Annihilation=No Wrath

[ByTheSpirit]

Mark 9::47-48
47 And if your eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell, 48 where

“‘the worms that eat them do not die,
and the fire is not quenched.’[d]

Seems pretty clear to me that hell is a place of eternal torment.

 

[BurningBush84]

I don’t disagree with eternal torment friend. I see scriptural the that could be supportive of annihilation or eternal torment. I’m actually undecided on the subject but I am leaning more towards annihilation. Can I be happy in heaven knowing that I may have loved ones who are suffering in agony for all eternity or would I be more at peace if I knew their suffering was over and they are at rest? I know this is not scriptural evidence, it’s human sentiment and I will accept God’s decision either way because I trust that He knows what is best but I can’t see myself being completely at peace and happy in heaven knowing that my loved ones are suffering in agony forever.

Its impossible to feel any kind of pain whatsoever in Heaven. You'll be happy forever. "‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death’ or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.” Revelation 21:4

Think about the people on Judgement Day who rejected Jesus because they were taught there was no Hell. They figured they might as well do whatever their sinful nature desired because the worse thing that could happen is peaceful soothing eternal sleep. They were taught that Gods wrath is sleep. So they did whatever they wanted in life because they thought there was no real punishment in the afterlife. Just a state of non- existence. And if you don't exist anymore you wont know what your missing, therefore you wont miss not being in Heaven. Imagine the shock their souls must feel when they die and end up in Hades , suffering in fire like the Rich Man from Luke 16. Satan doesn't want people believing in Hell. He wants to trick you into believing Gods wrath is sleep. Dont fall for Satans lies.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Its impossible to feel any kind of pain whatsoever in Heaven. You'll be happy forever. "‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death’ or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.” Revelation 21:4

Think about the people on Judgement Day who rejected Jesus because they were taught there was no Hell. They figured they might as well do whatever their sinful nature desired because the worse thing that could happen is peaceful soothing eternal sleep. They were taught that Gods wrath is sleep. So they did whatever they wanted in life because they thought there was no real punishment in the afterlife. Just a state of non- existence. And if you don't exist anymore you wont know what your missing, therefore you wont miss not being in Heaven. Imagine the shock their souls must feel when they die and end up in Hades , suffering in fire like the Rich Man from Luke 16. Satan doesn't want people believing in Hell. He wants to trick you into believing Gods wrath is sleep. Dont fall for Satans lies.

You’re misunderstanding the annihilation concept my friend. They don’t just go to sleep in the lake of fire, their souls is completely destroyed in the lake of fire which is extremely agonizing.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Its impossible to feel any kind of pain whatsoever in Heaven. You'll be happy forever. "‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death’ or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.” Revelation 21:4

Think about the people on Judgement Day who rejected Jesus because they were taught there was no Hell. They figured they might as well do whatever their sinful nature desired because the worse thing that could happen is peaceful soothing eternal sleep. They were taught that Gods wrath is sleep. So they did whatever they wanted in life because they thought there was no real punishment in the afterlife. Just a state of non- existence. And if you don't exist anymore you wont know what you’re missing, therefore you wont miss not being in Heaven. Imagine the shock their souls must feel when they die and end up in Hades , suffering in fire like the Rich Man from Luke 16. Satan doesn't want people believing in Hell. He wants to trick you into believing Gods wrath is sleep. Dont fall for Satans lies.

Perhaps we will have no memory of our former life and that’s why we will not have any sorrow for those who perish in the lake of fire.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Its impossible to feel any kind of pain whatsoever in Heaven. You'll be happy forever. "‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death’ or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.” Revelation 21:4

Think about the people on Judgement Day who rejected Jesus because they were taught there was no Hell. They figured they might as well do whatever their sinful nature desired because the worse thing that could happen is peaceful soothing eternal sleep. They were taught that Gods wrath is sleep. So they did whatever they wanted in life because they thought there was no real punishment in the afterlife. Just a state of non- existence. And if you don't exist anymore you wont know what you’re missing, therefore you wont miss not being in Heaven. Imagine the shock their souls must feel when they die and end up in Hades , suffering in fire like the Rich Man from Luke 16. Satan doesn't want people believing in Hell. He wants to trick you into believing Gods wrath is sleep. Dont fall for Satans lies.

Perhaps we will have no memory of our former life and that’s why we will not have any sorrow for those who perish in the lake of fire.

 

[BurningBush84]

You’re misunderstanding the annihilation concept my friend. They don’t just go to sleep in the lake of fire, their souls is completely destroyed in the lake of fire which is extremely agonizing.

If a person got thrown into hot lava they would be dead in a second or less. One second of pain followed by a eternal state of non existence is a light slap on the wrist. God's wrath is not a little light one second slap on the wrist. God's wrath is eternal punishment, eternal torment, eternal destruction. God's wrath is Hell.

 

[BNR32FAN]

If a person got thrown into hot lava they would be dead in a second or less. One second of pain followed by an eternal state of non existence is a light slap on the wrist. God's wrath is not a little light one second slap on the wrist. God's wrath is eternal punishment, eternal torment, eternal destruction. God's wrath is Hell.

The lake of fire could be metaphorical. Lava doesn’t destroy a soul only the body. The suffering would last as long as God intended it to.

 

[BurningBush84]

The lake of fire could be metaphorical. Lava doesn’t destroy a soul only the body. The suffering would last as long as God intended it to.

“If your hand or your foot causes you to sin ,cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life crippled or lame than to be thrown into the eternal fire with two hands or two feet". Matthew 18:8

"Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire, which is prepared for the Devil and his angels". Matthew 25:41

" And they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.” Matthew 25:46

" In hell, where he was in torment, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham far away and Lazarus at his side. He called out and said, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me! Send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in misery in this flame.’ Luke 16:23-24

" And the Devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet are. There they will be tormented day and night, forever and ever." Revelation 20:10

There is no point in saying the word "eternal" if the annihilation theory is true.

 

[BNR32FAN]

“If your hand or your foot causes you to sin ,cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life crippled or lame than to be thrown into the eternal fire with two hands or two feet". Matthew 18:8

"Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire, which is prepared for the Devil and his angels". Matthew 25:41

" And they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.” Matthew 25:46

" In hell, where he was in torment, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham far away and Lazarus at his side. He called out and said, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me! Send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in misery in this flame.’ Luke 16:23-24

" And the Devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet are. There they will be tormented day and night, forever and ever." Revelation 20:10

There is no point in saying the word "eternal" if the annihilation theory is true.

Yeah and a soul isn’t actually destroyed and doesn’t actually perish if it remains alive in torment forever. Like I said there appears to be evidence supporting both sides of the debate.

 

[Water and Fire]

It's amazing that if people aren't burning in torment for all eternity, they aren't being punished.. what?
How about, God punishes the wicked, brings them to repentance and then they are his loyal subjects, for all eternity?
Yep, that's what scripture actually teaches.

 

[SarahsKnight]

How about, God punishes the wicked, brings them to repentance and then they are his loyal subjects, for all eternity?
Yep, that's what scripture actually teaches.

I am not a universalist myself, might i say, as I adhere to the conditional immortality (annihilationism in laymen's terms) simply on account of the fact that it seems by far the most Scripturally accurate of the three views. But I certainly won't object to the eventual redemption of all mankind - even if by a painful purging in the Lake of Fire first for some in order to make it happen - as taught in the universalist thought if it turns out to be true. I mean, if someone finds the thought of that to be offensive or evil, they might want to do a quick soul search and make sure they don't fall under the heading of those kind of folk described in Isaiah 5:20.

 

[public hermit]

Although I hold to UR, I think conditional immortality is by far a better position than eternal damnation. And, I can see the scriptural support for it. I mean, 2 Peter has what appears to be conditional immortality all through it.

 

[SarahsKnight]

I mean, 2 Peter has what appears to be conditional immortality all through it

No, no, not at all. Clearly we were meant to read all that as magical code language that actually teaches eternal torment and immortal souls that can never truly die, instead ... that is, we would unmistakably glean eternal torment from this Scripture if we were spiritual enough / true Christians. (note the rolling of my eyes as I say this)

 

[Water and Fire]

I am not a universalist myself, might i say, as I adhere to the conditional immortality (annihilationism in laymen's terms) simply on account of the fact that it seems by far the most Scripturally accurate of the three views. But I certainly won't object to the eventual redemption of all mankind - even if by a painful purging in the Lake of Fire first for some in order to make it happen - as taught in the universalist thought if it turns out to be true. I mean, if someone finds the thought of that to be offensive or evil, they might want to do a quick soul search and make sure they don't fall under the heading of those kind of folk described in Isaiah 5:20.

Being purged by fire is painful, but it's not a literal fire or physical pain. There is a reason we are given images of sinners repenting in sackcloth and ashes.

Mat 11:20 Then began he to upbraid the cities wherein most of his mighty works were done, because they repented not:
Mat 11:21 Woe unto thee, Chorazin! woe unto thee, Bethsaida! for if the mighty works, which were done in you, had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes.

Sackcloth and ashes is always associated with repentance.

The fire we always hear about, is God's judgment, and it comes in the form of his word.

Jer 5:14 Wherefore thus saith the LORD God of hosts, Because ye speak this word, behold, I will make my words in thy mouth fire, and this people wood, and it shall devour them.

Joh 12:47 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
Joh 12:48 He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.

Mat 19:27 Then answered Peter and said unto him, Behold, we have forsaken all, and followed thee; what shall we have therefore?
Mat 19:28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

So God's elect judge the world with Christ's words, which brings them to repentance, and the repent in sackcloth and ashes. It really is that simple.

 

[Water and Fire]

I just wanted to post this verse, while we're on the the subject of fire.

Isa 33:14 The sinners in Zion are afraid; fearfulness hath surprised the hypocrites. Who among us shall dwell with the devouring fire? who among us shall dwell with everlasting burnings?
Isa 33:15 He that walketh righteously, and speaketh uprightly; he that despiseth the gain of oppressions, that shaketh his hands from holding of bribes, that stoppeth his ears from hearing of blood, and shutteth his eyes from seeing evil;

 

[SarahsKnight]

Isa 33:14 The sinners in Zion are afraid; fearfulness hath surprised the hypocrites. Who among us shall dwell with the devouring fire? who among us shall dwell with everlasting burnings?

I should have remembered this verse whenever ECT proponents claim the terms "everlasting fire" or "eternal fire" (which says nothing about the humans thrown into it, of course) as immediate and irrefutable proof that eternal torment is correct. I sure would like to know why, if eternal torment is the truth, Isaiah would very strongly suggest that mortals cannot possibly abide with or in the fire (described as devouring in this translation along with everlasting, take note), regardless of whether the fire here is a metaphor for God Himself or it refers to a kind of fire that comes from His presence. Because ECT necessitates that unbelieving humans would in fact be able to dwell in the fire God uses to punish them alive for eternity in hell. Not an easy dwelling, sure, since one is somehow being burned continuously in the fire of hell without ever eventually being consumed, but a dwelling nonetheless. If they are in hell body and soul and alive for eternity and never actually taken out by the flames, then I would say that's a dang good definition of dwelling with the everlasting fire. Just albeit in perpetual misery.

But hey, thaaaaat's pretty much what the ECT doctrine would have the weaker and questioning brethren steadfastly believe. And we can't very well lose the controlling and fearmongering aspect of evangelizing and teaching from the pulpit, now can we?

 

[BurningBush84]

I should have remembered this verse whenever ECT proponents claim the terms "everlasting fire" or "eternal fire" (which says nothing about the humans thrown into it, of course) as immediate and irrefutable proof that eternal torment is correct. I sure would like to know why, if eternal torment is the truth, Isaiah would very strongly suggest that mortals cannot possibly abide with or in the fire (described as devouring in this translation along with everlasting, take note), regardless of whether the fire here is a metaphor for God Himself or it refers to a kind of fire that comes from His presence. Because ECT necessitates that unbelieving humans would in fact be able to dwell in the fire God uses to punish them alive for eternity in hell. Not an easy dwelling, sure, since one is somehow being burned continuously in the fire of hell without ever eventually being consumed, but a dwelling nonetheless. If they are in hell body and soul and alive for eternity and never actually taken out by the flames, then I would say that's a dang good definition of dwelling with the everlasting fire. Just albeit in perpetual misery.

But hey, thaaaaat's pretty much what the ECT doctrine would have the weaker and questioning brethren steadfastly believe. And we can't very well lose the controlling and fearmongering aspect of evangelizing and teaching from the pulpit, now can we?

How do you interpret Matthew 18:8-9 ?

 

[SarahsKnight]

How do you interpret Matthew 18:8-9 ?

That it's not proof for eternal torment? Because Jesus still never says that the human who goes into that fire lasts eternally. Never says it. When He does talk directly about the soul that goes to Gehenna, though? He uses the term destroy (Matthew 10:28). Even when we get to the story of Lazarus and the Rich Man and choose to interpret it as a true story Jesus was telling, He still doesn't say the Rich Man was there eternally without being eventually burnt up (also if we choose to take this as a definite true account of something that happened to the Rich Man, then I sure would like to know how and why - if the torments of hell are so terrible beyond all human imagination - the Rich Man was able to not only see but call out to Abraham and Lazarus on the "other side" in seemingly perfectly eloquent words ("I am tormented in this flame", he said, without even an exclamation mark in the translations I have seen), rather than screaming his head off perpetually, as people are sort of conditioned to do when they are being burnt alive in fire, regardless of whether they eventually die and become ash from it or are preserved eternally in it. Either way, it's causing some pain that you really have no hope of being able to form perfectly coherent sentences in the midst of.

And I am so not going to entertain the notion ECT proponents have expected me to believe that, rather than the clear and unambiguous meaning of the term destroy, I am supposed to just know to interpret "destroy" as a never-ending process of destroying without ever actually being destroyed, 'kay?

The weight of evidence in Scripture is staggeringly in favor of conditional immortality. I am not going to revert back to the traditional doctrine of inherently immortal souls and eternal torment just because it's scarier and that's what the majority of Christians still adhere to. Like many Christians are want to say when arguing for not going along with the rest of the world on things: just because it's the popular way doesn't mean it's the right way.

 

[BurningBush84]

That it's not proof for eternal torment? Because Jesus still never says that the human who goes into that fire lasts eternally. Never says it. When He does talk directly about the soul that goes to Gehenna, though? He uses the term destroy (Matthew 10:28). Even when we get to the story of Lazarus and the Rich Man and choose to interpret it as a true story Jesus was telling, He still doesn't say the Rich Man was there eternally without being eventually burnt up (also if we choose to take this as a definite true account of something that happened to the Rich Man, then I sure would like to know how and why - if the torments of hell are so terrible beyond all human imagination - the Rich Man was able to not only see but call out to Abraham and Lazarus on the "other side" in seemingly perfectly eloquent words ("I am tormented in this flame", he said, without even an exclamation mark in the translations I have seen), rather than screaming his head off perpetually, as people are sort of conditioned to do when they are being burnt alive in fire, regardless of whether they eventually die and become ash from it or are preserved eternally in it. Either way, it's causing some pain that you really have no hope of being able to form perfectly coherent sentences in the midst of.

And I am so not going to entertain the notion ECT proponents have expected me to believe that, rather than the clear and unambiguous meaning of the term destroy, I am supposed to just know to interpret "destroy" as a never-ending process of destroying without ever actually being destroyed, 'kay?

The weight of evidence in Scripture is staggeringly in favor of conditional immortality. I am not going to revert back to the traditional doctrine of inherently immortal souls and eternal torment just because it's scarier and that's what the majority of Christians still adhere to. Like many Christians are want to say when arguing for not going along with the rest of the world on things: just because it's the popular way doesn't mean it's the right way.

What does Matthew 18:8-9 mean then ?

 

[Water and Fire]

How do you interpret Matthew 18:8-9 ?

I know how I interpret it, as it was meant to be interpreted.... as a parable!