What are you thoughts on Annihilation?

[Magenta]

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 after. So too, the damned do not undergo an eternal process of punishment or destruction. But once they are punished and destroyed, it is forever after. Hell is eternal in consequence, not duration. The wicked are “destroyed forever” (Ps 92:7), but they are not forever being destroyed.

The Old Testament actually 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 extinction” 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.”

Note also the metaphors in Isaiah 1:38, 1:30-31, and 5:24 carefully. They denote total annihilation.

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 fragments (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, emphasis added).

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 nothingness.

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 judgment 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 arrogant and all evildoers will be stubble.” The judgment thus “shall burn them up” (Mal. 4:1). source

Please note that the burning consumes them, unlike the burning bush which was not consumed by flames.

I mention that because people like to bring it up as if that is what the Lake of Fire is like...

 

[Diakonos]

Let's agree to disagree on the rest

You may choose to agree, refute, or concede my argument.

Do we agree that all people physically die whether they are in Christ out not in Christ?

1. No. I addressed that in post# 833.
2. It's irrelevant to Romans 5 because it is a historical account of Biblical events. Our current experience has no influence on the meaning of Scripture.

1 Corinthians 15:21-22
21For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. 22For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

Yep. Physical resurrection. The whole theme of 1 Cor 15 is bodily ressurection, glorified in the likeness of His ressurection.

Why is this not physical death? Because even Christians die physically.

Already explained this:
He has authority over life AND death.
Enoch and Elijah are examples of people who God can allow to bypass death even though they have sinned (Gen 5:24, 2 King 2:11), though they both sinned (Rome 3:23).

God can alter/bypass the natural process of death. He has the authority to take his own life, apart from the wages of sin.

““No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down,
and I have authority to take it up again. This commandment I received from My Father.”” (John 10:18)​

Do you see here that Adam's physical death is not what caused everyone else to die, but rather his spiritual death through sin?

Need I say more? Romans 5 is all about spiritual death and spiritual life.

You're just repeating things you said before, rather than addressing my responses to these things you already said.

Christ did not die spiritually.

Good! We have found common ground. Let's expand that. Please explain to me the meaning of verse 14:

“Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the
likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.” (Romans 5:14)
​

Using your paradigm, what does it mean that "death reigned from Adam until Moses. And what does it mean that Adam is a figure of Jesus?

 

[ewq1938]

"You got wrecked buddy" sounds hateful and unbecoming of a self-proclaimed Christian, especially on a public forum, where your shame is openly-aired for all to witness.

It's also immature language not to mention it's FAR from the truth. This whole Catholic/Jesuit heresy of eternal torture has been proven false over and over. There were 6 main schools of Christian doctrine in the early church and only one taught eternal torture and that was from Rome (no surprise there). And one taught Annihilation and that was Ephesus. I oppose teachings from Rome which ultimately is a symbol of the Antichrist.

In the first five centuries there were six known theological schools. Four of them taught that all men would eventually be rescued from Hell: these being the theological schools at Alexandria, Antioch, Caesarea and Edessa/Nisbis. One school, Ephesus, taught Annihilationism (that sinners are totally incinerated into nothingness in Hell). Only one theological school, Rome/Carthage taught eternal punishment. (The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, Universalism entry, p. 96, Baker Book House.)

 

[cv5]

"You got wrecked buddy" sounds hateful and unbecoming of a self-proclaimed Christian, especially on a public forum, where your shame is openly-aired for all to witness.

Did you know non-Christians watch us for the slightest detection of hypocrisy or unChrist-like behavior? You're giving them more fuel.

You can be better than that, cv5, despite our numerous disagreements. There's no need to get hostile. Let me pray for you. 🙏🏻

Lol.......I spoke unvarnished brutal truth. Just like John the Baptist. Just like Jesus.
If you actually believe Jesus was running around attempting NOT to offend people I think you better check again. Jesus was causing outrage among the religious authorities on practically a daily basis. He was freaking out the people too quite regularly.

Furthermore Jesus never put up with religious heresy. He confronted it denounced it and destroyed it.

 

[ewq1938]

​

Using your paradigm, what does it mean that "death reigned from Adam until Moses. And what does it mean that Adam is a figure of Jesus?

Moses is figure of Christ not Adam. Adam is symbol of Satan, the one who fell, rebelled against God, and died spiritually and brought death to all mankind who are not saved by Christ.

 

[ewq1938]

Lol.......I spoke unvarnished brutal truth. Just like John the Baptist. Just like Jesus.

You are nothing like them and you spoke varnished, untrue, unchristian things. You are like Rome, persecuting Christians for their biblical beliefs.

 

[Laura798]

All ANY of us are doing is repeating the same ole same ole,nothing is changing!
QUANITY IS NOT BETTER THAN QUALITY!
My post stand as is and I speak from my heart what has been taught by the Holy Spirit.
I'm non denominal and I don't dabble in all these heretical cults that knock on my door and want to share!

'Quantity is not better than quality' is true in some cases, but not all.

(also I don't see how the few verses used to support ETC could be considered quality--since they are all figurative.)

For example if a parent can see there child only two times a year and that time is spent in quality time--e.g. the child has the parent's attention and is receiving affection, vs getting to be with the parent every single day of the year--would you still say quality is better than quantity?

If you were an attorney in a murder case and had one piece of solid evidence, but the prosecutor had twenty more that were not as solid, but could still prove the person committed the crime, would you still say quality over quantity?

 

[Diakonos]

There's no need to get hostile.

If you actually believe Jesus was running around attempting NOT to offend people I think you better check again. Jesus was causing outrage among the religious authorities on practically a daily basis.

“Then some Pharisees and scribes came to Jesus from Jerusalem and said, “Why do Your disciples break the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread”...“And He answered and said to them, “Why do you yourselves transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?”...
Then the disciples came and said to Him, “Do You know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this statement?"
(Matthew 15:1–2, 3, 12)

It is not people we are hostile toward, it is ideas.

Your interpretation is that it says "eternal torment" but the actual verses say no such thing

“And the devil who deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the
false prophet are also; and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.” (Revelation 20:10)​

Just look at how the phrase is used throughout the Bible and don't resist the plain truth of God's divine decree:



The reason it's eternal torment is that it's an eternal sin to blaspheme the Holy Spirit, which all demons do.
God's love, mercy, authority, and justice are eternal.

 

[Magenta]

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). When God’s fury rises, “the wicked are overthrown and are no more…” (12:7,). And finally, “the evil have no future; the lamp of the wicked will go out” (24:20). It seems impossible to accept that the wicked have “no future” if in fact they shall never cease to experience an eternal future in the LoF. It is also impossible to accept that the wicked will “be no more” and even be “as though they never were” if they shall be existing in eternal torment.

The repeated teaching of the Old Testament that while God’s anger endures for a moment, his love endures forever (Ps. 30:5; e.g. 2 Chr. 5:13; 7:3, 6; 20:21; Ps. 100:5; 103:9; 106:1; 107:1; Ps 118;1-4, 29; 136:10-26). How is this consistent with the traditional teaching that God’s love and anger are equally eternal?

The New Testament also frequently expresses the destiny of the wicked by depicting them as dying or perishing, as being destroyed by fire, and other ways of describing the fate of the wicked which directly or indirectly speak of a cessation of being. 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).

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). 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 “sudden 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). He also says, "Remember this: Whoever turns a sinner from the error of their way will save them from death and cover over a multitude of sins." These passages contradict the traditional view that unsaved souls do not die, are never destroyed but rather endure endless torment.

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 “the fragrance of life” to “those who are being saved,” they are “the smell of 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.” This is consistent with Jesus’ teaching that those who try to find life apart from God end up losing it (Matt. 10:39). Paul also says that Christ came to “abolish death and [bring] life and immortality to light through the gospel” (1 Tim. 1:10).

When all the biblical evidence is assessed apart from the Hellenistic philosophical assumption that the soul is innately immortal (despite the clear teaching of Scripture to the contrary), it becomes clear that the fate of the wicked is eventual annihilation, not unending torment. source

 

[Gardenias]

Not sure i'm understanding you, but yes we all are free to disagree if we don't agree with the position someone holds, however I don't think it should be use as a 'weapon' either. For example, I just checked and you gave me a thumbs down, which wasn't stating any position, but rather referring to something factual, not an opinion I was posting--that I see as you seeking retribution and being angry for my previous comment directed at you and not really disagreeing on the point I was making.

"So that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes."--Ephesians 4:14

There are like,dislike agree,disagree,indifferent,angry, sad friendly ( love & kindness or feeling for you) as well as some others.

If I dislike something said it has some negative connotation, but I don't have to clarify,.
Disagree is stronger and states I think the idea is wrong.Again I do not have to rebut nor address the point!
Friendly doesn't mean I love you but I hear and feel for you.
You have already misunderstood this once with rayzor ( banned) who is unsaved!
Since our truce has been annulled still I will not respond to you except to clarify my feelings about the emojis I use.

Thanks

 

[Gardenias]

They get around that by pretending we are not believers. Such as being called minions of the devil.

Of course we know they do that because the verses they bring to the table cannot compare in strength or number to those that oppose their view, so they resort to low level insults, hoping that will silence what they do not want to hear in the first place.

I would never presume to know someone's spiritual status.
However I can READ your thinking by the posts.
Final judgment is God's for he alone see the heart!

 

[Gardenias]

All sourceses outside of the bible are Man's opinions and I don't see them as reputable.
State what is biblical and the true interpretation by context and supporting scriptures.
Anyone can use goggle,bible hub,reknew or any other of too many to count sources!

 

[Laura798]

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). When God’s fury rises, “the wicked are overthrown and are no more…” (12:7,). And finally, “the evil have no future; the lamp of the wicked will go out” (24:20). It seems impossible to accept that the wicked have “no future” if in fact they shall never cease to experience an eternal future in the LoF. It is also impossible to accept that the wicked will “be no more” and even be “as though they never were” if they shall be existing in eternal torment.

The repeated teaching of the Old Testament that while God’s anger endures for a moment, his love endures forever (Ps. 30:5; e.g. 2 Chr. 5:13; 7:3, 6; 20:21; Ps. 100:5; 103:9; 106:1; 107:1; Ps 118;1-4, 29; 136:10-26). How is this consistent with the traditional teaching that God’s love and anger are equally eternal?

The New Testament also frequently expresses the destiny of the wicked by depicting them as dying or perishing, as being destroyed by fire, and other ways of describing the fate of the wicked which directly or indirectly speak of a cessation of being. 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).

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). 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 “sudden 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). He also says, "Remember this: Whoever turns a sinner from the error of their way will save them from death and cover over a multitude of sins." These passages contradict the traditional view that unsaved souls do not die, are never destroyed but rather endure endless torment.

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 “the fragrance of life” to “those who are being saved,” they are “the smell of 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.” This is consistent with Jesus’ teaching that those who try to find life apart from God end up losing it (Matt. 10:39). Paul also says that Christ came to “abolish death and [bring] life and immortality to light through the gospel” (1 Tim. 1:10).

When all the biblical evidence is assessed apart from the Hellenistic philosophical assumption that the soul is innately immortal (despite the clear teaching of Scripture to the contrary), it becomes clear that the fate of the wicked is eventual annihilation, not unending torment. source

Well said, Magenta. You and others have had many such posts. This one post disproves ETC. This verse came to mind as I read it under the chapter title 'Spiritual Blindness'

"Some of the Pharisees who were with Him heard this, and they asked Him, “Are we blind too?” 41“If you were blind,” Jesus replied, “you would not be guilty of sin. But since you claim you can see, your guilt remains.”--John 9:40-41

 

[Diakonos]

Moses is figure of Christ not Adam. Adam is symbol of Satan, the one who fell, rebelled against God, and died spiritually and brought death to all mankind who are not saved by Christ.

Jesus and Adam are compared about 8 times in the Bible. However, Satan and Adam are never even mentioned in the same verse.

Adam prefigures Christ in the sense that what he did had universal consequences for other people. Adam in his effectiveness for ruin and Christ in his effectiveness for salvation. Both are a corporate head of a race of people, archetypes of humanity, each drawing after him all mankind. Adam prefigures Christ as the head of humanity. Adam and Christ each began an epoch characterized by their respective actions. They are the respective heads of two ages. They were in similar circumstances with similar temptations, though responding differently, and their acts brought consequences of similar scope. Both Adam and Christ imparted to those who were their own that which belonged to them. The whole point of the chapter is to show how Jesus reversed the consequences of Adam's transgression.

So since you don't think Adam is a foreshadowing of Jesus, then who is the "him who is to come" in verse 14?

 

[Magenta]

I would never presume to know someone's spiritual status.
However I can READ your thinking by the posts.
Final judgment is God's for he alone see the heart!

I certainly do not believe you when you make statements such as the following:

You have a cold cold heart of uncompassion!
Of course I would pray for that one and I will be praying that the Lord change YOUR heart of stone to one of flesh.
Only BC I don't want you to burn eternally,everlasting,forever and ever in conscious torment.

You beat me to it.
Who's your familiar?

Your words betray your malignant intentions and implications, and as you said: God sees the heart.

We are not blind either.

 

[Gardenias]

I certainly do not believe you when you make statements such as the following:





Your words betray your malignant intention, and as you said: God sees the heart.

That's your choice!
I derived this from her analogies that were not in standard with God's view of forgiveness and attacking me for feeling Rayzor and his admitting his soul's state.
BTW you agreed with there is no accounting with someone's taste or something or other equally ridiculous.
Do you own homework by study,not backing up others YOU agree with or sources that sooth your inability to communicate.

 

[Gardenias]

It has been equally tit for tat....
Don't play the victim all your life.
😢😢😢😢😢

 

[Runningman]

Lol.......I spoke unvarnished brutal truth. Just like John the Baptist. Just like Jesus.
If you actually believe Jesus was running around attempting NOT to offend people I think you better check again. Jesus was causing outrage among the religious authorities on practically a daily basis. He was freaking out the people too quite regularly.

Furthermore Jesus never put up with religious heresy. He confronted it denounced it and destroyed it.

"You just got wrecked buddy." isn't what Jesus or John the Baptist would say. That's somethng someone who lacks fruits of the Holy Spirit would say.

Love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, faith, meekness, and temperance. (Galatians 5:22-23)

Now your homework assignment is to identify which ones of those you didn't display.

 

[cv5]

"You just got wrecked buddy." isn't what Jesus or John the Baptist would say. That's somethng someone who lacks fruits of the Holy Spirit would say.

Love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, faith, meekness, and temperance. (Galatians 5:22-23)

Now your homework assignment is to identify which ones of those you didn't display.

Let me be more precise. Your HERESY has been (cough cough) "annihilated". Pardon the pun.....

That was obviously what I meant. The statement I made was not a personal one....it was IDEOLOGICAL. Your ARGUMENTS were sublimated to overwhelming biblical truth. YOU were not wrecked....your specious arguments were though. In bone-crushing devastating manner frankly.

 

[Magenta]

BTW you agreed with there is no accounting with someone's taste or something or other equally ridiculous.

What I said was, verbatim:


I have heard it said that there is no accounting for people's tastes...

Saying Jesus is the devil is ... quite wrong in many ways.

He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no
truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

Contrast with Jesus saying, "I am the way, the Truth, and the life."

There is no congruency nor harmonizing those two statements.

Not sure how you see that as ridiculous. Not seeking your capricious input either.