardless of its difficulty and present unpopularity.

General Summary of Book's Contents

Is it necessary to discuss the other side? Or is the exercise too speculative (seeing that none of us have been there) to warrant its usefulness? Dixon's first chapter addresses these questions. He strongly affirms the need to discuss these issues, for "if the biblical doctrine of hell is true, there is indeed something to fear!" (p. 10). In the past, most liberals and many cult groups have attacked or denied the traditional doctrine of hell (that of eternal conscious punishment), but now much of the opposition to this doctrine is coming from fellow evangelicals. In light of these contemporary challenges, Dixon affirms the need to discuss this doctrine.

No matter how distasteful or unpopular the doctrine is, Dixon argues that we must discuss and defend the classical doctrine of hell for at least three reasons: (1) whether we like it or not, the fate of the wicked is already being discussed by those denying the traditional view; (2) the doctrine of hell is the necessary correlative to rejecting the gospel message and thus is part of the Gospel message; and (3) most importantly, we must discuss it because Jesus so clearly taught it.

With this in mind, Dixon consecutively addresses three challenges to the historic doctrine of eternal conscious punishment.

He begins with universalism, the view that all things and all people -- whether righteous or wicked -- will be reconciled to God in the end. Even if there is a hell, it will have no permanent occupants, for its purpose is not punishment but purification. He cites Origen (ca. 185 - ca. 254) as the first proponent of this view. He also considers contemporary advocates such as Barth, Dodd, John A.T. Robinson, and Nels Ferre. Barth is incriminated unfairly, in my opinion, for he never forthrightly pronounced himself a universalist, even though his teaching may logically seem to proceed in this direction. The other theologians cited plainly taught their universalist views. After revealing each theologian's respective perspective, Dixon responds in light of the traditional view. He also deals extensively with the "universal" texts (Phil. 2:9-11; Col. 1:19-20), arguing that they do not teach universal and unilateral reconciliation of all creatures.

Next, he addresses annihilationism. This is the view that those consigned to hell will ultimately be destroyed or annihilated. Another version of annihilationism, conditional immortality, argues that immortality is a gift of grace given only to the redeemed. The unredeemed are not immortal and thus do not survive death but merely cease to exist. John Stott and Clark Pinnock are the particular proponents chosen by Dixon to represent this view. Dixon argues against this position by demonstrating how "destruction" and "non-existence" are not altogether synonymous. To destroy something is to ruin it or render it unfit for use so that it can no longer answer the end for which it was designed. This is not the same thing as annihilation.

Finally, Dixon addresses post-mortem conversion. According to this view, many (if not all) of those who die will be given a first (if they have never heard) or a second-chance to respond to the Gospel. This is one way to cope with the sober truth that countless billions have never heard the Gospel. Some proponents of this view argue that general revelation is salvific and unites a person with Christ's work, even though they remain unconscious of Jesus' specific work on their behalf. Against this position, Dixon argues that Scripture presents no possibility for salvation after death. He then deals extensively with 1 Peter 3:18-20, arguing that it does not warrant a belief in post-mortem conversion.

Dixon brings all the previous chapters to a head by presenting Jesus' teaching on hell. In reality, he actually presents a New Testament perspective on hell, because he continually incorporates passages from outside the Gospels to defend his position. However, he does focus on Matthew's presentation of hell and on Jesus' parable(?) of the rich man and Lazarus in Luke 16:19-31. He argues that Matthew's Jesus clearly warns of hell's reality and sufferings, using strong language that would communicate horrific thoughts to his original listeners. In regard to Luke 16:19-31, Dixon demonstrates that this story -- whether a parable or not -- has much to say about Jesus' view of the afterlife. Since parables usually speak of things that occur in reality, it is argued that Jesus would not mislead by giving bogus information about the future state. This argument may be shaky, but if Jesus is truly giving information about the afterlife, this parable alone knocks out all the contemporary challenges at once -- for there really is a hell, and the suffering is real, and hope for future redemption is non-existent. Obviously, the argument over whether this is a parable, a real story, or a parable with real and true elements will probably go on as long as the debates last.

Dixon concludes by challenging the supposed superior sensitivities of those who advocate non-traditional views. He rightly states that no one, no matter what his or her perspective, is overly joyous about the prospect of hell. But he also makes it clear that those who think they are showing more sensitivity by undermining clear biblical teaching because of their moral repulsion to hell are not helping matters by redefining the doctrine to fit their sensitivities. Ultimately, the reality of hell demonstrates God's real and righteous plan to vindicate righteousness. Evil will not ultimately go unpunished and good will not ultimately go unrewarded in the moral universe God has created and is recreating.

Dixon challenges evangelicals to continue to defend the traditional doctrine of hell. Even though we may find the doctrine difficult and unpopular, we must still speak of it because our master, Jesus, spoke of it. "We dare not be indifferent to the doctrine of hell; the stakes are too high" (p. 187).

Strengths and Weaknesses of the Book

The book is laid out well. Because of this, it is very easy to follow the development of Dixon's arguments. As each chapter unfolds, the biblical teaching on hell becomes clearer and more entrenched in the mind of the reader. Dixon seems to treat opposing views fairly and answers them clearly and convincingly. The farther someone is from his own position, the harsher he seems in response, but he is never overly harsh. For example, he treats Stott with kid gloves while strongly attacking Pinnock and Bloesch at times.

I only have one strong criticism of this book (other than its garishly ugly light pink and purple cover!). Throughout the book, Dixon quotes from authors without naming them. I'm not sure why he does this, for at times it would help the reader understand his opponents' positions better. Obviously, the footnotes are in the back of the book, but I don't think he is doing his readers a favor by keeping many of the sources anonymous in his main text.

Although this book deals with deep topics and subtle nuances in different positions, Dixon has written so well that most adept readers could benefit from his treatment. I am grateful I read this book and would definitely recommend it to others as a voice worth listening to in the contemporary debate.

© Richard J. Vincent, September 11, 2001