Debate: Is annihilationism biblical

When it comes to the debate of whether the lost burn in Hell forever or are ultimately burned through and "annihilated," it is evidently very important for saved Christians to think about whether doctrinal beliefs properly reflect the character of God and the intended meaning of Scripture. This debate is to discuss a very important topic which pertains to the worries of countless individuals.

Yes, Scripture supports it

Matthew 10:28

For starters, look at what Jesus says, as mentioned in the Gospel of Matthew:

“	And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell.	”
—Matthew 10:28

It's really that simple. If you think about it, Jesus is warning that saved believers shouldn't worry the most about being killed while still alive in the flesh, and instead should worry more about potentially losing their eternal life. Now, CARM gives a juggling, semantic-filled, overdressed, and ultimately unappetizing word salad filled with mere suppositions, and ultimately concludes that the verse doesn't definitively refute annihilationism, even though their overall position still is eager to claim that the doctrine is unbiblical (wow). The CARM page just goes on about how there's no certainty of what "destroy" in that context really means.

However, I think that Scripture is meant to be quite concise for those guided by the Holy Spirit. "Destroy" is applied equally to both body and soul in the second part of the verse, and therefore it's only sensible to conclude that if the body is ultimately destroyed, the soul will be as well. And in the first part, it's even more obvious that the word "kill" is applied with equal meaning to both body and soul, since it's self-evident from the rest of Scripture that people will physically die in the first death, but will still be resurrected, either in the first or second one. Therefore, why would the second part possibly lack conciseness/consistency, as CARM says could be the case? That sounds like an attempt to ignore/water down the word of God to fit the traditions of man (in this case, finding whatever excuses possible to deny annihilationism), which Jesus condemns in Mark 7:9.

Matthew 10:28 is making it very clear that both soul and body will be destroyed in hell. Just think: how can the soul be destroyed if it's perpetually burning in torment? If it's consciously tormented literally forever, then it's never actually destroyed, and thus the argument against annihilationism simply contradicts Jesus's words.

Also, ask yourself: when you first read Matthew 10:28, what's your initial impression? Do you honestly believe what opponents annihilationism, like CARM, actually say about how the true meaning is supposedly unclear? As someone who believes in the word of God, I think that the meaning is quite concise as the Lord intends. Jesus wouldn't use the word "destroy" if he meant "oh, it doesn't mean actual destruction, possibly instead another varying degree of torment, etc. etc." —LT ^{(Exodus 23:2)} Monday, 15:46, December 26, 2022 (EST)

The first man Adam was a living soul, the last Adam was a life giving spirit

piercing to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit.

So there's a difference between soul and spirit. God will destroy both the body and soul of man, not the spirit. God is a spirit. Satan is a spirit. And man has his own spirit (1 Thessalonians 5:23), too, which either is occupied by the Holy Spirit, or an unclean spirit, or is in itself an unclean spirit. RobS^{Give Peace a chance} 18:31, December 27, 2022 (EST)

Since when do fires burn forever?

Yes, Revelation says that Satan will be tormented in the lake of fire "forever and ever." Does this mean that the fire burns for literally forever? Well, take a look at the Book of Jude:

“	...just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.	”
—Jude 1:7

What was eternal about the burning of Sodom and Gomorrah? The practical effects; they got utterly destroyed. Likewise, the concept of hellfire being "forever" could not mean forever in the sense that the fire itself lasts for an eternity, as I believe other Scripture verses also use "forever" in reference to finite amounts of time in reality (I'll have to find them, though Pastor Doug Batchelor should summarize key points here). And just think: does the concept of a fire perpetually burning through an object make any sense at all? —LT ^{(Exodus 23:2)} Monday, 16:06, December 26, 2022 (EST)

Interesting observation

If you do a simple search of the topic by name, the top results are articles attacking the doctrine. However if you look up the key meaning at hand about whether hell burns forever, the top results are mostly in favor of annihilationism. What does this mean? Well, apparently it's easy for opponents of the doctrine to use the name of the doctrine as a buzzword to further attack the idea and further associate the general concept with a pejorative term. Coincidence? IMO, evidently not... —LT ^{(Exodus 23:2)} Monday, 15:53, December 26, 2022 (EST)

User: Conservative on why annihilationism is an errant theology

Annihilationism is rejected by most Protestants, rejected by the Catholic Church and I could not find any Eastern Orthodox theologians promoting this doctrine.[1] These are the 3 main branches of Christianity.

So why is annihilationism an errant theology?

In modern times, the English-born Canadian evangelical theologian J.I. Packer was one of the influential Bible believing Protestants who spoke against annihilationism. Here is a good article on the subject: J. I. Packer on Why Annihilationism Is Wrong. Conservative (talk) 16:35, December 26, 2022 (EST)

First off, biblical truth is independent of church teachings. Papal teachings (note: I'm anti–Papal Rome, not anti-Catholic, as I consistently treat individual Christians I know from various denominations, including Catholics, with utmost respect, and my harshness is towards the upper corrupt hierarchy) are founded on antisemitic pagan heresy which was "compromised" with Christianity during the reign of Constantine, and the Protestant Reformation's foremost leader was a prominent antisemite who wanted to burn synagogues and who inspired Hitler. So argumentum ad populum simply is not valid.

Also, even skimming that article, the author says that souls are "intrinsically eternal." To refute it, I just need to quote a simple verse from Genesis:

“	...but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.	”
—Genesis 2:17

—LT ^{(Exodus 23:2)} Monday, 16:46, December 26, 2022 (EST)

The saved in Heaven won't be troubled if those in Hell burn forever?

In the linked article above by Conservative, it says that (under the premise of eternal burning in Hell for the lost, in this context) those in Heaven won't be troubled at all by the fact that the lost will burn in Hell forever. Seriously though? Per Revelation:

“	He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away.	”
—Revelation 21:4

"Neither shall there be morning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away." So how can there be no morning, crying, nor pain, if there's literally a perpetually burning piece of timber where the lost are blistering in such excruciating agony for eternity? (when you burn your finger on a hot surface, the pain still lasts, even when you immediately withdraw it from the surface, for a long while; just try imagining how agonizing it would be to perpetually be burning) And remember: many people who go to Hell weren't purely malicious individuals in their time on the old Earth.

There may be countless teenagers and young adults, brought up by toxic, godless, atheist parents, who drove them to suicide, and they passed the age of accountability, where every time they may have had the barest exposure to any mention of the Bible, they were too conditioned by their environment to worry more about studies and career. And who knows, many of them may be genuinely kind people at heart, always with such tender sympathy for those suffering around them and consciously resenting the moral corruption they see in their everyday lives. And one day, they can't take it anymore and swallow cyanide pills. So if Hell burns forever, those individuals, simply because they were never lucky enough to get all the exposure to God's holiness enough to truly overcome all their worldly conditioning, get the same punishments as their toxic parents, let alone Hitler? And if that's the case, the saved in Heaven have no mourning and sorrow? —LT ^{(Exodus 23:2)} Monday, 16:58, December 26, 2022 (EST)

Eternal separation from God and God's love is punishment enough. Nothing further needs to be added. RobS^{Give Peace a chance} 20:37, December 26, 2022 (EST)

Doctrines like this are essentially deceptive and Satanic, implying that God is some sort of sadist who takes pleasure in punishing people. RobS^{Give Peace a chance} 20:53, December 26, 2022 (EST)

First of all, where does the Bible even imply that death is "separation"? It sounds like a man-made means of misconstruing Scriptural wisdom; this article gives good reasons in refuting the notion. Also, about the second point, it would actually give the impression of sadism if God sent a confused, abused teenager, who were conditioned by their toxic environment to be weak in conscience and who may commit suicide without attaining salvation, to perpetually burn and blister and receive more or less the same punishment as Hitler but only to a degree with simply less magnitudes of torment (which is the message I'm getting from opponents of annihilationism). Thus, it's the opponents of annihilationism who present God as vengeful and sadistic, while those who affirm annihilationism believe that God won't torment anyone in hellfire forever, and that He will end pain by ensuring that the souls of the lost ultimately die, simply put. —LT ^{(Exodus 23:2)} Tuesday, 22:11, December 26, 2022 (EST)

truthwatchers.com says this: You can be 100% sure you are going to heaven. Sounds to me a lot like the doctrine of eternal security. RobS^{Give Peace a chance} 14:21, December 27, 2022 (EST)

Wait wait wait. Lemme guess: "You can be 100% sure you are going to heaven, until you sin, then you can be 0% sure until you jump through certain hoops, then be 100% sure again." Unfortunately, there's too much of this kind of teaching around. RobS^{Give Peace a chance} 14:30, December 27, 2022 (EST)

Sounds like the classic bait n switch. Only question is, is it God or man giving the pitch? RobS^{Give Peace a chance} 14:33, December 27, 2022 (EST)

Death is separation. In the day you eat of it ye shall surely die.

Physical death is separation from the body and soul, and from a person's loved ones. Spiritual death is separation from God. Let the dead bury the dead. RobS^{Give Peace a chance} 22:27, December 26, 2022 (EST)

RobSmith, that verse you cite says "die" with absolutely no direct implied meaning of "separation" in regards to such an interpretation of hellfire supposedly lasting forever. And your subsequent explanation is merely a reiteration of a doctrine with very weak supporting evidence that relies on some mental gymnastics. Sola Scriptura and with conciseness, please. —LT ^{(Exodus 23:2)} Tuesday, 22:39, December 26, 2022 (EST)

God is light, and in him is no darkness. There is no "hellfire"; in fact, hell is outer darkness - a very cold place. RobS^{Give Peace a chance} 23:40, December 26, 2022 (EST)

Wow, right as I simply ask for Sola Scriptura–grounded arguments, you make a claim with no sound biblical substantiation, as far as I am concerned. Oh yes, do you recall all those times you bashed others, namely Dataclarifier, for supposedly making extrabiblical statements? And do you see what you are doing right now? —LT ^{(Exodus 23:2)} Tuesday, 15:10, December 27, 2022 (EST)

duh, all my responses have been sola scriptura, interpreting scripture with scripture: In the day ye eat of it ye shall surely die. God is light. etc etc. I note you have not responded to a key question regarding any of these issues: Death reigned from Adam to Moses. Can you respond sola scriptura to explain how Moses conquered death, and not Jesus? RobS^{Give Peace a chance} 16:24, December 27, 2022 (EST)

Being outside God's light does not automatically imply "coldness." —LT ^{(Exodus 23:2)} Tuesday, 16:43, December 27, 2022 (EST)

<sola scriptura> every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

Again we return to accepting or rejecting the doctrine of repentance. RobS^{Give Peace a chance} 18:07, December 27, 2022 (EST)

Annhilationism is anti-biblical

What it teaches is, there is no need to repent now, cause hell isn't that bad. The torment will be over quickly. RobS^{Give Peace a chance} 14:36, December 27, 2022 (EST)

Wow, nice way going about, promoting a gospel of fear rather than a gospel of godly love. No wonder countless non-believers think Christianity is a religion of intolerance, thanks to fearmongering by opponents of annihilationism about how even the abused teenager who dies without knowing Jesus will be burning in Hell forever alongside mass murderers like Nero, Genghis Khan, Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, and Democratic governors who killed thousands of seniors in nursing homes. Rather than tell people that they ought to repent because God wants them in His kingdom, with a great mansion prepared by Jesus for every saved individual, you'd rather exaggerate Hell's extent in hopes that they will convert out of merely avoiding a terrible punishment. Hell will be terrible, and its end will be death, not this man-made doctrine about "separation" and "endless burning." The unsaved will suffer terribly, each according to their deeds, and then be destroyed, per Matthew 10:28, as pointed out above. —LT ^{(Exodus 23:2)} Tuesday, 15:02, December 27, 2022 (EST)

Show me one verse in scripture with the term, "annihilation" or "annhilationism", sola scripture to back up the claim it's bibilical and not man-made or Satanic to disregard the doctrine of repentance?

All it teaches is there is no need for repentance now, that you can enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season and not worry about anything later - like immortality. RobS^{Give Peace a chance} 16:30, December 27, 2022 (EST)

Let's take this phrase: "exaggerate Hell". There's no need to exaggerate hell. Hell simply is eternal banishment from God's presence. Period. Paragraph. End of statement. RobS^{Give Peace a chance}

[EC] Hmm, why am I not surprised that you obsess over the term rather than the concept... just as I pointed out in another section in this debate page, if you search up "annihilationism," there's a slew of articles using the term as a pejorative and attacking the concept, though if you search up "do people burn in hell forever," you get different webpages showing up. Ultimately, I've shown that the concept is grounded in Scripture. —LT ^{(Exodus 23:2)} Tuesday, 16:42, December 27, 2022 (EST)

I have answered this question, sola scriptura, several times now: God is light. God is love. In him is no darkness. Hell is outer darkness. RobS^{Give Peace a chance} 16:46, December 27, 2022 (EST)

(ec) Let's take this phrase: "exaggerate Hell". There's no need to exaggerate hell with pitchforks and flames. Hell simply is eternal banishment from God's presence. Period. Paragraph. End of statement. RobS^{Give Peace a chance}

Now, let's suppose you chose to ignore the doctrine of repentance and prefer to await annihilationism. Fine. That's something you can share with your buddies in outer darkness for eternity. Compatriots like Hitler, Eichmann, the Zodiac Killer, etc etc etc and debate when it's coming. RobS^{Give Peace a chance} 16:50, December 27, 2022 (EST)

Today is the day of salvation. Harden not your hearts.... RobS^{Give Peace a chance} 16:53, December 27, 2022 (EST)

Okay RobSmith, now you're engaging in ad hoc bad-faith trolling by comparing me to Nazis. When all fails, just use Godwin's Law, eh? —LT ^{(Exodus 23:2)} Tuesday, 16:54, December 27, 2022 (EST)

Not necessarily; we're talking about sharing outer darkness with Nazis out of the flesh. Big difference.

Let's go back to Romans chapt 7:

I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me;

So you have a will, or choice, to choose repentance now, or reject it.

Now, let's toss in some more sola scriptura, returning to the book of Hebrews:

By faith Moses, when he was come to years, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter; Choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season;

This debate rather should be over immortality, and not annihilationism. Annihilationism denies immortality. So I think we skipped a step. RobS^{Give Peace a chance} 17:06, December 27, 2022 (EST)

"Immortality." The serpent told Eve, "you will not surely die." That was the first recorded lie in humanity. —LT ^{(Exodus 23:2)} Tuesday, 17:10, December 27, 2022 (EST)

Oh, so when she did eat, she did not surely physically die. Explain, please, using sola scriptura. RobS^{Give Peace a chance} 17:20, December 27, 2022 (EST)

(ec) <and technically, you're incorrect; the serpent was not human.> RobS^{Give Peace a chance} 17:27, December 27, 2022 (EST)

Just think for a moment: Satan's first lie was saying that sin won't lead to real death. And here you are saying that there's inherent immortality. —LT ^{(Exodus 23:2)} Tuesday, 17:22, December 27, 2022 (EST)

The "first lie" would have been the rebellion in heaven when Lucifer and the fallen angels were tossed out, wouldn't it?

And how come Satan hasn't been annihilated yet? Is he immortal? an eternal being? RobS^{Give Peace a chance} 17:27, December 27, 2022 (EST)

What was Satan (or Lucifer's) sin? Answer: Pride. Worshipping and serving the creature more than the creator (to use sola scriptura). I will exalt myself,, whereas I know that in me dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; RobS^{Give Peace a chance} 17:36, December 27, 2022 (EST)

So you have a will, or choice: you can accept the doctrines of repentance and immortality (eternal existense), or reject it with annihilationism. RobS^{Give Peace a chance} 17:47, December 27, 2022 (EST)

Gehenna is not hell

I hesitate to say the KJV translators got this wrong, or made a mistake, because of the idioms involved that require some knowledge and understanding the audiences of 1612 wouldn't be familiar with. Jesus said,

Whoever says to his brother, 'thou raca', is in danger of hell(fire)

Raca = fool. Gehenna, or the Valley of Hinom, was just outside the Jerusalem city gate. It served as the city dump. In the Pentateuch, we have the law of the leper, how someone diagnosed with leprosy was separated from the congregation (in the wilderness, it was outside the camp; in a walled city, it was outside the wall). So certain people who were exiled from the congregation outside the city lived in the city dump, where fires burned 24/7, picking through rags, and looking for food (kinda like today's homeless in any metropolitan area). These hapless individuals became the image in many people's minds at the time of Christ of what separation from God must be like. Jesus did not say "hell", he said "Gehenna". IOWs, what Jesus said was, "whoever says to his brother, 'thou fool', is in danger of separation from the community like those hapless lepers and beggars outside the wall picking through rags in the city dump looking for something to eat," or words to that effect.

Once again, we are faced with question of immortality. In the OT, the notion of life after death is not quite as clear as it became after Christ's resurrection. Christ proved it as so with his resurrection. But notions such as'Tartarus', or the abode of the dead, were considered by many teachers of the law as pagan or heretical. There was no universal understanding of 'heaven' or 'hell' under the Old Testament law. But people understood the suffering of separation from loved ones, from the community, and from God. Punishment in Gehenna was exactly such separation.

So KJV translators took a short cut and just substituted 'hell' for Gehenna, although a clear understanding of what it means to be eternally separated from God, banished from God's presence, is more fully developed and explained elsewhere in the NT. RobS^{Give Peace a chance} 13:16, December 29, 2022 (EST)

Anyways, it is from Gehenna that the idea of hell being a place of flames and eternal torment comes from; however there is some question about whether that was Jesus' intent in using the word, or what the hearers understood it to mean. RobS^{Give Peace a chance} 19:35, December 29, 2022 (EST)

It should be noted that many passages of scripture, with hindsight, give us a different understanding of how they were heard and received in Jesus' day. An obvious example is,

If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me

The way we hear and interpret this phrase, "take up his cross and follow" is much different than the original hearers, who only wondered, "What is he talking about?" RobS^{Give Peace a chance} 15:17, December 30, 2022 (EST)