Eternal torment VS Annihilation

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Aug 26, 2019
2
0
1
Not a good logical argument.

I have employed this argument as an annihilationist. I also ignored the fact that eternal life and eternal punishment are used in the same verse..therefore the duration of the life is the same as the duration of the punishment.

If you listen to some of the cultic videos on youtube, like those of the associated Church of Gods (United, Restored, Living, Philadelphia) and SDAs, who promote annihilationism, you will pick up all kinds of trashy theology.

My argument would be that they have an idol that cannot offend them because their theology caters to their idea of fairness at the human level. They fail to acknowledge the seriousness of rebelling against God, and the depth of their sinfulness. They really don't think that man deserves to suffer forever because they don't think God's holiness, and their sin against him, is really that serious.
Your point makes no sense here logically. So the contrast of life is death correct? Yet to you eternal life is opposite of eternal torment. The punishment of eternal death is eternal. They will be cut off from life and the kingdom forever. So your logic that duration isn’t the same is bad.
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
3,059
627
113
I’m sorry but you are very arrogant and ignorant. If anything traditionalist use creative interpretations to support eternal torment. There are only two scriptures in the entire bible that even could be used for eternal torment. Revelation 14:11 which […]
[…]
[…] Matthew 2:13 says Herod sought to destroy Jesus, did he simply want to ruin him? No in other translations he sought to kill him. Matthew 10:28 says not to fear him who can kill the body but not the soul, but to fear him who can destroy both body and soul in hell. The context is killing. […]
Welcome, ContextIsKing.

Did you happen to read the points I covered in Posts #22,24,25 [pg 2]; #114 [pg 6; List of usages of "the ages [plural] of the ages [plural]"]; #166 [pg 9]? I think I covered [what would relate to Matt10:28] in one or more of those Posts. :)

[perhaps Post #168 also, after viewing and grasping the point in Post #166, I think, if I recall...]
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
3,059
627
113
But, to be honest, if you only have a surface-level understanding of the Bible, and reason like a dispensationalist, annihilationism would be considered credible. Their biggest issue is the wooden literalism that they apply to words like death, destruction, and perishing. This wooden literalism is a trademark of dispensationalism.
Of course, most dispensationalists are not annihiliationists but that is because they don't reason consistently.
I disagree with you, here. (I'm not an annihilationist, just to be clear to the readers. :D )

I'm thinking of someone like Chuck Missler, who in his later years regressed (for lack of a better term, atm) [wading further and deeper into covenant theology] in his EFFORT to at least be "more consistent"... and came up with his embracing of the "millennial exclusion theory" [incorrect doctrine, to be clear] (that any member of "the Church which His body" may be excluded from the Millennia Kingdom age). The thing is, in his effort to become "more consistent" (at least he was being honest in that endeavor, and WAS being "more consistent" in interpretation), he instead went full-on into mis-application! :sick:



[I refer to his 2008 book, "The K, P, & G"... not sure if it was earlier than this that he started covering that aspect...]
 

UnitedWithChrist

Well-known member
Aug 12, 2019
1,623
825
113
I’m sorry but you are very arrogant and ignorant. If anything traditionalist use creative interpretations to support eternal torment. There are only two scriptures in the entire bible that even could be used for eternal torment. Revelation 14:11 which keeps getting spammed here out of context doesn’t even mention the lake of fire. In fact in verse 10 it speaks of those who receive the mark are to be tormented in the presence of the lamb and the holy angels. So Jesus and the angels are just watching this forever? Also if all are destined to be tormented forever than what would it matter if they worshiped the best or not? Also in the context it only says the smoke of their torment rises forever, not their actual torment. The Old Testament uses the same language but it doesn’t literally mean smoke goes up forever but symbolism for destruction. Isaiah 34:10 is a perfect example of that. So the majority here are making their arguments from the most symbolic book in the Bible and are taking it at face value wooden literally. I’m sorry but also the lost prior that tries to make destruction mean ruination is a farce. The poster took a bias source that believes in ECT and used a synonym for destruction totally ignoring all context. Matthew 2:13 says Herod sought to destroy Jesus, did he simply want to ruin him? No in other translations he sought to kill him. Matthew 10:28 says not to fear him who can kill the body but not the soul, but to fear him who can destroy both body and soul in hell. The context is killing. 2 Peter 2:6 and Jude 1:7 both show sodom and Gomorrah as an example of what will happen to the lost. It wasn’t eternal torment. Also even ones to hold literally to revelation 20:10 the beast isn’t a literal beast, also if the second death is eternal conscious torment then when death is no more wouldn’t Ect be undone? I’m just stating all of this to give y’all something to think about. The great scholar John Stott was a conditionalist and the great scholar Preston sprinkle who co authored erasing hell became a conditionalist after all of his research. So please y’all get off your high horses with the idea that this is heretical and fear mongering. It’s more scriptural than eternal conscious torment is by far. Eternal punishment doesn’t mean eternal torment, punishment can be anything including the death penalty. Unquenchable fire only means it can not be put out. Eternal fire many times only means it’s source is eternal not that the fire never ceases after destruction. Also last thing the scripture about their worm shall not die is Isaiah 66:24 and in the context is speaking only of dead bodies.

Sounds like you have been studying with cultists. Which ones? Church of God (Armstrongites), SDAs, JWs?

These are all the same arguments I used as a member of a cult that denied eternal punishment.

I read Erasing Hell when it was written. I think you give Sprinkle accolades that he does not deserve.

For instance, in a recent Counterpoints book, he claims that the traditional, annihilationist, universalist and purgatory view all have biblical warrant:

.

I wouldn’t refer to him as a “great scholar”. DA Carson, Wayne Grudem, RC Sproul and many others might fall under that category but he is hardly a recognized name.

Stott was well respected despite his oddball views in that area.
 

UnitedWithChrist

Well-known member
Aug 12, 2019
1,623
825
113
I disagree with you, here. (I'm not an annihilationist, just to be clear to the readers. :D )

I'm thinking of someone like Chuck Missler, who in his later years regressed (for lack of a better term, atm) [wading further and deeper into covenant theology] in his EFFORT to at least be "more consistent"... and came up with his embracing of the "millennial exclusion theory" [incorrect doctrine, to be clear] (that any member of "the Church which His body" may be excluded from the Millennia Kingdom age). The thing is, in his effort to become "more consistent" (at least he was being honest in that endeavor, and WAS being "more consistent" in interpretation), he instead went full-on into mis-application! :sick:



[I refer to his 2008 book, "The K, P, & G"... not sure if it was earlier than this that he started covering that aspect...]
I’m not sure what you’re referring to, but Missler wasn’t one of my favorites. I attended a Calvary Chapel for a while and it seems like Chuck Missler and Dave Hunt had their fanboys amongst the Calvary Chapel crowd. I wasn’t impressed by the few videos I’ve watched from either one.
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
3,059
627
113
I’m not sure what you’re referring to, but Missler wasn’t one of my favorites. I attended a Calvary Chapel for a while and it seems like Chuck Missler and Dave Hunt had their fanboys amongst the Calvary Chapel crowd. I wasn’t impressed by the few videos I’ve watched from either one.
Well, I've never agreed with his stance on the identity of the "sons of God" Gen6, and I'm pretty sure his view on that preceded his 2008 book espousing the Millennial Exclusion Theory [that any member of "the Church which is His body" may be excluded from the Millennial Kingdom]... so yeah. :D
 

UnitedWithChrist

Well-known member
Aug 12, 2019
1,623
825
113
I’m sorry but you are very arrogant and ignorant. If anything traditionalist use creative interpretations to support eternal torment. There are only two scriptures in the entire bible that even could be used for eternal torment. Revelation 14:11 which keeps getting spammed here out of context doesn’t even mention the lake of fire. In fact in verse 10 it speaks of those who receive the mark are to be tormented in the presence of the lamb and the holy angels. So Jesus and the angels are just watching this forever? Also if all are destined to be tormented forever than what would it matter if they worshiped the best or not? Also in the context it only says the smoke of their torment rises forever, not their actual torment. The Old Testament uses the same language but it doesn’t literally mean smoke goes up forever but symbolism for destruction. Isaiah 34:10 is a perfect example of that. So the majority here are making their arguments from the most symbolic book in the Bible and are taking it at face value wooden literally. I’m sorry but also the lost prior that tries to make destruction mean ruination is a farce. The poster took a bias source that believes in ECT and used a synonym for destruction totally ignoring all context. Matthew 2:13 says Herod sought to destroy Jesus, did he simply want to ruin him? No in other translations he sought to kill him. Matthew 10:28 says not to fear him who can kill the body but not the soul, but to fear him who can destroy both body and soul in hell. The context is killing. 2 Peter 2:6 and Jude 1:7 both show sodom and Gomorrah as an example of what will happen to the lost. It wasn’t eternal torment. Also even ones to hold literally to revelation 20:10 the beast isn’t a literal beast, also if the second death is eternal conscious torment then when death is no more wouldn’t Ect be undone? I’m just stating all of this to give y’all something to think about. The great scholar John Stott was a conditionalist and the great scholar Preston sprinkle who co authored erasing hell became a conditionalist after all of his research. So please y’all get off your high horses with the idea that this is heretical and fear mongering. It’s more scriptural than eternal conscious torment is by far. Eternal punishment doesn’t mean eternal torment, punishment can be anything including the death penalty. Unquenchable fire only means it can not be put out. Eternal fire many times only means it’s source is eternal not that the fire never ceases after destruction. Also last thing the scripture about their worm shall not die is Isaiah 66:24 and in the context is speaking only of dead bodies.
By the way, you are being dishonest as you have not addressed all the Scriptures that would need to be addressed. For instance, those who are lost are portrayed as being outside the city. This is not a state of nonexistence. Read Rev 21-22.

I think many would like to be consoled that their lost loved ones who rejected Christ will only suffer some minimal pain but I believe that’s simply wishful thinking. This fate of the wicked gives strong disincentive for rejecting Jesus.

I remember a young man whose parents believed in annihilationism telling me he wasn’t going to commit to Christ because it was too hard to resist Satan. He wanted to continue abusing drugs, alcohol, and engaging in sexual immorality. His logic was accompanied by the consolation of a possible post-mortem salvation opportunity and at worst, annihilationism. I think he will be sadly disappointed as I don’t think he ever committed to Christ and died as an alcoholic.
 

Ahwatukee

Senior Member
Mar 12, 2015
8,571
1,031
113
No, because I was part of a cultic group at that point in my life. They did not allow members to interact with non-members. Reading other materials was discouraged by the cultic group as well.

I was only 22 back then. I understood the church's teaching well, though. Annihilationists have to come up with "creative interpretations" for many Scriptures that betray their faulty position. But, to be honest, if you only have a surface-level understanding of the Bible, and reason like a dispensationalist, annihilationism would be considered credible. Their biggest issue is the wooden literalism that they apply to words like death, destruction, and perishing. This wooden literalism is a trademark of dispensationalism.

Of course, most dispensationalists are not annihiliationists but that is because they don't reason consistently.
Greetings United,

It is not because we don't "reason consistently" but because we know definition of the actual Greek words translated as death, destruction and perishing, which are olethros, apollumi and apoleia. For example:

"Enter through the narrow gate for wide is the gate and broad the way leading to destruction, and many are those entering through it."

Strong's Concordance
apóleia: destruction, loss
Original Word: ἀπώλεια, ας, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: apóleia
Phonetic Spelling: (ap-o'-li-a)
Definition: destruction, loss
Usage: destruction, ruin, loss, perishing; eternal ruin.

HELPS Word-studies
Cognate: 684
apṓleia (from 622 /apóllymi, "cut off") – destruction, causing someone (something) to be completely severed – cut off (entirely) from what could or should have been. (Note the force of the prefix, apo.) See 622 (apollymi).

684 /apṓleia ("perdition") does not imply "annihilation" (see the meaning of the root-verb, 622 /apóllymi, "cut off") but instead "loss of well-being" rather than being

Expositors take the translated words destruction and perish and apply the definition of annihilation to them, which is not what the original Greek says. Below the word apollumi is translated as "destroy"

"And you should not be afraid of those killing the body but not being able to kill the soul. Indeed rather you should fear the One being able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna.

Apollumi is also used in the following scripture:

"When He got into the boat, His disciples followed Him. Suddenly a violent storm came up on the sea, so that the boat was engulfed by the waves; but Jesus was sleeping. The disciples went and woke Him, saying, “Lord, save us! We are perishing!”

As you can see from the scripture above, the disciples were not saying to Jesus, Lord, save us! We are about to be annihilated or we about to become nonexistent. The same thing goes with the parable of the wineskins. When Jesus said, "no one pours new wine into old with skins, else the wineskins will burst and both the wine and the wineskins will be destroyed." He was not saying that the wineskins would be annihilated or become extinct. They still exist but in a ruined state. It is the same for those who end up in the lake of fire, they still exist, but in an eternally ruined state.

Therefore, the word apoleia/apollumi is referring to complete loss of eternal well being. Eternal ruination.

Based on all related scriptures, Death and life are both states of conscious, eternal existence, which is directly related to ones status with God.

Life = Eternal, conscious existence in the joy of the Lord in the kingdom of God

Death = Eternal, conscious existence in separation from God in the lake of fire
 

SoulWeaver

Senior Member
Oct 25, 2014
2,702
556
113
"Eternal results" - I encountered this years ago, but this isn't a good argument, so I reject it. The Scripture does say it goes on forever, which we then must believe. But this then seems to contradict with the other Scriptures, that suggests destruction. We cannot have discord. Then this picture occurred to me. I've believed this for a long time, I've just never exposed it on here, because people just read posts in a kneejerk fashion and think I'm attacking other Scriptures (which I don't, I really hate when the Scriptures are being pitted against one another. If you're agreeing with some Scriptures but contradicting others, then you don't have the answer). I've had this picture pop up before my eyes this morning, as the tree service was cutting a tree next to the house. So I thought, what if it was put into a fire?

"The tree that gives bad fruit" is cut and thrown into the fire.
But if is perpetually burnt without being consumed, would that not make the bad tree like a burning bush?
Only God and those with God on the inside are able burn without being consumed, because they are tried and came up gold and silver. They are filled with Holy Spirit, baptized by fire, burning, but not being consumed.
How can we believe that the chaff can withstand such flames as if it were made of asbestos? That is more like the chaff has the nerve to resist punishment and is flame retardant? Perish, chaff!

But if the new trees are thrown into the fire and you keep doing it, so the smoke keeps rising on and on, does this have to necessarily mean you are burning the same piece of wood continually? Actually, no.

It could be the process itself which is going on and on, but that first tree had long turned into smoke and perished - the thing is that the new ones are now added to the pile!...

Nowhere does the Scripture insist that the smoke will be sustained by the same persons burning. The Bible indeed states this CATEGORY of people will forever sustain the smoke of torment. Beyond doubt!
However, the Scriptures do NOT state that the same INDIVIDUAL PERSONS will be sustaining it for ever. It only specifies the category of people. (If you know Scriptures that suggest the opposite, and I missed them, I'd like to look at them, so let's keep in good spirit.)


And I know what some of you might be thinking now.
There is a Biblical notion suggesting that existence of our planet is finite, so some might say that God would "run out of wood" at a certain point, so how could that be eternal? But that is a very temporal understanding of "eternal". God is out of space and time. The reason He's eternal is because He's never changing. We are limiting God with our impaired concept of eternity, which is somehow also on a timer. A lot of Christians see eternity as if some end times timer expires at 12a.m., and then it's the "end of time" at midnight and eternity then "begins". But this is the same old linear time. Eternity doesn't "begin", eternity is what has always been there, what is, and always will be. Time is what begins and ends. I believe eternity is called what is never changing and always the same, yesterday, today, and tomorrow. The unchanging reality of Truth, which is God. "Sure, I come quickly". It's not only that days are shorter for God than for us (which is also true) so 2000 years is like 2 days. But consider, Jesus literally does come quickly. He comes quickly to our rescue, all the time!

It is God's eternal, timeless nature to always burn up the chaff: past, present, and future. So the punishment will be meted out eternally, yet also annihilating the enemies. If something is a part of God's nature, I would argue that it qualifies as eternal. God "cannot behold evil". Evil is simply destroyed in His presence.
Furthermore, Annihilation is commanded by God, "you shall utterly destroy them", which is God's will for all His enemies.
God always did, does, and will annihilate His enemies, and as a result,"the smoke of their torment shall rise for ever and ever".
Because God never changes (which if He changed would cause this smoke to stop rising, and they instead get rewarded or let loose).

It is hard for us to comprehend, but totally possible for the torment to go on forever and ever just like the Scriptures say (as dcontraversal posted in the beginning of this thread), and yet to annihilate also. These Scriptures that were posted, contrary to the OP, in the beginning of thread are why I find "eternal result" an inadequate argument. What makes more sense, at least to me, is "eternity of God results with eternity of His action, because God's unchangeable". It seems the same argument, but it is an entirely different argument. Jesus has always been the Lamb and Savior, eternally, predating His dwelling in the flesh among us. That who He is, and that's what He does. Some people might bring up the "end times" event calendar, but remember God didn't have hands tied by our linear timeframe to start redeeming and forgiving sins, and He sure isn't going to be limited by the timetable when it comes to the destruction of His enemies.

A lot of the confusion comes from us being stuck in the human timeframe and our limited understanding of "forever and ever" based on this timeframe. Christians are automatically imagining, in their heads, some infinitely long period of time, in which there will be burning "after" time "ends". But "an infinitely long period of time" is not what eternity, aka forever and ever, means. And if time "ends", "after" would also be completely nonexistent in that case. That would be my second argument.

Either way, it's important to emphasize that even if God decided to burn the same person for ever, I wouldn't find "fault" with God for that. He is God and we know Him and what kind of person He is. And we belong to Him. Which is the thing that really matters. So I'm not on a personal crusade with this post. I know some people teach annihilation as means to somehow "justify" God to themselves because of wavering faith and doubt in the lovingkindness of His person. If someone reading this thread feels this way, like they couldn't accept a God who acted in a certain way or stay Christian, I must warn you. Have unconditional faith in Jesus first. He deserves it. As Jesus is, so is the Father, so don't doubt His character. God trusted in you. My post does not stem from this kind of thing at all. I just love to see all Scriptures tied together. I know some people will disagree with my post, it is normal on this forum, let's just keep it lovingkind if possible.
 

UnitedWithChrist

Well-known member
Aug 12, 2019
1,623
825
113
I would also ask the annihilationists if they hold to open theism. Some annihilationists believe in an open theism God.

Clark Pinnock is an example of this.

I suspect that the reason behind this is that they want to deny God created the angels knowing that some are consigned to eternal torment. Since there is precedence that God created beings knowing that they would be eternally tormented, there’s no reason to think he would have issues with creating man with the same knowledge.

However if he is an open theist God with no foreknowledge, then he didn’t know the angels would rebel. He created mankind to be destroyed if he didn’t turn to Christ.

I haven’t taken the time to read Pinnock but I’m gurlessing that’s his reasoning. Maybe he thinks the angels were a botched experiment by a God who doesn’t know the future in detail. So mankind was plan B and was made material for the purposes of destruction if they didn’t turn to Christ.

This scenario doesn’t work, though, because mankind was made physical to represent God as his image-bearer in the physical realm. He was not made physical so that he could be destroyed if he went rogue.

By the way, annihilationists not only need to defend annihilationism but also soul-sleep. Because they don’t typically believe mankind has conscious existence outside of the body, often they reject the conscious intermediate state of believers in heaven.
 

SoulWeaver

Senior Member
Oct 25, 2014
2,702
556
113
I wouldn't call myself an "annihilationist". That might imply that I am trampling the Scriptures that talk about eternal punishment, which I don't. I do believe in annihilation as the Scriptures teach, and I also do believe punishment is going on eternally as the Scriptures teach both. I don't believe these two are in opposition, at all. The whole of the Scriptures must be true, and agree harmoniously.

I do not speculate about the things you mentioned like the fate of angels, for the reason that it seems presumptuous and arrogant for mankind to speculate about things like that, what God does with the angels is His prerogative. I'm concerned about myself and my fellow men. It's kind of futile to speculate what's going on with the angels, Jesus wants me to focus on the work before me.

I wrote about different reasons than what's found in the OP (and it stands with or without soul sleep). Regarding soul sleep, I believe only the body sleeps, and the soul goes to God. We only have definite Scriptural proof that bodies sleep, and some occurrences which seem contrary to soul sleep, so this highly likely means the souls do not sleep. But there is a lot of disagreement on the forum about this topic, or any topic for that matter, and everybody thinks they are right and everyone else is wrong... so it would be beneficial to skip that, I assume we agree on this anyway, and only focus on the question at hand now.

I gave my explanation in my previous post on the thread, I know it's a really long post, so if you have time, read it, and let me know what you think.
 

Deade

Called of God
Dec 17, 2017
11,169
5,828
113
73
That's what I meant. Jesus himself is a destroying lake of fire to evil,

his tongue is a consuming fire....the breath of the LORD, like a stream of burning sulfur, sets it ablaze. Isa.30:27,33

Except, in the passage you cited from Rev.20:10, the phrase "had already been thrown" isn't in the text.
Revelation 20:10 New International Version (NIV)
10 "And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever."

The "are" in the KJV and many others was added for clarity but read in doctrine. Here is the MKJV

MKJV Rev 20:10 "And the Devil who deceived them was cast into the Lake of Fire and Brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet were . And he will be tormented day and night forever and ever."
 
Aug 21, 2019
125
9
18
The smoke of their torment forever and ever is clear enough!!
Misquoted, it actually states:

Rev_14:11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.

Rev_19:3 And again they said, Alleluia. And her smoke rose up for ever and ever.

Distance, not time.
 
Aug 21, 2019
125
9
18
Suffering the vengence of eternal fire is clear enough
God is the eternal fire. They suffer His vengeance, for it is written:

Rom_12:19 Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.

Deu_4:24 For the LORD thy God is a consuming fire, even a jealous God.

God's eternal fire of love consumes sin, not preserves it. The wicked perish (John 3:16) in it.
 
Aug 21, 2019
125
9
18
The mists of darkness forever is clear enough
Darkness is to be without the light of life. Oblivion.

Pro_20:20 Whoso curseth his father or his mother, his lamp shall be put out in obscure darkness.

Oba_1:16 For as ye have drunk upon my holy mountain, so shall all the heathen drink continually, yea, they shall drink, and they shall swallow down, and they shall be as though they had not been.

Psa_143:3 For the enemy hath persecuted my soul; he hath smitten my life down to the ground; he hath made me to dwell in darkness, as those that have been long dead.

Job_17:13 If I wait, the grave is mine house: I have made my bed in the darkness.
 
Aug 21, 2019
125
9
18
Tormented day and night forever and ever is clear enough
Rev_20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

One part of scripture should not be used to try to contradict another:

'for ever and ever' is always subject to context.

Rev 20:11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.

Rev 20:14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

Rev 20:15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

torment is to come for them (Matthew 8:29), but it is to be unto death, not eternal preservation. Wages of sin is death (2nd).

The context refers to the devil:

Eze_28:19 All they that know thee among the people shall be astonished at thee: thou shalt be a terror, and never shalt thou be any more.

Mal 4:1 For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.

Mal 4:3 And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do this, saith the LORD of hosts.

Oba 1:16 For as ye have drunk upon my holy mountain, so shall all the heathen drink continually, yea, they shall drink, and they shall swallow down, and they shall be as though they had not been.

Zep_3:15 The LORD hath taken away thy judgments, he hath cast out thine enemy: the king of Israel, even the LORD, is in the midst of thee: thou shalt not see evil any more.

"day and night" is the time

"for ever and ever" means continually without reprieve, until consumed, destroyed, burnt up.

Isa_47:14 Behold, they shall be as stubble; the fire shall burn them; they shall not deliver themselves from the power of the flame: there shall not be a coal to warm at, nor fire to sit before it.

A fire so hot and all consuming, not one trace of sin or sinner will remain. For ever.
 
Aug 21, 2019
125
9
18
These shall go away into everlasting punishment is clear enough
Punishment, not punishing. The wages of sin is death (2nd). It will indeed be "everlasting" as there is no resurrection from it.

Job_31:3 Is not destruction to the wicked? and a strange punishment to the workers of iniquity?
 
Aug 21, 2019
125
9
18
I would also ask the annihilationists if they hold to open theism. Some annihilationists believe in an open theism God.

Clark Pinnock is an example of this.
No. Open Theism is gross heresy, and a denial of the all-knowing (omniscience) of God, from eternity past to eternity future. There are serious implications against God in such broken theology as that.

Clark Pinnock is a heretic, and I mean that in the most Biblical of definitions.
 

Roughsoul1991

Senior Member
Sep 17, 2016
3,042
590
113
I used to be on the Eternal Torment side, but then I decided to rethink my interpretations...
http://www.christianissues.biz/pdf-bin/blogarticles/conditionalimmortality.pdf
I would like to set this in the right perspective.

1st. What does it matter? Hell exists either way and Hell is no place any right thinking person should want to go even though everyone who ends up in Hell chose it.

2nd. Again either way God is just in his punishment. If God is all just and He is then so are His punishments. He is the absolute moral example. We get morality from observing who God is and we are created in His image giving us a sense of God through the moral code, moral law written within us.

Making God the only one to judge anything done outside the boundaries of morality. So when God judges, he is absolutely just, fair and could never be unjust due to He is also merciful as explained.

2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.

By the time God judges all of mankind, none will without excuse.

3rd. Just for the sake of debate. Good arguments have been made for both views.

One says this:

Matthew 25:46 New International Version (NIV)
46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”


While another says this:

Revelation 20:12-14 New International Version (NIV)
12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. 13 The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done. 14 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death.

A good strategy when reading scripture is the And Or method as in both scripture build on each other. In which could possibly mean the second death is soul death and this is a eternal punishment.

Either way this is one of those topics that will be forever debated and really makes no difference in the end.