• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

Featured Convince me of Annihilationism

Discussion in 'Controversial Christian Theology' started by friend of, May 14, 2019.

  1. Der Alter

    Der Alter This is me about 1 yr. old. Supporter

    +2,477
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    I addressed this in my [post #115] above.
     
    Last edited: May 24, 2019
  2. Hidden In Him

    Hidden In Him Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,371
    Christian
    Married
    I glanced through it earlier, but it doesn't discount that the term even when doubled up on and used twice in the same phrase can still nevertheless refer to a finite time period as well, essentially leaving it to the interpreter to discern which is meant in each individual case. That's why I said it makes disproving Annihilation all but impossible. Granted, I still see no verses in scripture that prove it beyond doubt either.
     
  3. Butch5

    Butch5 Newbie Supporter

    +500
    Christian
    Married
    I didn't give you opinions or assumptions. I gave you logic. Logic and common sense dictate, not me, that something that ends cannot be unending. You can reject logic and reasoning if you choose to, however, at that point there is no longer need for discussion.

    So, once again, you simply dismiss any evidence that goes against your position without addressing it. As if that's not enough you present the very same worn out argument again. I've already shown your reasoning is flawed. We have passages of Scripture where aion is in apposition to something you claim is eternal and yet the thing said to be aion isn't eternal. Do you address it? No. Instead you ignore it and just post more passages with the same argument. It doesn't matter how many passages you post, the reasoning is still wrong.

    I find hard to believe you're not getting this. I'm beginning to wonder if you just want to argue. But we'll go one more time. Aion and olam are used of finite periods of time. Therefore they can't mean eternal. However, they are used for extremely long periods of time also. Olam means, over the horizon. What is over the horizon is unseen. So, the end of an olam period is not known. When the Septuagint translation was made the translators chose the word aion or age, to use in place of olam. An age can be a relatively short time or a long time, but it's primarily used of long periods of time. So, to properly understand what aion means we have to have a definition that fits ALL of the passages where the word appears. Eternity doesn't fit ALL of the passages where aion appears therefore it cannot be the definition. The word age, however, can fit in All of the places where aion appears. The word age is a period of time. The length of time of an age is determined by the context in which it is used. An ice age, the bronze age, the iron age, the church age. These are all different lengths of time. However, the word age fits each one. An aion is a period of time that varies depending on the context. The church age is an aion. A persons longevity is an aion, etc.

    The bottom line, and proper way to reason through this, is to come up with a definition that can incorporate all of the places where it's used. The word eternity cannot incorporate the concept of finite periods of time. However, the word age, an undefined period of time, can incorporate the concept of eternity. Therefore it is proper to define the words aion and olam as age and let the reader determine from the context the length of that age. The problem with defining these words as eternity is that it leads people to false conclusions and doctrines. In this case it leads people to think that the lake of fire will burn forever. We know from Scripture that that is not so. Jeremiah tells us that one day Gehenna or the lake of fire will be once again be made holy to the Lord. It leads people to think that people will suffer for eternity. This simply isn't the case which is seen clearly in Scripture.
     
  4. Hidden In Him

    Hidden In Him Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,371
    Christian
    Married
    If you could, Butch, reference these two posts for me. My apologies, but with the limited time I have right now, reading through several pages of posts is a bit time consuming.
     
  5. Butch5

    Butch5 Newbie Supporter

    +500
    Christian
    Married
  6. Bible Highlighter

    Bible Highlighter Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul. Supporter

    +5,171
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    Revelation 20:6 does not specifically identify who the rest of the dead who will live again. But we can assume by process of elimination based on those who will be resurrected to go through the Millennium. The verse stresses how those who were beheaded for Christ during the Tribulation will go through the Millennium. Also, it is logical that Abraham and certain patriachs would need to receive the land promise. So the rest of the dead that will live again (after the Millennium) is everyone else. This would be both the rest of the saints and the damned (who will be resurrected to be destroyed in the Lake of Fire).

    The Scriptures lead us to believe that both the Pre-Trib Rapture and the Mid Trib Catching up happen at unique times. The flesh and blood bodily resurrection is also in two phases. One before the Millennium, and one after the Millennium. Again, the test of faith needs to happen for those who were killed in the Tribulation. They were saved during a time when it was obvious that the Lord was returning soon. The signs of the things happening all around the world would make men even more without excuse. So they would need to be tested again at the end of the Millennium.
     
  7. Butch5

    Butch5 Newbie Supporter

    +500
    Christian
    Married
    Hi, The post about what a man is, is 17. The other statement about Gehenna isn't in this thread. Der Altar and I have been doing this for quite a while. For quick reference, John said that the wicked would be cast into the lake of fire. Jesus indicates that the wicked would be case into Gehenna. The only way I see to reconcile this difference is to understand that they are actually the same place. Jesus told the apostles that if their, eye, hand, foot, cause them to stumble to cut them off. He said it is better to enter into life maimed than to be cast into the fire that is not quenched and the worm doesn't die. He says this several times and calls it Gehenna. It comes right out of Isaiah 66.


    23 And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD.
    24 And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh.(Isa. 66:23-24 KJV)

    Notice in this passage that it is dead bodies that are burning, not living disembodied humans. However, even this place according to Jeremiah 31 will one day be made holy to the Lord.

    38 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that the city shall be built to the LORD from the tower of Hananeel unto the gate of the corner.
    39 And the measuring line shall yet go forth over against it upon the hill Gareb, and shall compass about to Goath.
    40 And the whole valley of the dead bodies, and of the ashes, and all the fields unto the brook of Kidron, unto the corner of the horse gate toward the east, shall be holy unto the LORD; it shall not be plucked up, nor thrown down any more for ever. (Jer. 31:38-40 KJV)
     
  8. Butch5

    Butch5 Newbie Supporter

    +500
    Christian
    Married
    Thanks for the blessings and the same to you! The way I see it there is no exception for two reasons. I don't believe that aion mean eternal but rather an age. The other reason is that I believe the beast and the false prophet are demon possessed men. In Revelation the beast is said to come up out of the pit. This obviously isn't a man. In this case the men would die in the fire and the demons would continue on for some time before being consumed.
     
  9. Butch5

    Butch5 Newbie Supporter

    +500
    Christian
    Married
    Thanks for making my point. You said,

    "Unlike folks like you, real scholars don't just make up definitions to fit their assumptions/presuppositions, they actually study.
    If a scholar authored a book with errors the scholastic community would expose it instantly. Let that sink in.
    The blue highlights are the sources, in addition to the scriptures, the scholars consulted to determine the definition."

    I bolded the above. That makes my point, They're not going to step out of line for fear of being exposed instantly. In other words, they tow the orthodox line. People aren't going to buy their work if they're being called a heretic. So everyone stays within the orthodox box and no one gets their panties in a wad.
     
  10. Der Alter

    Der Alter This is me about 1 yr. old. Supporter

    +2,477
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    <B5>Thanks for making my point. You said,
    "Unlike folks like you, real scholars don't just make up definitions to fit their assumptions/presuppositions, they actually study.
    If a scholar authored a book with errors the scholastic community would expose it instantly. Let that sink in.
    The blue highlights are the sources, in addition to the scriptures, the scholars consulted to determine the definition."
    I bolded the above. That makes my point, They're not going to step out of line for fear of being exposed instantly. In other words, they tow the orthodox line. People aren't going to buy their work if they're being called a heretic. So everyone stays within the orthodox box and no one gets their panties in a wad.<B5>
    I just love it when someone is so anxious to throw out a gotcha that they walk right into a trap. I don't accept accusations without evidence. Your unsupported opinion is not evidence of anything.
    Where are all the non-unbiased scholars? Aren't there any unbiased scholars anywhere in the world?
    All these amateurs all over the internet, many could not locate a Hebrew verb or parse a Greek verb if their life depended on it, claiming that all the accredited sources in the world, e.g. BDAG, BDB etc., are biased and wrong?
    BDAG has been around for more than 100 years. Why haven't "unbiased" scholars, in the last 100 years or so, compiled "unbiased" lexicons which prove BDAG, BDB etc., wrong?
     
  11. Butch5

    Butch5 Newbie Supporter

    +500
    Christian
    Married
    You seem to miss the fact that logic isn't debatable. God created reasoning and He created logic. It doesn't change if one has an IQ or 10 or 200. It doesn't change if one never attends school or if one has multiple Phd's. Logic is logic, and logic dictates that something that ends cannot be unending. That's not opinion. That's logic.
     
  12. Der Alter

    Der Alter This is me about 1 yr. old. Supporter

    +2,477
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    <B5>I didn't give you opinions or assumptions. I gave you logic. Logic and common sense dictate, not me, that something that ends cannot be unending. You can reject logic and reasoning if you choose to, however, at that point there is no longer need for discussion.
    So, once again, you simply dismiss any evidence that goes against your position without addressing it. As if that's not enough you present the very same worn out argument again. I've already shown your reasoning is flawed. We have passages of Scripture where aion is in apposition to something you claim is eternal and yet the thing said to be aion isn't eternal. Do you address it? No. Instead you ignore it and just post more passages with the same argument. It doesn't matter how many passages you post, the reasoning is still wrong.
    I find hard to believe you're not getting this. I'm beginning to wonder if you just want to argue. But we'll go one more time. Aion and olam are used of finite periods of time. Therefore they can't mean eternal. However, they are used for extremely long periods of time also. Olam means, over the horizon. What is over the horizon is unseen. So, the end of an olam period is not known. When the Septuagint translation was made the translators chose the word aion or age, to use in place of olam. An age can be a relatively short time or a long time, but it's primarily used of long periods of time. So, to properly understand what aion means we have to have a definition that fits ALL of the passages where the word appears. Eternity doesn't fit ALL of the passages where aion appears therefore it cannot be the definition. The word age, however, can fit in All of the places where aion appears. The word age is a period of time. The length of time of an age is determined by the context in which it is used. An ice age, the bronze age, the iron age, the church age. These are all different lengths of time. However, the word age fits each one. An aion is a period of time that varies depending on the context. The church age is an aion. A persons longevity is an aion, etc.
    The bottom line, and proper way to reason through this, is to come up with a definition that can incorporate all of the places where it's used. The word eternity cannot incorporate the concept of finite periods of time. However, the word age, an undefined period of time, can incorporate the concept of eternity. Therefore it is proper to define the words aion and olam as age and let the reader determine from the context the length of that age. The problem with defining these words as eternity is that it leads people to false conclusions and doctrines. In this case it leads people to think that the lake of fire will burn forever. We know from Scripture that that is not so. Jeremiah tells us that one day Gehenna or the lake of fire will be once again be made holy to the Lord. It leads people to think that people will suffer for eternity. This simply isn't the case which is seen clearly in Scripture.<B5>

    All nonsense! Nothing but your unsupported opinion. You have not quoted a single credible language resource which supports any of this. See my previous post.
    Do you have any education or training in linguistics?

    The scientific study of language and its structure, including the study of morphology, syntax, phonetics, and semantics. Specific branches of linguistics include sociolinguistics, dialectology, psycholinguistics, computational linguistics, historical-comparative linguistics, and applied linguistics.
     
  13. Der Alter

    Der Alter This is me about 1 yr. old. Supporter

    +2,477
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    More meaningless bloviation with no, zero,none credible scholastic support. See my above post.
     
  14. Butch5

    Butch5 Newbie Supporter

    +500
    Christian
    Married
    LOL, It's called common sense. Something that ends cannot be unending.
     
  15. Butch5

    Butch5 Newbie Supporter

    +500
    Christian
    Married
    That's too funny. All you have to do is admit they made a mistake and move on.
     
  16. Hidden In Him

    Hidden In Him Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,371
    Christian
    Married
    Thanks for the reply, man. For me Gehenna is a reference to Hell, since some of Christ's uses describe a punishment that seems too immediate to be referencing the Lake of Fire (Luke 12:5, for instance). As for Jeremiah 31, I take the entire Chapter as describing Israel's return from captivity rather than it having anything to do with end-time prophecy, and I take Isaiah 66:23-24 to be referencing the Dead Sea, which will eventually become the Lake of Fire.

    But I'll grant you one thing I'm very grateful for: Demonstrating that the expressions normally translated as "forever and ever" and "eternal" can actually be referring to finite periods of time is quite powerful. It leaves the door open for the possibility of Annihilationism, which I see as somewhat comforting in a way. That the torment of the wicked should go on forever seems... incongruent with my idea of a merciful God.

    Haven't read through your Post #17 yet, but I'll try to get it later, and thanks again : )
     
  17. Butch5

    Butch5 Newbie Supporter

    +500
    Christian
    Married
    You're welcome and I agree. It seems much more merciful. Especially if you consider what I wrote in post 17. My view on man is monism. I see from Scripture that man consists of the dust of the earth and that when God breathed into the man the breath or life the man became a living soul. I view man as a living being that consists of the body and the breath of life from God. When that breath is taken away the body returns to the dust. This leaves no room for any part of man to live on after death. This is what I see in Genesis 2. If that's the case the only way for man to be tormented forever would be if God kept the man alive. I don't see that in a merciful God.
     
  18. friend of

    friend of Well-Known Member Supporter

    +1,898
    Canada
    Non-Denom
    Private
    Yes but said verses do not necessarily mention a disinclusion of all other saints.

    To me it makes less sense that those who converted during the tribulation would be given power to rule and reign alongside Christ during the MK while those who came to faith before this period would simply be relegated to having no part in this era. 1 Corinthians 6:2-3 could be speaking about MK, and so Paul is speaking with believers of old, that they will be present to make judgements. Those who have been changed in the twinkling of an eye to meet the Master in the air and so be with him forever cannot be said to be dead in any sense, certainly not after they have put on immortality as the verse implies.
     
  19. friend of

    friend of Well-Known Member Supporter

    +1,898
    Canada
    Non-Denom
    Private
    Psalms 37:35 speaks about wicked people being successful until death.

    Thanks for your responses.
     
  20. Bible Highlighter

    Bible Highlighter Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul. Supporter

    +5,171
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    Yes, it is implied by the language used unless there is another verse or passage suggesting otherwise. For example: It would be like saying: All the green marbles are to only be present for the week, and the rest of the other colored marbles will not be seen again until after the week is finished.

    Only two people groups are mentioned as going through the Millennium.

    "And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years." (Revelation 20:4).​

    People group #1. They that sat upon the thrones and judgment was given to them.
    People group #2. The souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, the Word of God, and they did not worship the beast, neither his imagine, and neither did they receive his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands.

    Usually, when you specify something it is for a purpose or reason. If all believers would be included it would have said so.

    Also, the next verse says this:

    "But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection." (Revelation 20:5).​

    Please take note that the REST of the dead that lives AFTER the thousand years is STILL REFERRED as the FIRST RESURRECTION. See verse 5 above.

    Also, verse 6 says this about the 1st resurrection:

    "Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power,..." (Revelation 20:6).​

    So the 1st resurrection, is not a resurrection of the damned or the wicked. Granted, there will be a resurrection of the wicked, but that comes after the 1st resurrection.

    I would rather stick to what the Word of God says in it's most plainest meaning instead.
     
    Last edited: May 25, 2019
Loading...