Open Theism Discussion Board

Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > (No Subject)

Forum Quick Jump

[ << Previous Thread | Next Thread >> | Show Newest Post First ]

archive
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 516

Posted 6/27/2001 7:58 AM (GMT -6)

Dear readers,
I have a question that pertains to the subject of the GRAVITY of SIN.It has often been taught and for a long time that when a man commits a sin against a god who is INFINITELY holy that he is therefore guilty of committing a sin that is INFINITE in it's EVILNESS. Is there someone out there who can show me from the scriptures where it clearly teaches this? Might there even be someone out there who can even show me even just one verse of scripture that clearly teaches that there actually is such a thing as a sin that is INFINITE in it's EVILNESS? I have found in the scriptures where it speaks of certain abominations as being greater than others. I have found where Jesus declares, "therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the GREATER sin". I have NEVER found any verse that affirms that there is any such thing as a sin that is INFINITE in it's EVILNESS though I have indeed searched for it. Perhaps I just somehow overlooked it which is something I am indeed capable of doing. It should also be noted that if the scriptures do indeed affirm that some sins are LESS evil than other sins then obviously those sins that are LESS evil CANNOT be INFINITE in their EVILNESS. I need to see scriptures that CLEARLY affirm the realty of INFINITELY evil sins. Building beliefs by reading between the lines is like building a house on a foundation of sand. There is one last thing that needs to be said and that is that what a man believes regarding the GRAVITY of SIN could ultimately cause that man to question whether or not other beliefs he has been taught are indeed true to the scriptures or not. A fine example of this would be the doctrine of INFINITE PUNISHMENT for [(IN)FINITE?] sin. Thanks for any reply you might have.
Sincerly,
Yankee

archive
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 516

Posted 6/27/2001 7:58 AM (GMT -6)

Hi "yankee"! Actually, you are misunderstanding the doctrine of hell I believe. No-one, to my knowledge, talks about the "infinite evilness" of any given sin. The Bible does speak of degrees of punishment in an eternal hell, which would refute the idea of an infinitely evil sin. However, the Bible does clearly speak of an ETERNAL Hell, in the same sense as an ETERNAL Heaven. If you reject the former, you by necessity reject the latter. More to come...

Benjamin Musclow

archive
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 516

Posted 6/27/2001 8:00 AM (GMT -6)

Dearest Yankee,

I wish I knew the Bible well enough to answer your original question but somebody who is a better Christian is going to have to do that. You say, “I have found in the scriptures where it speaks of certain abominations as being greater than others.” Indeed the Bible does talk about sin in this way at times. But there are other times when it talks about sin in more universal and egalitarian ways.

Again I apologize for my lack of knowledge about the Bible, I could only find one example but I know that there are more like this. In James 2:10-11it says, “For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become accountable for all of it. For the one who said, ‘You shall not commit adultery,’ also said, ‘You shall not murder.’ Now if you do not commit adultery but if you murder, you have become a transgressor of the law.”

One way to think about sin is to examine the consequences of sin. Jesus says that to even be angry at a brother or sister we have committed murder in our hearts (however Jesus also got angry and in other places it says be angry but do not sin. This would imply that the anger Jesus is speaking of here is a special sort of anger—an evil anger if you will, an anger born from maliciousness). Sins have natural and spiritual consequences. If you literally murder someone it has the natural consequence of ending their life. However if you murder in spirit you do literally murder them in that spiritual murder is real, but it has different natural consequences. For example they continue to live materially. However, the spiritual consequence of spiritual murder is the same as physical murder. So one way of accounting for the dual talk of ‘all sin is one’ and a ‘hierarchy of sin’ is that spiritually all sin is one but physically some sins are worse than others.

This, however, can be only part of the answer. The Bible also talks about people’s debts of sin as being larger or smaller which doesn’t seem to be a reference to physical consequences. So all I can to is outline your question. I can’t really answer it.

As far as infinite sin is concerned it is merely a fact of extrabiblical logic based on juxtaposing Biblical truths. You say, “Building beliefs by reading between the lines is like building a house on a foundation of sand.” That depends on what you mean by ‘reading between the lines.’ Whatever you mean you cannot discount an argument that seeks to carry out Biblical truths to their logical ends can you? There are plenty of verses that establish God’s infinitude. If you start here it is just a matter of how appealing this logic is: Does a sin against an infinite God constitute an infinite sin? Could a sin be finite if it is sinned against one who is infinite? These questions never appear in the Bible but that shouldn’t discount their authenticity as questions. Whether you decide that the argument is sound or not I think the spirit of the argument is essentially correct. We can meditate on the gravity of our sin by meditating on who God is and the fact that we are sinning against Him. To me, pointing out His infinitude is not very convicting. God as infinite doesn’t seem to be the Biblical center of who God is even if it is the center of some theological constructs about Him. Rather if we place ‘God as love’ at the center of our theology the sublimity of our sin, the overpowering weight of it, sinks in to me. We are sinning against love itself!!! See my ‘after taste’ post on the ‘is the death penalty moral’ thread.

Finally about hell. Let’s suppose that a sin against an infinite God constitutes an infinite sin. Does it follow that an infinite sin DEMANDS infinite punishment? Does this not tie God’s hands when it comes to punishing sin? It would seem to me that part of God being infinite, and part of God being sovereign is that He is sovereign over punishment. We are not talking about an impersonal mechanism for dishing out punishment in proportion to fault, rather we are talking about a personal God who is free to forgive.
Furthermore would infinite punishment translate into infinite indefinite punishment? I say not necessarily. Infinite punishment could just as easily be argued for annihilation as for eternal conscience torment.

Ben says, “No-one, to my knowledge, talks about the ‘nfinite evilness’of any given sin.”

Wislawa: Anslem does.

Ben also says, “However, the Bible does clearly speak of an ETERNAL Hell, in the same sense as an ETERNAL Heaven. If you reject the former, you by necessity reject the latter.”

Wislawa: That’s a pretty simplistic defence of an eternal hell.

I love the debate about hell because I’m not on either side. In most debates one view will show itself as clearly being stronger than the other (not that the same view strikes different people with this same clarity, but I think it works this way for most people). With the hell debate, however, both seem equally strong—or equally week. I am completely unbiased in that I don’t feel any sort of motivation to defend one view for the sake of my theology. That is to say that my theology is not threatened by either view. So bring it on Ben!!! Whatever side you take I’ll take the other

—Wislawa

archive
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 516

Posted 6/27/2001 8:01 AM (GMT -6)

glamdring777

06/20/01 10:56 PM

oh yeah

---------------------------------------------------------

you go girl

archive
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 516

Posted 6/27/2001 8:02 AM (GMT -6)

yankee551

06/22/01 3:31 AM

RE: RE: Sins that are INFINITE in their EVILNESS???

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear GODesteem,
Thank you for your response to my letter. I will say that what we believe pertaining to the duration of the suffering experienced in hell and the lake of fire must ultimately rest upon what the scriptures have to say pertaining to the duration of it. The question pertaining to the gravity of sin is just a logical problem that will drive the kind of man who thinks things through to put his own beliefs pertaining to hell to the acid test of the scriptures to see if they are really true to the scriptures or not. Still we must go with what the scriptures declare. The belief that a sin committed against an infinitely holy god is therefore a sin that is infinite in it's evilness is traced back to Anselm if not even further. W.G.T. Shedd used this belief as a means of making sense out of the justness of eternal punishment about a century or so ago if I remember right. It really does not surprise me so much that there are so few who ever speak of any sin as being infinite in it's evilness. I was raised in church and one thing that I have observed is that it seems that most christians are simply content to have a simple faith in God. Most christians simply do not take the time to think their own beliefs through or put them to the acid test of the scriupture to see if they are really true. I think that if on judgement day God was to ask every christian why he or she believed what they believed most would have to confess, " I got saved in a church that taught these beliefs" or "Mom and Dad raised me up to believe these beliefs" or even "I heard so many preachers and evangelists proclaim with such great conviction that these beliefs were true to the scriptures that I just assumed they must be true". The only right reason a man can give for believing what he believes is "Lord through my research, reading, and study of your word I came to accept these certain beliefs as true and those other beliefs as false". My next point is that I do not believe that the DEGREES of suffering refutes the idea of infinitely evil sins because the DURATION of eternal suffering still makes the belief in ifinitely evil sins logically difficult to avoid. The QUANTITY of our sins makes a much better argument for the DEGREES of suffering than the GRAVITY of our sins that is if there is such a thing as a sin that is infinite in it's evilness. A logical question to be asked is, "Why would a god who is described in the scriptures as being JUST require a man to be punished with INFINITE suffering for a FINITE number of sins that are only FINITE in their evilness that were committed during a FINITE and breif life of approximately seventy years?". It is logically impossible for a man to stand before God guilty of committing an INFINITE number of sins seeing how he only has such a short life span in which he can commit them. If there is no such thing as a sin that is INFINITE in it's evilness than a sinner is only capable of standing before God while being guilty of only committing a FINITE number of sins that are only FINITE in their evilness. You cannot make sense out of justifying eternal torment with the QUANTITY of our sins. Only the GRAVITY of our SINS can make a logical argument for eternal torment. One thing that I must say is that when I speak of something as being either logical or illogical I am speaking of how I perceive things. That which seems logical to me might not seem logical to others and I do realize that. God's logic is certainly higher than mine. It would seem from your response that you believe that a belief in the eventual annihilation of the unrightious in the lake of fire necessitates a belief in the eventual annihilation of the rightious in Heaven for the same bible that uses such words as, "eternal, everlasting, and forever" in conjunction with the sufferings of the unrightious dead also uses these words in conjunction with the bliss of the rightious dead. It is not enough for a man to look to the Greek and Hebrew words from which these words are translated to see if these words always convey the same meaning to us as the Greek and Hebrew words conveyed to the original recipients of the scriptures. We must also look to the scriptures to see what the scriptures have to say pertaining to such words as, "mortal, immortal, mortality, immortality, eternal life, soul, spirit, and death". For you as a christian it really does not matter if your soul is equipped with immortality at the time you were conceived, born again, or when you go to be with the Lord. When you are a resurrected and immortal saint dwelling with the Lord, how is it possible for you to be annihilated seeing how you have put on immortality? Even if immortality could be forfeited we must still consider the fact that the book of Revelation speaks of a time when there will be NO MORE DEATH. If death is abolished then how could a resurrected and immortal saint possibly die? Due to what the scriptures have to say regarding immortality and death it seems clear to me that a rejection of the belief in "eternal Hell and suffering" does not logically require a rejection of the belief in "eternal Heaven and bliss". There is one more thing that I need to say. If there is someone out there reading this letter who might be inclined to say, "who are you to put God on trial and have His JUSTNESS measured by the measuring stick of human reasoning?" I must say in return that it was never my intention to do that. I apologize if it might seem like that at first. There is a world of difference between putting God on trial and asking some logic based questions against an INTERPRETATION of what God is like that is based upon the scriptures but not necessarily true to the scriptures. My intention is to do the latter. I do believe that that a good logic based question deserves both a good logic based and also a good scripture based answer. Let the scriptures be true even if my reasoning isn't. Thank you dear GODesteem for reading my letter and for any reply you might have. Have a good day.

Sincerly,
Yankee (a man who certainly still has much to learn)

archive
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 516

Posted 6/27/2001 8:02 AM (GMT -6)

yankee551

06/22/01 4:25 AM

RE: RE: RE: Sins that are INFINITE in their EVILNESS???

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Wislawa,

Thank you for your response. I think that you are probably more knowledgable of the scriptures then you give yourself credit for. I admit that I have put some study into these issues; however, I am certainly not a scholar. Thank you for the scriptures you refered me to. You brought up some very good thoughts. GODesteem did too but his letter was much shorter. One of the things that I like about this bulletin board web service is that the folks who write in seem to be the kind of people who think things through and not the kind who are just satisfied with a simple faith in God without really knowing why they believe what they believe. Your point about the spiritual and physical aspects of sin is good. Reading between the lines to me means to look for what the scriptures "imply" without clearly saying it in an up front manner. Implied beliefs certainly do carry more weight than beliefs that have no basis at all in the scriptures. Building beliefs that have no basis at all either implied or directly stated in the scriptures is like building a house on a foundation of thin air. Sand does make a better foundation than thin air does. You also made a good point about God's sovereignity over punishment. I hope to hear more from both you an GODesteem for I enjoyed your letters. I also look forward to whatever letters I might receive from others who have not written yet. Thanks and have a good day.

Sincerly,
Yankee

archive
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 516

Posted 6/27/2001 8:03 AM (GMT -6)

yankee551

06/22/01 4:31 AM

RE: oh yeah

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Glamdring,
Thanks for the words of encouragement. By the way, I am a man. Have a good day.

Sincerly,
Yankee

archive
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 516

Posted 6/27/2001 8:05 AM (GMT -6)

GODesteem

06/24/01 9:38 AM

Sins that are INFINITE in their EVILNESS???

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greetings in the name of our precious Lord Jesus! Let me first say I greatly appreciated the tone of your post, Yankee. It is good to stay focussed on the Word of God, rather than base a foundation on speculations and emotional preconceptions. God's Word has authority, and we must submit to it, even when it is beyond our finite minds and hearts to apprehend the truths contained in it.

Secondly, I actually will have to concede that I have read about the idea of the "infiniteness" of sin - it just has been so long ago, that it escaped me! Jonathan Edwards, after a long deliberation over the Scriptures, discussed the "justness" of God pouring out His wrath for all eternity over sinners who have commited a finite number of sins. As Edwards put it:

"The crime of one being despising and casting contempt on another, is proportionably more or less henious, as he was under greater or less obligations to obey him. And therefore if there be any being that we are under infinite obligation to love, and honor, and obey, the contrary towards him must be infinitely faulty. Our obligation to love, honor and obey any being is in proportion to his loveliness, honorableness, and authority... But God is a being infinitely lovely, because he hath infinite excellency and beauty...
So sin against God, being a violation of infinite obligations, must be a crime infinitely henious, and so deserving infinite punishment... The eternity of the punishment of ungodly men renders it infinite... and therefore renders it no more than proportionable to the heniousness of what they are guilty of.
(The Justice of God in the Damnation of Sinners)

Now, of course, such words must submit to the truth of God's Word, and only carry authority as much as they agree with the truth.

"They will suffer the punishment of ETERNAL DESTRUCTION and exclusion from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His might, when He comes on that day to be glorified in His saints, and to be marveled at in all who have believed" (2 Thess. 1:9).

The word translated "destruction" is olethros, and it means "ruin" (cf. 1 Tim. 6:9, 1 Cor. 5:5). The word translated "eternal" is aionios, and in the 71 places it is used in the Bible, it is always used to describe something eternal (cf. Matt. 18:8, Mark 3:29, Hebrews 6:2, Jude 1:7). But let me go to the most basic proof of the eternality of "Hell", better known as the lake of fire (see Revelation 20).

Jesus shares a prophecy in Matthew 25, in which he is describing His own coming to judge the nations; speaking of Himself, He states:

"Then He will say to those at His left hand, 'Depart from Me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels... And they will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life" (Matt. 25:41, 46).

Here the eternal fire is explicitly "punishment." And its opposite is eternal life! Again, I will say this: if you reject the eternality of the punishment of the wicked, you by neccesity must also reject the eternality of the ever-increasing joy on God's beloved! This may be "simplistic", but honestly I prefer a straight answer from Jesus than emotional speculations. Forgive me for that! :c)

I will leave the Scriptural evidence at that, although there is much more describing the nature of the punishment of the wicked, which I can share in due time if needed. Let me conclude with a response to an interesting point you made.

Yankee wrote:

"The QUANTITY of our sins makes a much better argument for the DEGREES of suffering than the GRAVITY of our sins that is if there is such a thing as a sin that is infinite in it's evilness."

My response:
While I would disagree with you that quantity is more important than gravity (how would that work in our own justice system???), I would like to point out that in "hell" (the lake of fire) the sins of the unrepentant will go on for ever and ever! The wicked do not cease to sin in hell, nor do they suddenly become righteous and obey God. In a similar way described in Romans 1:24-32 (God "gave them over" to various sinful desires), the wicked are given over to the corruption of their nature so that they continue rebelling and deserving eternal punishment eternally.

Benjamin "praising Jesus for delivering me from God's wrath" Musclow

archive
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 516

Posted 6/27/2001 8:09 AM (GMT -6)

Wislawa

06/24/01 2:17 PM

RE: Sins that are INFINITE in their EVILNESS???

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben said:
This may be "simplistic", but honestly I prefer a straight answer from Jesus than emotional speculations. Forgive me for that! :c)

Wislawa:
I wasn’t calling your first post on this thread “simplistic” because it was based on the Bible. It was “simplistic” because it was not very complete. You quoted one verse as if that settled the matter. In this last posted you flushed it out a bit more with some other passages and fixed that. But it is still only half of what the Bible has to say about hell. Like I said before I love this topic because when the whole Bible is taken into account both sides look about even to me. A little bird told me that Doc is working on some sort of hybrid view that takes the strongest from both views. I’m skeptical if this can be done with out appealing to a highly speculative context for reading these verses in ways that don’t cancel each other out but we’ll see.

If you’re interested in a very impressive very scholarly defence of annihilationism check out Fudge’s “The Fire That Consumes.” That book ripped some new pathways in my brain about hell. For a while (about two weeks) I was a full-fledged annihilationist, now I’m in between. What I liked about that book was that the scholarship had such integrity. Even if you disagree with Fudge you have to be impressed with how much he cherishes the Bible. His own desire is for this debate to be decided on the Bible alone.

Ben said:
I would like to point out that in "hell" (the lake of fire) the sins of the unrepentant will go on for ever and ever! The wicked do not cease to sin in hell, nor do they suddenly become righteous and obey God. In a similar way described in Romans 1:24-32 (God "gave them over" to various sinful desires), the wicked are given over to the corruption of their nature so that they continue rebelling and deserving eternal punishment eternally.

Wislawa:
Good point. I can’t remember ever hearing this argument before. It gave me pause.

Ben also said:
The word translated "destruction" is olethros, and it means "ruin" (cf. 1 Tim. 6:9, 1 Cor. 5:5). The word translated "eternal" is aionios, and in the 71 places it is used in the Bible, it is always used to describe something eternal (cf. Matt. 18:8, Mark 3:29, Hebrews 6:2, Jude 1:7). But let me go to the most basic proof of the eternality of "Hell", better known as the lake of fire (see Revelation 20).

Wislawa:
It is true that this word is “always used to describe something eternal.” But the question is in what way is it eternal? Something can be eternal in duration OR it can be eternal in consequence. In this way a materialist can rightly say that death is eternal because it will be eternal in consequence if materialism is correct.
Interpreting aionios as eternal in duration every time it is used in the Bible causes some theological problems, EVEN WHEN HELL IS CONTRASTED DIRECTLY WITH HEAVEN. For example the Bible says that the righteous will undergo “eternal redemption” (Heb. 5:9, 9:12). This does not mean that they will be in the process of redemption for all eternity, rather their redemption is eternal in the sense that once it is done it will be forever. When we go through judgement (Heb. 6:2) it will be eternal because it will be final. In the same way the wicked will undergo “eternal punishment” (Mt. 25:46) and “eternal destruction” (2 Thess. 1:9) it does not mean that they will be in an eternal process of punishment or destruction rather it will be eternal in its consequence. At least this is how an annihilationist would read it.

Ben said:
Jesus shares a prophecy in Matthew 25, in which he is describing His own coming to judge the nations; speaking of Himself, He states: "Then He will say to those at His left hand, 'Depart from Me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels... And they will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life" (Matt. 25:41, 46). Here the eternal fire is explicitly "punishment." And its opposite is eternal life! Again, I will say this: if you reject the eternality of the punishment of the wicked, you by neccesity must also reject the eternality of the ever-increasing joy on God's beloved!

Wislawa:
Again I will say not necessarily. This verse is one of the most difficult for Annihilationists to deal with but three points can be made.

1. It should be noted that there are many other places in the Bible that contrast the righteous and the wicked that support the Annihilationist position (Prov. 12:7, Phil 1:28, 2 Cor. 2:15-16, Rom. 6:23, Ps. 1:6, 37:9-10). Mathew 25:41 is an odd exception to a standard teaching not the standard itself.

2. It should also be noted that this is one of a series of interrelated parables that all touch on the same issue of how to live ones life (the ten bridesmaids Mt. 25:1-13, the talents Mt. 25:14-30 and the sheep and goats Mt. 25:31-46). A parable is like a joke--the only thing that matters is the punch line. Only the main point of a parable actually correlates to reality. If we were to take everything in a parable as being literal we would have to also believe that God is an unjust Judge (Lk. 18:1-8) or that he approves the actions of a dishonest manger (Lk. 16:1-14). The point of this parable about the goats and the sheep is that if you want to serve Jesus it means serving the least of these and that if you deny the least of these you are in reality denying Jesus. (A point Mother Teresa made the center of her ministry.)

3. This passage can be reconciled with the dominant teaching in scripture if we interpret hell as being eternal in consequence, but not in experiential duration.

Ben said:
Secondly, I actually will have to concede that I have read about the idea of the "infiniteness" of sin - it just has been so long ago, that it escaped me! Jonathan Edwards, after a long deliberation over the Scriptures, discussed the "justness" of God pouring out His wrath for all eternity over sinners who have commited a finite number of sins. As Edwards put it:
"The crime of one being despising and casting contempt on another, is proportionably more or less henious, as he was under greater or less obligations to obey him. And therefore if there be any being that we are under infinite obligation to love, and honor, and obey, the contrary towards him must be infinitely faulty.
Our obligation to love, honor and obey any being is in proportion to his loveliness, honorableness, and authority... But God is a being infinitely lovely, because he hath infinite excellency and beauty...
So sin against God, being a violation of infinite obligations, must be a crime infinitely henious, and so deserving infinite punishment... The eternity of the punishment of ungodly men renders it infinite... and therefore renders it no more than proportionable to the heniousness of what they are guilty of.
(The Justice of God in the Damnation of Sinners)
Now, of course, such words must submit to the truth of God's Word, and only carry authority as much as they agree with the truth.

Wislawa:
Now one can dispute that if God in fact does punish the wicked with eternal conscious torture in hell She will still be just for doing so. I agree with Edwards that we deserve infinite punishment but the question is weather or not God is BOUND to punish us? Is She sovereign or not? Plus as you said Edwards words must submit to the truth of God’s Word. So do they? From an annihilationist perspective two Biblical points can be raised against Edwards words regardless of what might be raised in their support.

1. First of all, is this really how God’s wrath pans out in the Bible? The Old Testament scholar Abraham J. Heschel put out a two-volume study on the prophets which included a study on God’s wrath. Here is his conclusion: “Far from being an expression of ‘petulant vindictiveness,’ the message of anger includes a call to return and to be saved…There is no divine anger for anger’s sake. Its meaning is…instrumental: to bring about repentance; its purpose and consummation is its own disappearance.” (Heschel The Prophets v. 2 New York: Harper & Row, 1962, page 66.) So the question is how can God’s wrath as displayed in hell ‘consummate in its own disappearance’ if not through annihilation? What redemptive purpose could unending torment have? According to the classical perspective the primary purpose for an eternal display of God’s wrath as seen in hell is the just punishment for sin. BUT IN THE BIBLE the primary purpose of God’s wrath is redemption, punishment for sin is secondary. Sin is not simply a matter of breaking a set of rules that necessarily require the prescribed punishment; rather sin is at heart the breaking of a relationship. Many stories illustrate how God’s wrath is used as an instrument to restore his loving covenant relationships (see for example Ex 32, Duet 30, Judges 10:6-16, Hos 11). But most orthodox Christians throughout history have maintained that once someone is judged and sent to hell there is no longer any hope for a restoration of that relationship (Prov. 24:20). What then would be the purpose of an eternal display of God’s wrath without the possibility that they could return or be saved? Annihilationists are willing to affirm that God’s wrath will be used to fulfill the secondary purpose of punishment for sin for a time but with the impossibility of ever fulfilling the primary goal of redemption the wicked must eventually be annihilated.

2. Secondly, when God does display wrath in the Bible Her mercy always outstrips Her wrath given a long enough time. God is portrayed as one who is “slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love, and relents from punishing” (Joel 2:13, Jonah 4:2). Annihilation is most consistent with this portrait. Furthermore, God oftentimes relents during a display of his wrath (Ex. 34:1-28, 1 Chr. 21:19, Joel 2:12-14, Jonah 4:2). David was banking on God’s mercy in the midst of judgement when given the choice between being punished by God or by humans he asked, “let us fall into the hand of the Lord, for his mercy is great, but let me not fall into human hands” (2 Sam. 24:14). Apparently it paid off because God eventually relented (v. 16). God’s mercy outstripped his wrath in this case. Given all eternity to act would not his mercy eventually outstrip his wrath in regards to the suffering of the wicked?
In addition to all this I find Five more Biblical or theological problems with believing in a never ending hell.

First, there exists a logical contradiction in this view. Traditionalists want to affirm that the damned must continue to consciously exist in order to experience separation from God (2 Thess. 1:8-9). But Christians have always held that nothing can exist apart from God. How then could a person exist apart from God? Since under the Classical view of hell God must hold the damned together in existence throughout all eternity, God and the damned would be connected to one another in at least this one, albeit very limited, way. This, however, is not complete separation. From the Annihilatonist perspective the complete and utter separation from God described in 2 Thess 1:8-9 entails that the damned cease to exist as a result of this separation.

Second, and I find this argument particularly convincing, in the Bible humans DO NOT HAVE PRE-EXISTING IMMORTALITY. According to the popular and unbiblical understanding of Christian teaching human beings are by nature immortal. Therefore when it comes to the doctrine of salvation immortality is not what is at stake (it is supposed we are that already), rather the issue is whether or not these immortal souls will spend eternity in heaven or in hell. According to the classical view both heaven and hell must be eternal because people themselves are eternal. This understanding of human nature, however, comes more from the persuasive influence of Hellenistic philosophy than it does from what the Bible actually has to say on the matter. Indeed the Bible portrays immortality very differently but these verses are often overlooked because of the presuppositions held by western readers. According to the Bible God alone is immortal (1 Tim. 6:16). Based on this passage human beings do not begin with immortality simply by virtue of being human, this is reserved only for God. Immortality is a gift God gives to mortals (John 3:15-16; 10:28; 17:2; Rom. 2:7; 6:23; 1 Cor. 15:42, 50; Gal. 6:8; 1 John 5:11, see also Heb. 9:27). Likewise immortality is something that we put on, “When this perishable body puts on imperishability, and this mortal body puts on immortality…” (1 Cor. 15:54). Why would someone need to put on immortality if they were already immortal? Clearly these passages contradict the classical assumption that hell must be eternal in order to accommodate for the eternal nature of humanity.

Third, in the classical model God’s victory is not very victorious. One of my favorite childhood authors George MacDonald saw this clearly. “Is He not defeated every time that one of these lost souls defies Him? God is triumphantly defeated, I say, throughout the hell of his vengeance.” (MacDonald Creation in Christ Wheaton: Harold Shaw Publishers, 1976, page 72.) MacDonald ended up a universalist because of this, and other problems with the traditional view of hell. I don’t think there were very many annihilationists if any at all at that time. I wonder if MacDonald had been exposed to the view he might have found it more appealing than universalism??? At any rate his comment has Biblical support. There exists in scripture a number of verses that refute the traditional understanding of hell on the basis that God’s eventual victory will be absolute. For example, if the wicked suffering in hell are never reconciled to God or restored to their intended glory then what does the Bible mean when it says that he will “reconcile to himself all things” (Col. 1:20), or that there will be a “time of universal restoration” (Acts 3:21)? If in the coming of Christ’s victory there will be no more tears, sorrow or death (Rev. 21:4), then what happened to all the “weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Matt. 8:12, 13:42, 22:13, 24:51, 25:30, Luke 13:28) or the “anguish and distress” (Rom. 2:8-9) that was supposed to be going on in hell for all eternity? It is difficult to reconcile the fact that every knee will one day bow to Christ (Rom. 14:10-11, Phil. 2:10-11) without concluding that the defiant in hell will be annihilated. Therefore in order for God to be victorious over all (Eph. 1:10, 21-22, 1 Cor. 15:28) these defiant souls must cease to exist. This is precisely what the Annihilatonist suggests happens. (Universalism also solves this problem by claiming that all will be saved but it creates a bunch of other problems too.)

Fourth, it is hard to reconcile the portrait of a God who would send people to eternal torment with the portrait of God in the Bible. Granted God’s wrath is furious beyond all Sunday school flannel board depictions, but as shown above even Her wrath is given out of love. How do we let ‘God as love’ (1 Jn 4:8, 16) inform our view of hell? I think ultimately it comes out best in the story of Gomer and Hosea. If we cannot imagine Hosea mercifully annihilating Gomer if she went to hell than I don’t think we should view God this way. But first just to flesh out the concept we should look at other verses that describe the defining characteristic of God. He loves all people (Acts 10:34, Deut. 10:17-19, 2 Chr. 19:7, Job 34:19, Isa. 55:4-5, Ezek. 18:25, Mark 12:14, Jn 3:16, Rom. 2:10-11, Eph. 6:9, 1 Pet. 1:17). He does not want anyone to go to hell (Ezek. 18:23,32; 33:11; Jn 1:7; 1 Tim. 4:10; 2 Pet. 3:9). Hell is, among other things, the ultimate heartbreaking experience for God. God loves everybody so much that he was willing to die on a cross to save them (Jn 3:17, 4:42, 1 Jn. 2:2, 4:14). If he was willing to go that far why would we not assume he would also be willing to do the loving thing and annihilate those who have chosen not to return that love? We must pay careful attention to how God portrays his powerful unending and often unrequited love for people in scripture. One of the most poignant examples is the book of Hosea in which God commands Hosea to take Gomer, an unfaithful whore, as his bride. The book demonstrates the lengths that God was willing to go and the agony that he felt when Israel was unfaithful to his love. If Hosea knew that Gomer was suffering eternal conscience torment and that it was within his power to relive her suffering by annihilating her would he not do so? If he was unwilling to do so would we not count that as a weakness in his love for her? If we cannot imagine Hosea withholding the loving act of annihilation from Gomer then we must hold that God would likewise act mercifully.

Finally, along with all the verses that support eternal suffering the Bible also gives us a ton of verses that support annihilation. Indeed scripture is jam packed full with verses that describe the final fate of the wicked as annihilation. For the sake of space on what is getting to be a post that rivals one of Mephi’s, they have been grouped according to the imagery used to communicate this annihilation.

1. Consumed. Unlike the burning bush which burned “yet it was not consumed” (Ex. 3:2) the wicked will be placed in “a fire that will consume you”(Isa. 33:11), their fire “shall not be quenched” (Isa. 66:24). In passages like these the scriptures make clear that nothing will withstand or outlive the fire, the fire is what last forever but the wicked are utterly consumed (2 Kings 22:17, Jer. 7:20, Ezek. 20:47-48, Isa. 1:28, 30-31, Nahum 1:10, Mal 4:1).

2. Destroyed. We are told not to “fear
those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell” (Mat 10:28). Apparently souls are not indestructible and hell is the place where they are destroyed. Rather than viewing the experience of judgement as unending the Bible specifically says that the wicked have an end and that end is destruction. (Phil 1:28, 3:18-19, 2 Pet. 2:3, 3:7, 1 Cor 3:17, 1 Tim. 6:9, Jas 4:12, Mat 10:28, Ps. 37:38, Isa. 1:28).

3. Forgotten. The wicked “will be no more” (Ps. 37:10) and “the very memory of them has perished” (Ps. 9:6). God will “cut off the remembrance of them” (Ps. 34:16). He “will leave them neither root nor branch” (Mal 4:1). All of these metaphors require the annihilation of the wicked in order to make sense. The wicked will be so completely destroyed that they “will be no more” (Prov. 10:25, 12:7) and it “shall be as though they had never been” (Obed 16). How could they be no more, or as if they had never been if they still are?
4. Perish, blotted out, dashed, and cut down. The wicked “deserve to die” (Rom. 1:32) and that is exactly what the Bible says they will do (Prov. 8:36, Prov 24:20, 2 Cor 2:15-16, Rom 6:23, Jas. 1:15, Ps. 1:6, 34:21, 37:20, Jn. 3:16). Indeed the Bible specifically states that they will suffer a “second death” (Rev. 21:8). They will be “blotted out” (Duet. 29:20, Ps. 69:28), broken, dashed in pieces and torn apart (Ps. 2:9, Dan. 2:35 Ps 50:22), they will be cut down and wither (Isa 1:28, 5:23, 33:11, Ps. 37:2, 58:7-8, Mal. 4:1, Mat. 3:10, 7:19, 13:40, Jn. 15:6, Heb. 6:8). Rather than eternal conscious suffering the Bible depicts the final fate of the wicked as one of annihilation.

So like I said before I’m still in-between right now but I think annihilation fits the bill for Biblical support. Both views seem to have holes in them. What’d’ya’ll think? I’m itchin’ to post another poll but maybe I should resist the temptation.

Wislawa

archive
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 516

Posted 6/27/2001 8:10 AM (GMT -6)

yankee551

06/25/01 7:40 AM

RE: RE: Sins that are INFINITE in their EVILNESS???

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Wislawa,

It's good to hear from you again. Thank you for your letter. I thought I would recommend a web site to you that you might find interesting. It is www.tentmaker.org.. It is a site that offers scriptural proof for the belief in salvific universalism. I am not a believer in salvific universalism but I will tell you that if anyone honestly thinks that the universalists are ignorant of the scriptures and cannot support their belief with scriptures then they would do well to check out this site. Gary Amirault does an astonishing job of presenting a powerful defense for his view and he does it by focusing attention on the Greek and Hebrew from which our English Bibles are translated and also on the English as well. I do have a question for you. I noticed that you referred to God in the feminine gender. What is your basis for doing so? I will also tell you that I also have a copy of The Fire That Consumes written by Edward Fudge. I would also like to recommend Adventures In Conditional Immortality by Sydney Hatch. Mr. Hatch's book is a good book that is written more for the average layperson so it is easier to follow. Both are good books. Have a good day.

Sincerly,
Yankee

archive
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 516

Posted 6/27/2001 8:10 AM (GMT -6)

Dear GodEsteem,

Good to hear from you. Thanks for the reply. It is a good letter full of scripture. I would like to say that it was never my intention to convey the idea that the quantity of our sins is of greater importance than the gravity of our sins. A thousand thefts will never be more heinous than just one murder. It's just that from my perspective the gravity of our sins makes a much more logical (though not necessarily more scriptural) basis for the duration of the suffering. I will also tell you that aion and aionios which is translated as eternal is also translated as the various forms of the word "ever" (example "forever"). "Olam" and "ad" are some Hebrew word(Old Testament) from which the various forms of the word "ever" is translated. It is clear to me that when the translaters translated our bibles into English that they made the mistake of sometimes choosing the wrong word as a translation for the Greek and Hebrew words from which we get eternal and forever. Have you ever met a man who is thousands of years old and who is still alive and who wears an earring in his ear as a testimonial to the fact that he loves his master and will serve him FOREVER (Exodus 21:6 KJV.)? Obviously his master must still be alive also but then again I just believe that his FOREVER (unto the age) ended with the end of his life. The bible also speaks of the cities of Sodom and `Gomorrha as suffering the vengence of "eternal fire". Are these cities still burning today? Is the everlasting ordinance of sprinkling blood at the passover still for today? Exodus 40:15 speaks of the Aaronic priesthood as "everlasting" (olam) and yet it then specifies the duration as throughout their generations. Where is the Aaronic priesthood today? These are just some examples. For further study on "Everlasting things that don't or did'nt last forever I recommend Edward Fudges' book "The Fire That Consumes". I've got to go now. I look forward to hearing from you again. Good point about sinners still sinning in hell.

Sincerly,
YANKEE

archive
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 516

Posted 6/27/2001 8:11 AM (GMT -6)

Wislawa

06/25/01 12:39 PM

RE: RE: RE: Sins that are INFINITE in their EVILNESS???

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Checked out the site. I found a few things that I found interesting. I know that there are a lot of smart people who are universalists just like there are a lot of smart people who are a lot of things. What ever you believe you can be sure someone a lot smarter with you disagrees. I still think universalism creates a lot more Biblical problems than it solves. Fudge has a really good section on universalism in his book. I find myself in agreement with him in that part. Then again if by some chance universalism turns out to be true I will welcome that truth gladly--especially if I’m among the damned!!! I can’t imagine anyone hoping it’s not true—I just don’t see it taught in the Bible unless you isolate a few verses.

Yankee said:
I do have a question for you. I noticed that you referred to God in the feminine gender. What is your basis for doing so?

Wislawa:
I knew it wouldn’t take long for someone to notice. Referring to God in the feminine sticks out to people when they read. Check out Modes in the “Does God Need Healing” thread and everything that comes after it for the reason why I’ve started doing this on this site.

archive
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 516

Posted 6/27/2001 8:12 AM (GMT -6)

glamdring777

06/25/01 6:54 PM

RE: Sins that are INFINITE in their EVILNESS???

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Guys,
Sorry about the ambiguous post before. Actually the 'you go girl' was directed at Wislawa. I was just giving him a hard time cause he referred to himself with a feminine pronoun on an earlier poll. What prompted my affectionate ribbing was the statement that he could argue different postitions on hell with equal skill. I admire that.

I am glad y'all are keeping this thread going. It's very interesting and well written. Thanks to the Yank for getting it going.

Wislawa, you wondered how long it would take us to notice you referred to God in the feminine? Immediately comes to mind. Can't wait to see what else y'all got.

glam

archive
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 516

Posted 6/27/2001 8:13 AM (GMT -6)

GregBoyd

06/25/01 10:37 PM

A little essay on Annihilationism

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi folks:

Nice thread. I am not an annihilationist, but I find aspects of the view compelling, for many of the same reasons Wislawa does. I want to here offer up an essay I wrote from the perspective of an annihilationist as part of a forthcoming book called Evangelical Options. In this book Paul Eddy and I defend all the major options available to evangelicals. Its to be used as a text book for evangelical students to help them think through the issues.

Since we have both annihilationist sympathizers and critics on this thread, I thought this might be a good opportunity to get feedback on the essay. It's about 2000 words long (roughly 4 pages, as are all the essays in this book).
-----------------------------------------------------------------
While the Hellenistic philosophical tradition generally viewed the human soul as inherently immortal, Scripture sees immortality as something that belongs to God alone (I Tim. 6:16). God graciously offers immortality as a gift to people who align themselves with his will (e.g. John 3:15–16; 10:28; 17:2; Rom. 2:7; 6:23; 1 Cor. 15:42f; 50, 54; Gal. 6:8; 1 John 5:11). Those who choose to reject God’s will are denied this gift, following the pattern of Adam and Eve when God denied them access to "the tree of life" (Gen 3:22-24).
Unfortunately, early Church fathers accepted the Hellenistic view and consequently read into Scripture the view that the wicked suffer unending torment. If we read Scripture without this Hellenistic assumption, we see that it teaches that God justly, and mercifully, annihilates the wicked. He does subject them to eternal torment.
Scripture certainly teaches that the wicked are punished eternally, but not that the wicked endure eternal punishment. The wicked suffer "eternal punishment"(Mt 25:46), "eternal judgment" (Heb 6:2) and "eternal destruction" (2 Thess 1:9) the same way the elect experience "eternal redemption" (Heb 5:9, 9:12). The elect do not undergo an eternal process of redemption. Their redemption is "eternal" in the sense that once the elect are redeemed, it is forever. So too, the damned do not undergo an eternal process of punishment or destruction. But once they are punished and destroyed, it is forever. Hell is eternal in consequence, not duration.
Along the same lines, Scripture’s references to an "unquenchable fire" and "undying worm" refer to the finality of judgment, not its duration (Isa. 66:24, cf. 2 Kings 22:17; 1:31; 51:8; Jer. 4:4; 7:20; 21:12; Ezek. 20:47–48). If these passages are read in context, it becomes clear that the fire is unquenchable in the sense that it cannot be put it out before it consumes those thrown into it. And the worm is undying in the sense that there is no hope for the condemned that it will be prevented from devouring their corpse. These passages teach that the wicked will justly suffer for their sins, but the end result will be their destruction (cf. Lk. 16:19–31; Rom. 2:8; 2 Thess. 1:6).
Annihilationism and the Old Testament. The traditional view that the wicked suffer eternally makes little use of the Old Testament. They justify this on the grounds that Old Testament authors weren’t concerned with the afterlife. We believe this is mistaken. The Old Testament has a good deal to say about the ultimate destiny of those who resist God.
Peter specifically cites the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah as a pattern of how God judges the wicked. The Lord turned the inhabitants of these cities "to ashes" and "condemned them to extinc-tion" thus making "them an example of what is coming to the ungodly…" (2 Pet. 2:6). Conversely, the Lord’s rescue of Lot sets a pattern for how the Lord will "rescue the godly from trial" (2 Pet. 2:9). We thus have a precedent set in the New Testament for learning about the fate of the wicked in the Old Testament. And what we learn is that they are "condemned… to extinction."
Throughout the Old Testament the Lord threatens the wicked with annihilation. To all who refuse to comply with the covenant God had established, for example, the Lord vows to "blot out their names from under heaven" (Deut. 29:20). Indeed, he vows to destroy them and the land "like the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah…which the Lord destroyed in his fierce anger…’" (Deut. 29:23). So too, through the prophet Isaiah the Lord warns that
…rebels and sinners shall be destroyed together,
and those who forsake the Lord shall be consumed.
…you shall be like an oak whose leaf withers,
and like a garden without water.
The strong shall become like tinder,
and their work like a spark;
they and their work shall burn together,
with no one to quench them. (Isa. 1:28, 30–31)
Again,
…as the tongue of fire devours the stubble,
and as dry grass sinks down in the flame,
so their root will become rotten,
and their blossom go up like dust,
for they have rejected the instruction of the Lord of hosts… (Isa. 5:24)
The theme that the Lord will annihilate the wicked is especially prominent in the Psalms. The Psalmist says that whereas those who take delight in the Lord shall be "like trees planted by streams of water" (1:3), the wicked shall be "like chaff that the wind drives away… the wicked will perish" (Ps. 1:4, 6). They shall be dashed "in pieces like a potter’s vessel" (2:9), torn into frag-ments (Ps. 50:22) and "blotted out of the book of the living…" (Ps. 69:28, cf. Deut. 29:20). Each metaphor depicts total annihilation.
Similarly, the Lord’s plan for "evildoers" is to "cut off the remembrance of them from the earth…evil brings death to the wicked" (Ps. 34:16, 21). The wicked shall be so thoroughly destroyed that they shall not even be remembered (Ps. 9:6; 34:16). In the powerful words of a later author, the wicked "shall be as though they had never been" (Obed. 16).
With the same force, the Psalmist proclaimed that the wicked "will soon fade like the grass, and wither like the green herb" (Ps. 37:2). They "shall be cut off…and…will be no more; though you look diligently for their place, they will not be there" (Ps. 37:9–10). While the righteous "abide forever" (37:27), "the wicked perish…like smoke they vanish away" (Ps. 37:20); they "vanish like water that runs away; like grass [they shall] be trodden down and wither"; "like the snail that dissolves into slime; like the untimely birth that never sees the sun" (Ps. 58:7–8). And again, "…transgressors shall be altogether destroyed" (Ps. 37:38, cf. vs. 34). In short, the fate of the wicked is disintegration into nothing.
The Psalmist’s emphasis on the total destruction of the wicked has parallels throughout the Old Testament. Daniel, for example, speaks of all who shall be crushed by the rock of God’s judgment as being "broken." They become "like the chaff of the summer threshing floor" blown away by the wind "so that not a trace of them [can] be found" (Dan. 2:35). Nahum says that in the judg-ment the wicked "are consumed like dry straw" (Nahum 1:10). Malachi tells us that the judgment day shall come "burning like an oven" and "all the arro-gant and all evildoers will be stubble." The judgment thus "shall burn them up" (Mal. 4:1). Proverbs tells us that all who hate the Lord "love death" (Prov. 8:36) and that when "the tempest" of God’s judgment passes, "the wicked are no more…" (10:25). Again, when God’s fury rises, "[t]he wicked are overthrown and are no more…" (12:7). And finally, "[t]he evil have no future; the lamp of the wicked will go out" (24:20). It is impossible to accept that the wicked have "no future" if in fact they shall never cease to experience an eternal future in hell.
Annihilationism in the New Testament. The teaching that the wicked will be completely destroyed is even stronger in the New Testament. As in the Old Testament, they are frequently depicted as being destroyed by fire. For example, John the Baptist proclaimed that "every tree…that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown in the fire" (Matt. 3:10). He announced that the Messiah "will clear his threshing floor and will gather his wheat into the grainary; but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire" (Matt. 3:12). Jesus himself describes hell as a consuming fire several times (Matt. 7:19; 13:40; John 15:6).
The New Testament has many other ways of describing the fate of the wicked. All directly or indirectly speak of total annihilation. The wicked are sometimes depicted as being "consumed" by fire (Heb 6:8, 10:7; Jude 7, cf. Isa 33:11). It is frequently said of the wicked that they will be "destroyed." Jesus contrasts the wide gate that "leads to destruction" with the narrow gate that "leads to life" (Matt. 7:13). Destruction clearly contrasts with life in this passage, and this at least implies cessation of consciousness such as when a person is dead. Along similar lines, Jesus tells his disciples not to fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; rather "fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell" (Matt. 10:28). The implication is that God will do to the soul of the wicked what humans do to the body when they kill it. And this implies that the soul of the wicked will not go on existing in a conscious state after it has been destroyed.
James teaches that God alone is able to both "save and destroy" (Jam. 4:12). Peter teaches that "destruction" awaits false, greedy teachers (2 Pet. 2:3). And Paul teaches that the quest for riches can plunge people into "ruin and destruction" (1 Tim. 6:9). Moreover, all who are "enemies of the cross" have "destruction" as their final end (Phil. 3:18–19, cf. 1:28). So too, if anyone "destroys the temple of God, God will destroy that person" (1 Cor. 3:17). With the same force the apostle teaches that "udden destruction" will come upon the wicked in the last days (1 Thess. 5:3). This day is elsewhere described as a day for "the destruction of the godless" (2 Pet. 3:7). These passages clearly contradict the traditional view that damned souls are in fact never destroyed but rather endure endless torment.
The New Testament also frequently expresses the destiny of the wicked by depicting them as dying or perishing (apollymi). John proclaims the good news that God sent Jesus so that "everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life" (John 3:16). Paul utilizes this same contrast when he states that while those who proclaim the gospel are a "fragrance from life to life" to those "who are being saved," it is "a fragrance from death to death" to those "who are perishing" (2 Cor. 2:15–16). So too, Paul teaches that "the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life" (Rom. 6:23, cf. 21, 1:32). This is consistent with Jesus teaching when he says that try to find life apart from God end up losing it (Matt. 10:39).
Along the same lines, James writes that "sin, when it is fully grown, gives birth to death" (Ja 1:15) and so the person who "brings back a sinner from wandering will save the sin-ner’s soul from death…" (James 5:19). So too, Christ is said to have come to "abolish death and [bring] life and immortality to light through the gospel" (1 Tim. 1:10). Indeed, he came to "destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil" (Heb. 2:14). Life and immortality are connected with following God, death with following Satan. The contrast in these passages between "death," losing life, and "perishing," on the one hand, with "life," on the other, is incompatible with the con-trast of eternal bliss with eternal pain which the traditional teaching on hell presupposes. "Death," losing life, and "perishing" are not easily read as signifying another kind of life, viz. a life of eternal conscious pain.
When all the biblical evidence is assessed apart from the Hellenistic philosophical assumption that the soul is innately immortal, it becomes clear that the fate of the wicked is eventualy annihilation, not unending torment.
Supporting Arguments
1. UnEnding Suffering is Inconsistent with Love of God. The central revelation of God in the New Testament is that God is love (I Jn 4:8, 16). His anger endures for a moment, but his mercy endures forever (Ps 103:8-14). How is this consistent with the view that God’s wrath burns eternally toward the wicked? Does this seem like the sort of thing the "Abba" Father of Jesus would do? Would we call a human being good or merciful – or anything other than cruel -- who retaliated on his foes with this sort of unmitigated, insatiable vengeance?
From the annihilationist perspective, God’s justice and mercy unite in condemning the wicked to extinction. He justly punishes their sin and forbids them a place within the Kingdom. And he mercifully annihilates them precisely so they will not endlessly endure what the traditional view says they endure.
2. Unending Torment is Inconsistent With God’s Victory. The teaching that people and fallen angels will be tormented throughout eternity contradicts the Bible’s teaching that God is altogether victorious at the end of history. How can we affirm that Christ shall be over all (Eph. 1:10, 21–22) and that God shall be "all in all" (1 Cor. 15:28) when a dimension of reality shall perpetually oppose God? How can we accept the Scriptural affir-mation that all creatures in heaven and earth shall bow before the throne (Phil. 2:10–11, cf. Rom. 14:10–11) and that all things will be reconciled to God (Col. 1:20, cf. Acts 3:21) if in fact many creatures shall forever exist in hostile rebellion to God? How can we affirm the final and ultimate victory of God’s joy and peace and accept that there shall be no more tears, sorrow or death (Rev. 21:4) if throughout eternity there shall be "weeping and gnashing of teeth" as multitudes suffer an endless second death? If the traditional view of hell is correct, God remains nonvictorious. Instead of a glorious universal Kingdom unblemished by any stain, an ugly dualism reigns throughout eternity.
Responding to Objections
1. Tormented Day and Night. The most difficult passages for annihilationists to explain are Revelations 14:10-11 and 20:10 which speak of the wicked being tormented "day and night forever and ever," These passages are not as decisive against the annihilationist’s view as they might initially seem. The phrase "forever and ever" can be translated "for ages upon ages" which implies an indefinite, but not necessarily unending, period of time. Even more fundamentally, it’s important to keep in mind that Revelation is a highly symbolic book. Its apocalyptic images should be interpreted literally. This is particularly true of the phrase "for ever and ever" since phrases similar to this are used elsewhere in Scripture in contexts where they clearly cannot literally mean "unending" (e.g. Gen 49:26; Ex 40:15; Nu 25:13; Ps 24:7).
Perhaps the most significant example of this for our purposes is Isaiah 34:9-10, for it closely parallels the two passages in Revelation. In this passage Isaiah says that the fire that shall consume Edom shall burn "[n]ight and day" and "shall not be quenched." Its smoke "shall go up forever" and no one shall pass through this land again "forever and ever." Obviously, this is symbolic, for the fire and smoke of Edom’s judgment isn’t still ascending today. If this is true of Isaiah, we should be less inclined to interpret similar expressions in the book of Revelation literally.
2. The Fear of Hell. It has sometimes been argued that if annihilationism is true, the fear of hell is undermined. Two things may be said in response to this.
a) Most annihilationists do not deny that the wicked will suffer, perhaps for long periods of time, prior to being annihilation. God’s justice shall be severe and ought to be dreaded.
b) It is questionable that the traditional teaching on hell generally installs fear in the hearts of unbelievers. It rather seems that this teaching often has the opposite effect. The notion of unending punishment is so out of sync with people’s ordinary sense of justice that it is easily rejected as preposterous. There is certainly a need to warn unbelievers of the impending judgment of God. The warning that the annihilationist gives is both biblical and believable.
What do you think?
Doc

Ps. Make sure you thank Adiaphora and Dave on the New Board thread for their work (it was ALOT) getting a new board to post on.

archive
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 516

Posted 6/27/2001 8:14 AM (GMT -6)

Wislawa

06/26/01 3:51 AM

RE: A little essay on Annihilationism

------------------------------------------------------------------------
All Right! Let me play the conservative now. In addition to all the supporting verses for unending torment, I have some problems with a lot of the verses annihilationists use to support their views.

A majority of verses annihilationists use come from the Psalms and Proverbs. When we really do exegesis on these verses, however, within the context of wisdom and poetic literature, can we say that the really mean what an annihilationist wants to say they mean? The spirit of Proverbs in general is tempered, or outright contradicted, by Job and Ecclesiastes. Isn’t Proverbs more general truthlets garnered by experience about the hear and now that we shouldn’t hang to much weight on, rather than infallible revelation received from the Other about how the afterlife really is? The wisdom in Proverbs origionates with humans, how much can humans really now about the afterlife if its not revealed? Isn't it more likely that they are talking about Earthly punsihment in terms of retribution (which by the way is a sham). And how much can we trust Psalms when it comes to the afterlife. After all the afterlife is a great place to speculate poetically (as shown beyond just in Ps).

It just seems to me that annihilationists are treating verses that support their view from these books differently then they might treat other verses from these same books.

archive
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 516

Posted 6/27/2001 8:15 AM (GMT -6)

GregBoyd

06/26/01 4:40 PM

RE: RE: A little essay on Annihilationism

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair enough Wislawa. But, in fairnes to the annihilationists, a) they are trying to show a pattern of how God treats the wicked more than they are trying to hang a doctrine on a few dozen verses, and b) they claim that the burden of proof is on traditionalists to show that all these verses do not have eschatological implications. Traditionalist argue that the authors are speaking phenomenologically: to earthly observers the wicked perish like smoke in the wind, like a dream when one awakes, etc... But why assume this? That is there point.

At the same time, I agree that their case is weakest in dealing with the crucial texts that support the traditional view (e.g. Mt 25/ Rev. 14 and 20).

Doc

yankee551
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 22

Posted 7/3/2001 8:35 AM (GMT -6)

Dear Godesteem and Wislawa,

Sorry that I have not written in a while. I just got back from taking a vacation in Florida with my beautiful Filapina wife and two kids. I think that the point that Godesteem made that sticks in my mind the most is that the unrightious dead will continue to commit an infinite number of sins throughout all eternity while being punished in the lake of fire throughout all of eternity for their sins that they commit while in the lake of fire. This is a good point and I will have to put it to the scripture test to see how well it stands. Personally I believe that God will eventually put an end to all sin. A question that does have to be asked is, "According to the scriptures will sin be totally abolished everywhere (including the lake of fire) or will it only be abolished from amongst the redeemed?". It would seem to me that if it can be proven from the scriptures that all sin everywhere will eventually be abolished than GodEsteems' belief in sinners committing an infinite number of sins cannot be used to make sense out of the doctrine of eternal punish(ing) and the question of the gravity of sin remains crucial to making a logic based argument for eternal punish(ing). If the scriptures do not prove the eventual abolishment of all sins everywhere than GodEsteem does indeed have a good logic based argument for his belief in eternal punishment. If the scriptures prove that sin will continue throughout eternity then GodEsteem has both a good logic and scripture based argument for his belief in eternal punishment. Please understand that when I use the word "eternal" in this letter that I am intending for it to refer to an infinite duration of time as we commonly assume it does today. I will have to look to the scriptures for the answers to these questions. I feel that the time has come for me to allow GodEsteem, Wislawa, anyone else, and the scriptures to have the last word on this. I hope to hear from both Wislawa and GodEsteem again on this. Also, thank you Mr. Boyd for your response as well. This is my final letter on this thread.

Sincerly,

Yankee

Forum Information

Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 4:48 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads

Need Support? | Forum Help Manual