Annihilationism

[Dkh587]

I am an Annihilationist.

Eternal burning is a Greek myth.

even the Hellenized Jews and Jews influenced by Babylonian religion prior to Christ believed in it. But did the prophets teach it?

the answer is no.

 

[Albion]

I am an Annihilationist.

Eternal burning is a Greek myth.

even the Hellenized Jews and Jews influenced by Babylonian religion prior to Christ believed in it. But did the prophets teach it?

the answer is no.

It's all a matter of what the Bible teaches. For us Christians, anyway.

So make your case on the Bible and let's see whether universal salvation or eternal estrangement from God for those who deserve it is taught there.

 

[BobRyan]

It's all a matter of what the Bible teaches. For us Christians, anyway.

So make your case on the Bible and let's see whether universal salvation or eternal estrangement from God for those who deserve it is taught there.

Who is arguing that annihilationism means universalism???

 

[hedrick]

Annihilation seems the most straightforward reading of NT passages when they are read in light of the OT imagery they used. In the OT eternal fires, lights, etc, aren’t literally everlasting. The most common image is from Is 66, where the worm may not die, but they are eating dead bodies, not tormenting people. There’s no everlasting punishment involved. The Rev. Is a possible exception, but I think the pit is gone in the final vision of the restored earth.

I’m not quite a universalist, but Paul’s description in 1 Cor 15 seems to show destruction only of people who are so closely allied with the persecutors that they can be considered part of the Powers.

 

[BobRyan]

Annihilation seems the most straightforward reading of NT passages when they are read in light of the OT imagery they used. In the OT eternal fires, lights, etc, aren’t literally everlasting. The most common image is from Is 66, where the worm may not die, but they are eating dead bodies, not tormenting people. There’s no everlasting punishment involved. The Rev. Is a possible exception, but I think the pit is gone in the final vision of the restored earth

agreed.

 

[Saint Steven]

What are your thoughts on annihilationism? Is it biblical?

Yes, Annihilationism is biblical.
So are Damnationism and Ultimate Redemption (UR)
All three are valid doctrines of the final judgment.
However, all three are contradictory.

 

[Saint Steven]

So is a person is being honest and consistent then if they reject hell and punishment they should also reject heaven and bliss.

Cant have one without the other?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

It's all a matter of what the Bible teaches. For us Christians, anyway.

So make your case on the Bible and let's see whether universal salvation or eternal estrangement from God for those who deserve it is taught there.

Albion, I'm all with you in saying that a person, any person, should attempt to make a "case on the Bible" in support of some such-and-such view, but like any literature, I'm going to to have also say that our views don't come in singular, hometically sealed packages of rational thought, but are progressively worked out by swimming through a morass of Hermeneutical and Exegetical issues ...

... so the problem here as there typically is with understanding just about any part or portion of the Bible, is in making a case, or in some instances just plain admitting, where it is we begin methodologically or existentially when we decide to pick up the Bible and engage its contents.

The issue of 'ends' would be no different in this regard, would it?

 

[Der Alte]

Annihilation seems the most straightforward reading of NT passages when they are read in light of the OT imagery they used. In the OT eternal fires, lights, etc, aren’t literally everlasting. The most common image is from Is 66, where the worm may not die, but they are eating dead bodies, not tormenting people. There’s no everlasting punishment involved. The Rev. Is a possible exception, but I think the pit is gone in the final vision of the restored earth.
I’m not quite a universalist, but Paul’s description in 1 Cor 15 seems to show destruction only of people who are so closely allied with the persecutors that they can be considered part of the Powers.

Do we ignore the words of Jesus?

John 3:14-16
14 Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up,
15 that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him."
16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.​

In these two verses Jesus parallels "aionios life" with "should not perish" By definition "aionios" means "eternal."

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

It is often argued that the word "kolasis" means "correct" not "punish" but the word "kolasis" occurs one other time in the NT 1 John

1 John 4:18 There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment.[kolasis] He that feareth is not made perfect in love.​

The one who has "kolasis" is not made perfect no correction.

​

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

Cant have one without the other?

I suppose a person can and many do but there are passages that talk about both places as a present and future reality.

 

[hedrick]

Do we ignore the words of Jesus?

John 3:14-16
14 Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up,
15 that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him."
16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.​

In these two verses Jesus parallels "aionios life" with "should not perish" By definition "aionios" means "eternal."

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

It is often argued that the word "kolasis" means "correct" not "punish" but the word "kolasis" occurs one other time in the NT 1 John

1 John 4:18 There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment.[kolasis] He that feareth is not made perfect in love.​

The one who has "kolasis" is not made perfect no correction.

​

You do realize that John 3:16 actually supports annihilation or conditional immortality, right?

I think Matthew has a harsher view than some other NT authors. He may well envision eternal torment. The Rev. Is the next most likely, though I think the obvious understanding of the pit is destruction. But if eternal means more in a gods realm than going on forever, as it does in many OT references, eternal life might mean life with God, more than life that goes on forever.

 

[Der Alte]

You do realize that John 3:16 actually supports annihilation or conditional immortality, right?

If we do not consider the greater context of all of Jesus' teachings on this topic. I'm thinking of Matthew 25:46 specifically. And no "kolasis" does not mean "correct" and "aionios" does mean "eternal." Please see my scriptural support, 26 vss in My post [#1937] another thread this forum.

I think Matthew has a harsher view than some other NT authors. He may well envision eternal torment. The Rev. Is the next most likely, though I think the obvious understanding of the pit is destruction. But if eternal means more in a gods realm than going on forever, as it does in many OT references, eternal life might mean life with God, more than life that goes on forever.

While the lake of fire is called "the second death" more than once. No one, nothing is cast into the LOF then is said to die.
In this verse three living beings one, the false prophet, a person, are thrown into the LOF but they don't die they are tormented "aionios" for ever.

Revelation 20:10
10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.​

 

[hedrick]

If we do not consider the greater context of all of Jesus' teachings on this topic. I'm thinking of Matthew 25:46 specifically. And no "kolasis" does not mean "correct" and "aionios" does mean "eternal." Please see my scriptural support, 26 vss in My post [#1937] another thread this forum.

While the lake of fire is called "the second death" more than once. No one, nothing is cast into the LOF then is said to die.
In this verse three living beings one, the false prophet, a person, are thrown into the LOF but they don't die they are tormented "aionios" for ever.

Revelation 20:10
10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.​

The devil, the beast, and the false prophet. I don't think a literal reading of that is consistent with his idea of the new Jerusalem, but I could be wrong. That's why I said the Rev is the second most likely book to support some kind of eternal torment (even if just for the devil, the beast and the false prophet).

 

[hedrick]

While the lake of fire is called "the second death" more than once. No one, nothing is cast into the LOF then is said to die.

This is one of the more bizarre pieces of text I've read recently. We have a second death of which no one dies?

I admit I've only reviewed the chapters where this stuff appears, but it looks to me like it's the second death for humans, and eternal torment for the devil, the beast and the false prophet.

I'm also not sure it's right to try getting a literal picture from any of this. After being throw into the pit where he would be tormented forever, Satan is let out. Trying to get doctrine from the Rev is dangerous.

 

[Clare73]

What about the body? Matthew 10:28 indicates the following---but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

Per your position doesn't this mean that the body has to be immortal as well?

"Destroy, destruction" mean "ruin," not annihilation, loss of being.

Those things "destroyed" by the "destroyer," say in 1 Corinthians 5:5,
1 Corinthians 10:10; 1 Thessalonians 5:3 or Hebrews 11:28, were not annihilated, they did not lose their being.

 

[Der Alte]

The devil, the beast, and the false prophet. I don't think a literal reading of that is consistent with his idea of the new Jerusalem, but I could be wrong. That's why I said the Rev is the second most likely book to support some kind of eternal torment (even if just for the devil, the beast and the false prophet).

On second thought the beast could represent a kingdom/nation etc. The devil is referred to as an individual.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

"Destroy, destruction" mean "ruin," not annihilation, loss of being.

Those things "destroyed" by the "destroyer," say in 1 Corinthians 5:5,
1 Corinthians 10:10; 1 Thessalonians 5:3 or Hebrews 11:28, were not annihilated, they did not lose their being.

... one thing I'm wondering though, which I think is rather odd, is that if we take that bit about the Lake of Fire literally, don't we have to also see both Hades and Death as literal living, sentient beings who will also suffer for Eternity?

If this is the case (and it might be that I'm not interepreting things rightly due to the various books I've read that have influenced my thinking), it strikes me as strange since there's no mention in the rest of the Bible about Hades and Death being sentient beings who can suffer along with The Dragon, The Beast and The False Prophet.

What's your view on this bit of Scripture in Revelation, Clare?

 

[hedrick]

On second thought the beast could represent a kingdom/nation etc. The devil is referred to as an individual.

Yes. The Anchor Bible comments:
"Some interpreters argue that Revelation depicts condemnation as annihilation rather than ongoing suffering (Boismard, “Le sort”; Harrington). For example, when Babylon fell, the smoke of her burning went “up from her forever and ever” (19:3; cf. 18:9–10), yet the context was one of utter destruction, for “it will not be found anymore” (18:21). Moreover, those in the lake of fire include the beast and false prophet, who are not individuals but personifications of social and political forces, along with Death and Hades. One can imagine a political system and death coming to an end, but it is hard to see how they could suffer torment. Most interpreters acknowledge that Revelation assumes some form of continued existence for God’s opponents (Osborne; Reddish; Smalley), but these observations help to show that the judgment they receive cannot be understood in a simple physical sense."

I'm not convinced of their continued existence. The same ambiguity exists in 1 Cor 15. Rulers and authorities and powers are destroyed. Just what does that mean? I'm inclined to take the obvious reading that they no longer exist. But Paul may well be thinking of them more as forces, much as he portrays sin, rather than actual beings. It's not so obvious that 1 Cor is consistent with any people being tormented forever. Nor do I think the Rev really says that. If Paul isn't an actual universalist, I guess you'd have to say that the damned are destroyed at the same time as the powers. I've seen people claim that some of those put under his feet are damned, and they acknowledge him only negatively. But that seems to reject the overall thrust of the passage, which is an end whether everyone is in Christ.


"

 

[Gregory Thompson]

After the final lake of fire judgment Jesus says a curious thing.

Behold, I make all things new.

This implies either all things in the lake of fire were either 1) redeemed at that point or 2) Annihilated.

So in a sense Annihilationism and Ultimate Reconciliation come from a similar place, though the God they imply to be judging in either case is completely different.

In the same way, eternal torment implies a different God also.
Perhaps it was better that Revelation was never added to the canon, better to just stick with the gospels in that regard.

 

[hedrick]

After the final lake of fire judgment Jesus says a curious thing.

Behold, I make all things new.

This implies either all things in the lake of fire were either 1) redeemed at that point or 2) Annihilated.

So in a sense Annihilationism and Ultimate Reconciliation come from a similar place, though the God they imply to be judging in either case is completely different.

Right, both the Rev and 1 Cor 15 end up in a new world, with everyone in Christ. Behold I make 10% of things new doesn't have the same ring.