Plenty of people are taking Cameron up on that offer. “The fatal flaw in Kirk Cameron’s view of temporary suffering in Hell (where the Lake of Fire ends the suffering by annihilating the soul of the sinner),” said Dr. Clint Archer, a pastor in Alabama, “is that it doesn’t account for a verse that says Satan and the human ‘beast’ live forever in torment.” Archer quoted Rev. 20:10.
“Hell is a place of eternal, conscious torment. It is not annihilation (Rev. 14:11; Matt. 13:42; Mark 9:47-48; etc.),” said Trevor Sheatz. “When we preach this truth, salvation in Christ becomes even more precious.”
Preacher and evangelist Ryan Denton reposted Huff on X, giving five reasons “why annihilationism is incompatible with historic Christianity.”
“Satan does not run hell. God does,” said Matt Smethurst, a pastor in Virginia. “Just as heaven is an eternal monument to his mercy, hell is an eternal monument to his justice. Both glorify his perfect character.”
Theologian Owen Strachan, who in an earlier post said he was “grieved” by Cameron’s view, later said, “I don’t see Kirk Cameron as ‘heretical.’ Yikes! But I do hope that he reconsiders annihilationism.”
“Annihilationism is a false doctrine that contradicts Scripture and diminishes the glory of God’s holiness and justice,” said Denny Burk, president of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. He linked to a book he had contributed to, as well as an article he wrote for The Gospel Coalition (TGC).
TGC itself posted an article, commenting, “The traditional doctrine of hell is currently undergoing significant challenges from both within and without the church. In this article, J. I. Packer responds to four common arguments for annihilationism.” Nathan W. Bingham, vice president of media for Ligonier Ministries, alluded to the conversation by linking to a series on hell from R.C. Sproul and quoting Sproul. The Ligonier account on X posted an article responding to the annihilationist argument.
Author and evangelist Justin Peters posted a lengthy response to Cameron. “I’m not saying he is a bad guy or anything like that,” said Peters, “but this is a departure from orthodox—and by orthodox I don’t mean the denomination but historical Christianity—and the implications of adopting such a position are very, very dangerous.”
“And taken to its logical conclusions, this position is really an affront on the character of God,” he said.
Ray Comfort posted a video response to Cameron Tuesday afternoon, calling Cameron a “dear friend” and a “godly man” who “loves the Lord.” Notably, Comfort said that Cameron had not fully decided on the annihilationist view.
