Indeed, “NONE of the above” is the correct answer. Bertrand Russell condemned Christ’s view on hell as morally repugnant. John Hick’s labels the idea that God may inflict unending torment on sinners a “grim fantasy” and “a serious perversion of the Christian Gospel.” Hicks espouses “universalism” (having an unbiblical view of 1 Tim 2:3-4, that “all” would be saved ) and sees an “always” loving God that will “never cease to desire and actively work for the salvation of each created person” (Evil and the God of Love, p. 378-379). Hicks embraces other heresies as well as he taught pluralism (God and the Universe of Faiths) and he does not believe Jesus is the incarnate Son of God (The Myth of God Incarnate).

Clark Pinnock likes some of heretic Hick’s reasoning. He believes in a second chance at death saying, “God does not cease to be gracious to sinners just because they are no longer living” (A Wideness in God’s Mercy, p 170) and then if they don’t make it, the annihilation of the wicked. Even Pinnock admits the lack of Scriptural support for his view, however, he does appeal to 1 Pet 3:19-20 saying that Christ “preached to the spirits in prison.” However, 1 Peter does not record any positive response to Jesus’ preaching and moreover, we would need to grant that Christ went to hell (IMO He didn't, read Berkhof). Even NT Wright gets this correct saying, “The next chapter (1 Peter, especially vv. 17-18) rules out the possibility that ‘those who do not obey God’s gospel’ will be saved” (Towards a Biblical View of Universalism).

John Stott’s (Atkinson’s; Froom’s; Fudge’s; Guillebaud’s) view of annihilationism does not stand up to the scrutiny of Scripture (Rev 22:11, etc.). Stott (please note he may have changed his position, but I have not been able to confirm this even through JSM) does a song and dance on the language of the text of Scripture saying “destruction” (total) is a final state of perdition. Fudge says that "destruction" is for the “utter, absolute, irreversible, annihilation” of the Beast and the Anti-Christ. However, if one reads “the Bible” they are "cast into the lake of fire and brimstone“ (still alive) in Rev 20:10 "and they shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever" (compare 2 Thess 1:9, which cannot be annihilation, because their "eternal destruction from the face of the Lord and from the glory of his might" presupposes their continuous existence)! Thus, this argument has no foundation for Stott and others to stand upon. Moreover, if we look at Matt 25:46, “eternal” (aionios) modifies both “punishment” and “life.” Thus, the “life” extends as long as the “punishment” will extend! This is an insurmountable problem for Stott and others in his camp. Guillebaud, an annihilationist, sums it up nicely (somewhat), saying;

Quote
It is not denied, that if it were clear beyond question from Bible teaching elsewhere that the doom of the lost will be everlasting torment, it would be quite possible to understand ‘death’, ‘destruction’ and the like, as meaning a wretched and ruined existence. (The Righteous Judge, p. 19)
Thus, who would like to make a few brief points in defending the true view of hell?

Some books worth considering here are:

Hell on Trail by Robert Peterson and The Other Side of the Good News, by Larry Dixon (the normal warnings apply).

Reformed and Always Reforming,