My thoughts on how a Conditionalist should live in a Traditionalist church

I recently had a meeting with some of the pastors at my church. This was the third meeting I've had with various elders since I let them know of my change of mind on final punishment back in July.

It has been a sanctifying experience. Before I became a conditionalist, for years I have been passionate about three concepts relating to the life of the church. 

The first is in Galatians 6:2 

"Bear one another's burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ." 

The second is 1 Peter 4:8 

"Above all, keep loving one another earnestly, since love covers a multitude of sins." 

The third is Hebrews 13:17 

"Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with groaning, for that would be of no advantage to you." 

I'm especially passionate about that part in bold. 

I'm passionate about believers not just playing nice and putting on a church face but really digging into the mess of each other's lives and helping each other walk with Christ. The life of a Christian is NOT meant to be lived alone. As Paul says in 1 Corinthians 12:21 

"The eye cannot say to the hand, “I have no need of you,” nor again the head to the feet, “I have no need of you.”"

I've never understood how people are satisfied with surface level relationships in the body of Christ. I don't understand why people would keep others at arms lengths, keep their struggles to themselves. It seems that when people do that they go along until they crack and all the yuck spills out. We should be relying on one another in Christ, knowing that others are there for us and being there for others. 

I am so very thankful for the relationships I have at our church both with the friends I am closest too and with the elders as I've gotten to know them. It would have been real easy for them when I told them about my change of mind to just write me off, to just box me in and shut me up. They could have kicked me out, they could have rebuked me publicly, they could have revoked our membership. 

They haven't done that. They have asked that I not go around talking to everyone about this because that would cause a lot of trouble. It has been my intention since the beginning to NOT be a source of division. When I changed my mind on Hell I told almost no one before telling one of our pastors because I don't want to be or come of as being subversive. They have the responsibility of shepherding the flock of God that is among them and the last thing I want to do is make that more difficult. 

This whole time I've been trying to not only feel my own feelings about hell but to see things from their perspective. We are called to love our neighbors as ourselves and to treat others the way we would want to be treated. How can we do that if we don't try to imagine things from their perspective?

Here are some of the thoughts and concerns I imagine they might have:

-They might be concerned because for 1400 years this has been a minority position. It's real easy to believe (and I have done this myself) that if an understanding about a biblical topic has been shared by the vast majority of believes for most of church history, across denominational lines, through more than a dozen centuries then it's difficult to believe that it is wrong. 

-They likely go to the text and read it themselves and they see the traditional view in the text (I'll be writing another blog on this topic) They really believe that the text is teaching ECT.

-They might have concerns about how conditionalism may effect other doctrines.

-They might be concerned that it has often been associated with cults and fringe groups within Christianity. 

-They might worry that it might sap the zeal or urgency for sharing the gospel.

-They might worry that if they were to change their minds that they would have to step down from church leadership.

-They might worry about the impact that would have on those who look up to them if they were to change their minds. 

-They might worry that if people believe that the "church" has been wrong on this issue that it might be wrong on more foundational issues like the trinity, the deity of Jesus, the exclusivity of the gospel etc... and that it may shipwreck the faith of some. 

-They might worry that it may take away the urgency for unbelievers to accept Christ.

-They might worry that it could cause a church split.

-They might find it hard to believe that all the people who have taught them and poured into their lives have been wrong. 

-They might worry about the personal cost if they were to consider this view. "Will I lose friendships? Will I lose my job? How can I provide for my family?

-They may worry about letting themselves be deceived.

-They might be concerned that it is only emotions that would be pulling them to believe in conditionalism. Traditionalism is a hard truth and it's too easy to give into wishful thinking.

-They may be worried about persecution if they were to adopt conditionalism.

-They may be worried about being ostracized by family and those whom they respect.

-They may worry that if they are just deceiving themselves that they could be used to deceive others. 

I could go on and on, there are many more concerns that they could face and I would not be a disciple of Christ if I just shoved all that aside and yelled "don't you care about the truth?!" or something like that. 

I believe that I have understood what the bible is saying correctly by accepting conditionalism. I want to stay humble enough to say that I might be wrong. None of us comes to the bible nakedly objective. We all have our presuppositions, our assumptions, life experiences that shape how we take in information and how we interpret the text. 

Often, when faced with two similarly good but different explanations of a passage or a doctrine we accept the one that "feels" more correct. To admit that sounds like we're guided by our feelings, that is not what I mean. What I mean is that often when two people make equally good cases to us it is other factors, factors we are often unaware of that lead us to go with one over the other.  I can't fault anyone else for doing this since I do it myself. If I'm going to love my neighbor as myself I must be willing to put up with things in them that I would hope others would put up with in me. 

It has become clear to me, through these meetings and other conversations that at least for now, neither of us are going to convince the other. The question then is, how do we live out our Christianity together?

First, I'm thankful that at least in my situation the elders do not believe that my conviction is a salvation issue. They also do not think it is an issue that would warrant church discipline. With those two concerns out of the way, they do however believe that it is a serious error. Because of this they have taken me out of teaching positions at the church (I was teaching a home fellowship group and was in the rotation for Sunday morning prayer and scripture reading) They have asked that I 

1. Not bring up the topic with people I haven't already talked to in the church. 

2. Refrain from trying to convince others of my view that already know that I hold it (my 6 or 7 closest friends). 

I am however able to talk with said friends about the situation proper. I can discuss how my meetings have gone, share my thoughts and feelings, pray with them etc...

I also am able to discuss this issue itself with the elders and 2 of my closest friends. This has been a great relief since I don't have to keep all my thoughts bottled up in my head. 

------

Now I know that many will perhaps read this and they will have all manner of different reactions. Some may read about my current situation and think "They don't have the right to silence you like this" others may read it and think "They should be silencing you more!" and everywhere in between. 

I get those thoughts. 

For those of you who think "They are not being fair with you" I want to share my perspective.

While I would love to be able to freely discuss my view with everyone or anyone in our church I realize that to do so could cause tremendous chaos. I know there are people in our church who upon hearing about my change of mind would say "that's interesting. What led you to adopt that view?" or "this is not something we should divide over." I also remember having a conversation with a man (several years before I became a conditionalist) who was concerned that our church was working together with another church because THAT church was renting their building from the 7th day Adventists and the 7th day Adventists are Annihilationists. I imagine he would have quite strong feelings if he knew what I've come to believe. 

I love my pastors. I love them as my pastor, and as a brother, and as friends. I know how hard being a pastor is. I know they have many early mornings, many full days, many late nights, many nights lost in concern or in prayer. I know that being a pastor is hard on their families, that often times when crises arise that it is their wives and children who sacrifice time with them. I know they carry the weight of the well-being of hundreds of people. As the apostle says when listing all the difficulties he has faced:

"In toil and hardship, through many a sleepless night... And, apart from other things, there is the daily pressure on me of my anxiety for all the churches. Who is weak, and I am not weak? Who is made to fall, and I am not indignant?"

My heart truly goes out to these men and the burdens they endure. How could I demand they give me my freedom when they have given themselves as slaves for Christ? Are we not all called to pick up our cross and follow Jesus?

If I were to go around making the case to everyone in the church, it would be like an arsonist going around starting fires. I believe that conditionalism is true, but the elders to do not. Am I going to win them over by causing conflict and schism? 

Even if I am right, the way I go about sharing what I believe to be truth matters. 

If you are a conditionalist reading this I want to appeal to you to consider carefully how you carry yourself. We can wield the truth as a weapon and destroy what we should rather be building up. I want to consider Romans 14 in it's entirety since it speaks to exactly how we should handle ourselves in this situation.

1 As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions. 2 One person believes he may eat anything, while the weak person eats only vegetables. 3 Let not the one who eats despise the one who abstains, and let not the one who abstains pass judgment on the one who eats, for God has welcomed him. 4 Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand.

What we believe about final punishment is not a salvation issue. In Paul's audience there were some who, by how they've understood the word, believed that they should not eat meat. Others, by how they have understood the word, believe they are able to eat meat. The key is that we are told not to quarrel over opinions. 

In the issue of hell, let the traditionalist not despise the conditionalist and let not the conditionalist pass judgement on the traditionalist for since this is not a salvation issue it is evident that God has welcomed him. Who are we to pass judgment over God's servant? He and you are both accountable to God and because of what Jesus did on the cross, because of the righteousness of Christ we will both be upheld for Jesus is able to hold us up.

5 One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind.

Here Paul brings up another issue. Some people disagree on what is acceptable to eat, others disagree on whether some days are better than others. Paul's statement at the end of verse 5 is fascinating. Rather than say "each one should admit they might be wrong" rather he says that "each one should be FULLY CONVINCED in his own mind."

Here is John pipers thoughts: 

Therefore I conclude from what Paul says that the way for disagreeing Christians to get along with each other in a truth-honoring, Christ-exalting way is not to breed indecisiveness on minor issues. The answer to judgmentalism and despising others and not accepting others is not vacillation, wavering, indecisiveness, and uncertainty about what to do. That might create a kind of peace. People without opinions tend to be able to get along pretty well. But evidently Paul does not believe the solution to Christian disagreement is for all of us to become wishy-washy—even on the minor issues! When Paul weighs the risks of the mindset that can’t come to a conviction and stand for it, versus the risks of the mindset that has convictions on all minor matters, he chooses the second set of risks. In fact, he advocates for the second set of risks: “Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind."

The key to in what WAY we should be convinced is in the next verse:

6 The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God. 

It doesn't seem that Paul is saying that we must be convinced that we are right but rather we should be convinced that what we believe honors the Lord.

The traditionalist believes he is honoring the Lord to believe in eternal torment, the conditionalist believes he is honoring the Lord to believe in eternal destruction. We should recognize in each other the desire to honor the Lord in what we believe.

If you are struggling with loving traditionalists, with being patient with them, with thinking the best of them, please read that last sentence again. 

If we are really Christians, then the deepest desire of our heart is to love God with all our heart and mind and strength. I recognize in my brothers that they are not believing in traditionalism because it is just tradition or because they hate unbelievers, they believe it because they think it is what the word says. They desire to conform their beliefs to Jesus. I want to honor that in them. If we are seeking to believe things simply because they feel good or are pragmatic or they are appealing we should repent. 

7 For none of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to himself. 8 For if we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord. So then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord's. 9 For to this end Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living.

I can't tell you how much these 3 verses make my heart soar and how there is a deep longing in my heart for my life and the life of those who are in Christ to exemplify this attitude. 

1 cor 6:19-20: 

"Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body."

When we really get the gospel, what God has done for us, how can we insist on our own way?

Philippians 2:2-5

"complete my joy by being of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind. Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves. Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others. Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus"

 Jesus emptied himself by taking on the form of a servant. He didn't seek his own good but sought ours. He was willing to suffer himself for our good. We should follow his example. 

If I was seeking to please my flesh my pride would be hurt. It hurts to be removed from a teaching position. If people were to ask me why I'm no longer teaching, I don't have an answer that makes me look good.

It hurts to be asked to not discuss with others what I've come to believe to be true about hell. It hurts to know that people I respect and care about think that I am wrong in a serious way. All of those thoughts and feelings need to be crucified. If giving up all those things, the respect of being a teacher, the status of approval as appearing sound in doctrine in the eyes of people who's opinions I value, is required in order to preserve the unity of the body then I will lay them at the foot of the cross. My deepest desire is that Jesus would be honored in my life. I stumble in many ways but I am determined to do all that I can to love Him and to love others through this.

10 Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God; 11 for it is written,
“As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.” 12 So then each of us will give an account of himself to God.

If some of you are facing situations that are similar to mine, take courage from these verses. It is not our place to pass Judgment. I cannot judge my brother. I'm not in authority over him. How can I let him be small in my sight? (the word translated in the ESV as despise can mean to think of as nothing) Remember that they will stand before God and give an account of himself to God, if he was wrong about hell, God will address it. But also remember that YOU will stand before God. If you have been despising your brothers for their view of hell God will also address that with YOU. 

13 Therefore let us not pass judgment on one another any longer, but rather decide never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of a brother. 14 I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself, but it is unclean for anyone who thinks it unclean. 15 For if your brother is grieved by what you eat, you are no longer walking in love. By what you eat, do not destroy the one for whom Christ died. 16 So do not let what you regard as good be spoken of as evil. 17 For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. 18 Whoever thus serves Christ is acceptable to God and approved by men. 19 So then let us pursue what makes for peace and for mutual upbuilding.

There are ways to discuss our disagreements that work toward building one another up. There are also ways to discuss our disagreements that tear each other down. Paul says that he personally is persuaded that nothing is unclean in itself but he understands that if another person see's it differently then in their own conscience it IS unclean. If Paul thinks that it's fine for him to eat bacon and a brother thinks that bacon should not be eaten, for that brother to eat it would be to violate his conscience. 

If I think something is sinful then to allow my self to do it would be to allow myself to sin. To push someone into that kind of moral dilemma is unloving and dangerous. If I push a brother into violating his conscience he may learn to do that in other areas as well. I may end up pushing him along a path that even ends up walking away from the faith all together. 

If I promote what I believe to be "good" in such a way that it damages others faith, others will regard what I believe to be good as if it were "evil". If I promote conditionalism, a thing which I regard as good, in such a way that it causes chaos, disorder, crisis of faith in others in the church, everyone who disagrees with me will look on conditionalism as a problem. The same could be said about how we hold Calvinism, Continuationism, Baptism, our view of the Eschatology, etc... Paul tells us to hold our opinions on secondary matters in love. 

20 Do not, for the sake of food, destroy the work of God. Everything is indeed clean, but it is wrong for anyone to make another stumble by what he eats. 21 It is good not to eat meat or drink wine or do anything that causes your brother to stumble. 22 The faith that you have, keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the one who has no reason to pass judgment on himself for what he approves. 23 But whoever has doubts is condemned if he eats, because the eating is not from faith. For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.

Sometimes as conditionalists we can feel so sure that we are right that we just want to MAKE everyone else see what we see. But if the way we go about talking about our understanding harms another brother Paul says it would be better if we just shut our mouths.  Paul says "the faith that you have, keep between yourself and God" this means that it IS appropriate at times NOT to argue for your cause. Since this is not a salvation issue, we can be wrong on it and still be approved by God. One of them was right, either the day was better or it wasn't but both are holding their beliefs so as to honor God. Either it is okay to eat meat or it's not, but both believe they are doing what is right toward God. If you never convince others of the truth of your view, if they are in Christ, they will still be accepted by God. 

------

I want to say a final word to my traditionalist and conditionalist friends. 

To the conditionalists reading this please remember that many of you were likely traditionalist yourselves, perhaps for decades. You read the scriptures and you thought they taught ECT. You discounted conditionalist arguments and were not persuaded by them. The Lord had to bring you through all the life experience necessary to the point that you could receive a change of mind. Therefore have mercy on others knowing that they are not where you are at. 

It's not due on their part to moral deficiency, they believe they are believing what the bible says. Many traditionalists have stated that they don't like the doctrine but they believe it is what the bible teaches. Love and treat them the way you would want to be treated. I don't believe that Paul's instructions in Romans 14 rules out conversation to try to mutually discover the truth but it does preclude causing another to stumble in the way we interact over disagreements. 

To my traditionalist brothers, please also remember our view is not due to moral deficiency. We are not conditionalists merely because we "can't stomach the truth about hell" or because we put our feelings ahead of the text.

Please be humbled by the fact that in the first five centuries of the church there was GREAT diversity of views. Conditionalists (Ignatius, Clement of Rome, Irenaeus, Athanasius) Universalists (Origen, Gregory of Nyssa, perhaps Clement of Alexandria) and Traditionalists (Athenagorus, Tertullian, Augustine) all worked together for the gospel, they didn't anathematize each other over their view of hell. None of the first ecumenical counsels decided dogmatically on the nature of hell which means, despite a diversity of views, no one thought a particular view was essential for salvation or that it disqualified one from ministry. 

I would encourage you in two ways, first be careful to make more of this doctrine than the early church did, if they could tolerate diversity on this issue so can we. Second, put yourselves in our shoes, if you came to be persuaded FROM THE SCRIPTURES that the end of the wicked is death, how would you hope to be treated. 

I love you all. For the glory of Christ and the furtherance of the gospel, peace be with you in Christ. 

John 6 teaches conditionalism

The context: John 6:1-15 Tells the story of Jesus miracle of turning 5 loaves and 2 fish into enough food for everyone to eat "as much as they wanted" and still have 12 baskets full of pieces left over. Verse 14 says: "When the people saw the sign that he had done, they said, 'This is indeed the Prophet who is to come into the world!'"

After this Jesus went away to the other side of the Sea of Galilee, which is the Sea of Tiberias. And a large crowd was following him, because they saw the signs that he was doing on the sick. Jesus went up on the mountain, and there he sat down with his disciples. Now the Passover, the feast of the Jews, was at hand. Lifting up his eyes, then, and seeing that a large crowd was coming toward him, Jesus said to Philip, “Where are we to buy bread, so that these people may eat?” He said this to test him, for he himself knew what he would do. Philip answered him, “Two hundred denarii worth of bread would not be enough for each of them to get a little.” One of his disciples, Andrew, Simon Peter's brother, said to him, “There is a boy here who has five barley loaves and two fish, but what are they for so many?”  Jesus said, “Have the people sit down.” Now there was much grass in the place. So the men sat down, about five thousand in number. Jesus then took the loaves, and when he had given thanks, he distributed them to those who were seated. So also the fish, as much as they wanted. And when they had eaten their fill, he told his disciples, “Gather up the leftover fragments, that nothing may be lost.” So they gathered them up and filled twelve baskets with fragments from the five barley loaves left by those who had eaten. When the people saw the sign that he had done, they said, “This is indeed the Prophet who is to come into the world!” Perceiving then that they were about to come and take him by force to make him king, Jesus withdrew again to the mountain by himself.

Before we dive into the rest of the passage I want to take a quick detour since the bible says more about this prophet. 

He is first foretold by Moses in Deutoronomy 18:15-19 

“The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your brothers—it is to him you shall listen— just as you desired of the LORD your God at Horeb on the day of the assembly, when you said, ‘Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God or see this great fire any more, lest I die.’ And the LORD said to me, ‘They are right in what they have spoken. I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers. And I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him. And whoever will not listen to my words that he shall speak in my name, I myself will require it of him."

God promised through Moses that He would send another Prophet and He warns that anyone who doesn't listen to that prophet, God will "require it" of him. From this passage alone we might not know what "it" is that will be required, but Peter in Acts 3 fills us in on what is intended. 

Acts 3:22-23 

"Moses said, ‘The Lord God will raise up for you a prophet like me from your brothers. You shall listen to him in whatever he tells you. And it shall be that every soul who does not listen to that prophet shall be destroyed from the people.’"

Here we see that Peter understands that what God will require of people will be their lives, they will be "destroyed" from the people. The NASB translates "destroyed" as "utterly destroyed" that is because the Greek word used is one of the strongest words that could be used to convey what we understand as "Annihilationism" 

This does not just mean to "ruin" them as in make their still living lives worthless and miserable, it means to exterminate. 

So setting the context, these people see the "sign" that Jesus does and they realize "He's the one we were told that would come!" and they seek to make Jesus their king by force. Jesus IS the prophet foretold by Moses but he would not let them make him king at this time because he still had redemption to accomplish. 

Peter's words are important to remember in the following passage. Those who do not listen to Him will be "utterly destroyed" out from the people. Let's see if they will listen to Jesus. 

In verses 16-24 the disciples get in a boat and go across the sea, Jesus walks on water and gets in the boat and they all go across to the other side. The next day, those people left behind realize that Jesus had gone to the other side so they follow and search for him. 

When they get there and find Jesus he immediately cuts to the heart of the situation:

"“Truly, truly, I say to you, you are seeking me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate your fill of the loaves. Do not work for the food that perishes, but for the food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you. For on him God the Father has set his seal.'"

Not knowing what Jesus is exactly saying they ask him:

Then they said to him, “What must we do, to be doing the works of God?” Jesus answered them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent.” 

(they should have listened to him at this point) 

So they said to him, “Then what sign do you do, that we may see and believe you? What work do you perform? Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written, ‘He gave them bread from heaven to eat.’” 

Right here they show their true desires. John already said in verse 14 and Jesus reiterates it in verse 26 that the feeding from the 5 loaves and 2 fish was a sign. They didn't really want to see a sign, they already had that, they wanted more food. They weren't seeking Jesus they were seeking just what Jesus could give them.

Jesus then said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, it was not Moses who gave you the bread from heaven, but my Father gives you the true bread from heaven. For the bread of God is he who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.”  

Let's stop here for a second. Jesus says that the one who comes down from heaven gives LIFE to the world. What do we understand life to be? Those who believe in eternal torment think that "eternal life" (life here refers back to the eternal life that Jesus said the Son of Man would give them in verse 27) does not mean merely being alive forever but means a blessed quality of life in fellowship with God. 

They say since John 17:3 says: 

And this is eternal life, that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent. 

Therefore the phrase eternal life is not talking about living forever (though they won't deny that the saved will live forever) but about knowing God. Since the lost in hell do not "know" God, even though they "exist" (as William Lane Craig says) they do not have "eternal life." But that is selectively narrowing down the meaning of the phrase. Yes the eternal life that Jesus gives is more than just being alive forever, but it is certainly not less. If you are alive forever you have eternal life whether you know God or not. However if Conditionalism is true, then John 17:3 fits like a glove. Everyone who knows God has eternal life, everyone who has eternal life knows God because those who don't "know" Him have been killed. 

Let's see however if the traditionalist restriction of "eternal life" can withstand the rest of the passage.

They said to him, “Sir, give us this bread always.” Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst. But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe.  

As the prophet that was foretold by Moses, Jesus told them "believe in me". They do not now believe in him, therefore they have not "listen(ed) to that prophet." Keep in mind what Peter says will happen to those who don't listen...

All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” So the Jews grumbled about him, because he said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven.” They said, “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does he now say, ‘I have come down from heaven’?” 

More not listening... 

Jesus answered them, “Do not grumble among yourselves. No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.  It is written in the Prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me—  not that anyone has seen the Father except he who is from God; he has seen the Father.  Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life.  I am the bread of life.  Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. 

If "eternal life" refers not just to being alive forever but being in a knowing relationship with God then it would be logical that not knowing God could be called "eternal death" and that those who are physically alive but do not know God could logically be called "dead." But, is this the sense of life and death that Jesus is using in this passage? When he says: 

Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died.

Is he referring to this "spiritual state" of being alive but not knowing God? NO! they dropped like flies in the desert so that within 40 years everyone who was over 20 years old who had decided not to enter the promised land (other than Joshua and Caleb) had died! They physically died. So in one sentence Jesus contrasts the bread that he offers which offers "eternal life" with bread that couldn't keep people alive forever so they physically died.

This is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die.

Eternal life here results in "not dying" what does he mean by dying? Well it's a direct contrast with what happened to those who ate the manna. They died, if you eat the bread from heaven you will not die. This is physical death not a state of "spiritual death" that means you are physically alive but since you do not know God you could be called "dead". Since we've established that physical death is what is being contrasted with eternal life then eternal life has to mean more than simply knowing God but must also mean being alive forever. 

This means that there are two options. 

1. Listen to Jesus, believe in him and have eternal life. 
2. Don't listen to Jesus and you will not have eternal life and you will die. 

There is no room in this contrast for people who "exist" but are not alive. Jesus goes on to say:

 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. 

Here Jesus reiterates what eternal life means, it means living forever. If you are alive forever in hell you have eternal life. Since only those who believe in Jesus receive eternal life, those who go to hell cannot continue to live forever. 

And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.” 

Jesus is referring to how he will give us eternal life. For everyone who believes in Jesus, he will bear their sins on the cross and he will die the death they deserve to die. Since they are IN Jesus by faith when he rises from the dead they rise with him and share in eternal life because of his sacrificial death. 

The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?”  So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.  

Remember, life in this context refers to eternal life, yes they are alive now but they will not live past the "Last day." 

Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. 

This is the fourth time Jesus has referred to "the last day" and the second time that he has connected eternal life with being raised on "the last day" Jesus connects having eternal life with the resurrection that will take place on the last day (John 5:29). Believers now will die (unless Jesus returns) and so having eternal life does not mean once you come to Christ you won't ever die physically at all, it means that once you are raised from the dead, if you are in Christ you will never die again, unlike the lost who will die in the judgement. 

John 11:21-27

Martha said to Jesus, “Lord, if you had been here, my brother would not have died. But even now I know that whatever you ask from God, God will give you.” Jesus said to her, “Your brother will rise again.” Martha said to him, “I know that he will rise again in the resurrection on the last day.”  Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live, and everyone who lives (speaking of after the resurrection) and believes in me shall never die. Do you believe this?” She said to him, “Yes, Lord; I believe that you are the Christ, the Son of God, who is coming into the world.”

I point this out because all the other New Testament authors generally speak of "eternal life" as something we WILL receive in the future but do not yet fully posses. (Matthew 25:46, Mark 10:30, Romans 2:7, Romans 6:22, Jude 1:21) Peter says:

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! According to his great mercy, he has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for you, who by God's power are being guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.

We have eternal life now in that we have it as our inheritance. We have a taste of it now in this world but will have it fully in the last day. Jesus says that eternal life is knowing God and Jesus and we do know them now but only as in a mirror dimly 1 Cor 13:12:

For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.

We have eternal life now as an inheritance, but we will one day have it as a possession. We know God now in part, but one day we will know him fully. Amen! 

Jesus continues...

For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever feeds on me, he also will live because of me. This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like the bread the fathers ate, and died. Whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.”  

Jesus could not have been more explicit, the contrast is between dying and living forever, not two kinds of living forever, one blessed and one miserable. The phrase "eternal life" is not restricted to just a qualitative meaning. 

Remember that Peter said that whoever does not listen to the prophet (Jesus) would be "utterly destroyed" from the people, Jesus says that those who believe him receive "eternal life" will "not die"and will "live forever" and contrasts it with those who do not believe and will die just like those who physically died who ate the manna.

Again, those who believe in Jesus will live forever and those who do not believe in Him will be utterly destroyed. There is no room to squeeze eternal torment into this passage. 

Jesus said these things in the synagogue, as he taught at Capernaum. When many of his disciples heard it, they said, “This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?” But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples were grumbling about this, said to them, “Do you take offense at this? Then what if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before? It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. But there are some of you who do not believe.” (For Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him.) And he said, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.” After this many of his disciples turned back and no longer walked with him. So Jesus said to the twelve, “Do you want to go away as well?” Simon Peter answered him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life, and we have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.” Jesus answered them, “Did I not choose you, the twelve? And yet one of you is a devil.” He spoke of Judas the son of Simon Iscariot, for he, one of the twelve, was going to betray him.

Jesus lays out some challenging words. He expertly cut through the thoughts and intentions of the hearts of those who had chased him for a meal. Those who listen to Jesus and believe in Him He gives eternal life, Peter understands this and says "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life." Peter and the other 10 listened to Jesus, they knew that there was no hope to look anywhere else. The rest of the people, the hangers on, those who were in it for what they could get out of it couldn't stomach what Jesus had to say, they couldn't handle how exclusive he was, how he elevated himself, most of them walked away, they refused to "listen to him", and one, Judas, would betray Jesus to death. Judas and the rest rejected the words of the prophet and did not believe in him so as to have eternal life, therefore there is nothing left for them but at the day of Judgement to be "utterly destroyed" from the people. 

_____

If you have read this and you are not a believer. Listen to what Jesus says. You already know you are going to die. The reason we die and the reason we will not be able to survive on the day of Judgment and will be destroyed is because of our sin. God created human beings to be good, to enjoy fellowship with God and to be stewards over creation. But pride and jealousy entered our ancestors hearts and they were not content to simply serve and obey God. They wanted to be like God themselves and decided for themselves what was right and wrong. In their rebellion they passed sin down to all their descendants. People decided that, for them, it was right to lie, to steal, to murder, to be sexually immoral, to dishonor their parents, to covet what didn't belong to them and their sin spread throughout the world.

You know in your own heart of hearts that you have sinned. You've lied, you've stolen, you've been jealous, you've hated, you've been self centered.

God told us to love Him and to love one another and all manor of sin and evil in the world is a violation of those two commands. 

Romans 13:8-10 

Owe no one anything, except to love each other, for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law. For the commandments, “You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet,” and any other commandment, are summed up in this word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”  Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.

You understand that you have not obeyed God's commands and the Apostle Paul says in Romans 1:28-32:

And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips,  slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Though they know God's righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.

We all understand instinctively that those who do evil deserve to die. That's why we cheer when the bad guy in a movie finally gets what he deserves. We instinctively feel justice is served, but when we turn and look at our own lives, and we see the same sin and evil we don't want justice. We make excuses, we compare ourselves to others "at least I'm not as bad as him/her". But excuses don't make us innocent. The apostle James says that if you break one commandment but not another, you're still guilty of breaking God's law. It's like a window, if you break the glass in any part, the whole window is broken. 

Jesus says in the sermon on the mount "You must be perfect as your heavenly father is perfect." 

But who of us is perfect? No one. That's why the Apostle says "For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God." 

If we all have fallen short, what hope is there?

But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it—  the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,  and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

If you try to stand on your own merits before God you will fall. You cannot be good enough to enter the kingdom of God. That is why the bible says that you need to acknowledge that you have sinned, that you are a sinner, that you are guilty before God, and grab hold of Jesus by faith, trusting that his death on the cross satisfies your debt of sin and that by his act of sacrifice you can be forgiven. 

Jesus paid the debt of all who will trust in him for forgiveness. 

This is the message we have heard from him and proclaim to you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth. But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin. If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

Trust in Jesus.