Annihilation: The Bible Says Yes!

Great Debates
1

First of all, this debate is about what the Bible says, NOT about whether what the Bible says is true or not. Believing that the Bible is true is a matter of faith, but what the Bible says can be objectively verified because it is a real, physical book, the contents of which even atheists can agree on.

Now, for the debate. I believe that the Bible supports the position that the unsaved are annihilated; that is, they simply die and are gone. There is no eternal torment in Hell or anything like that. What is the evidence of this? Well, for starters, let’s try that perennial Christian favorite, John 3:16:

This seems pretty obvious: those who believe have eternal life, those who don’t will perish. But, wait! There’s more!

Do you see a pattern here? Everyone who asked Jesus about salvation asked how to get eternal life, and Jesus did not disagree with this. This is also consistent with the main theme of Christian theology as well. Christians believe that because of original sin, mankind was condemned to die. Then Jesus died and was resurrected, thus defeating sin and death, which are really the same thing. That’s why the traditional Christian creed emphasizes the resurrection of the body. If the “soul” cannot die, what’s the point of being resurrected? I conclude with Revelations 20:14-15:

2

Yeah, but a lot of fundies just find it more effective to scare the shit out of other folks by saying that they will burn in a laken of molten sulfur for eternity simply because they didn’t convert to the fundies’ particular brand of Christianity.

3

OK. I’ll bite.

So what does “believ[ing] in him” entail? Is it belief in the mission and example of Jesus (love and compassion for our fellow man, judging not others, etc.) or does “believing in him” mean we have to believe the virgin birth story, that he was God in the flesh or the son of God, and that he “died for our sins” and was resurrected? I fail to see any indication in the verse cited that the latter is true.

Again, I fail to see the belief in virgin birth, the divinity of Yeshua ben Yosef, and the resurrection as requirements for eternal life. Please correct me if I’ve misunderstood your intent with the OP.

I’m having trouble following the logic in the last paragraph of the OP.

4

Yes, you did misunderstand. The debate is about whether the Bible says the unsaved go to Hell for eternity, or whether they just die and are gone. I assert the Bible says the latter. This debate is not about what you have to do to be saved. That’s a completely different debate.

5

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ricksummon *
**First of all, this debate is about what the Bible says, NOT about whether what the Bible says is true or not. Believing that the Bible is true is a matter of faith, but what the Bible says can be objectively verified because it is a real, physical book, the contents of which even atheists can agree on.

Now, for the debate.

It also says this:

Mat. 25:41 Jesus said, “…depart from me into everlasting fire”

     25:45  "...and these shall go away into everlasting  
                     punishment"

Rev. 14:11 "…and the smoke of their torment ascendeth up
forever and ever and
THEY HAVE NO REST DAY NOR NIGHT

the boards acting up so I’ll post now

6

You see, this is why I don’t quote fractional Bible verses.

Yes, and Revelation 20:10 makes it clear that the devil will be tormented forever and ever. It’s possible that the devil, as an angel, cannot die, so that’s why he gets eternal torment.

If you were to go only by that last passage, it would seem to contradict itself! I agree that the Bible is a bit inconsistent on this subject, but I think the majority of the passages support annihilation.

7

You see, this is why I don’t quote fractional Bible verses.

Yes, and Revelation 20:10 makes it clear that the devil will be tormented forever and ever. It’s possible that the devil, as an angel, cannot die, so that’s why he gets eternal torment.

If you were to go only by that last passage, it would seem to contradict itself! I agree that the Bible is a bit inconsistent on this subject, but I think more of the passages support annihilation than not.

8

Oh, and if you want an extremely detailed argument about annihilation that covers every related Bible passage, check out this link.

9

Interpret anyway you like. It’s not really a debate on our interpretation of what it says, is it?

Rev. 14:9 - 14:11
And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice. If any MAN worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand.

The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation: and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:

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.

also… Mat 25:41-45
When one group is told they will receive eternal life and the other is told they will receive eternal punishment.
Well, that seems pretty clear!

Yes, there is contradiction in the Bible, about pretty much everything. Not just Heaven and Hell.

You see, this is the problem w/ scripture, very few actually read the whole work. This is true in many cases where people start quoting whatever (science, law, politics, religion etc.) they find what they believe and then look for evidence to back that up.
“backwards science”

as far as fractional quotes…unless you want to start quoting entire chapters then we’re condemned to out of context quotes. There are several chapters referring to punishment and reward which include several verses. I just mentioned a few which show an obvious contradiction in beliefs.

So, in response to your original post…the Bible says both!

(remember it only takes one example to disprove an absolute)

10

What the Hell (pun intended), I might as well throw in http://www.what-the-hell-is-hell.com/.

11

I didn’t even check the link yet (I will) but there are many websites supporting both/or several sides of that coin. Believe what you will, but don’t try a literal translation of the Bible, cause it just don’t work.

There’s too many contradictions/translations and outdated beliefs that won’t wash. Just enjoy the reading and examples to live by. It’s pretty good history in some parts too.

Peace

12

FWIW the Worldwide Church of God, who publish the magazine “Plain Truth”, believe that the “non-saved” are annihilated.

13

—If you were to go only by that last passage, it would seem to contradict itself!—

Not really, since “eternal life” is used in a way that stakes it out as being another, higher, form of life, rather than the idea that unless you have eternal life, you will at some point not exist. The concept of “eternal death” wouldn’t make much sense if you read it as “eternally ceasing to exist.” Death is not necessarily a ceasing to exist.

14

Huh? What is it then?

15

—Huh? What is it then?—

You haven’t watched enough crappy horror movies…

16

Do you have a cite for this? Back before I drifted from my Christian upbringing, I read " The Plain Truth" every month (as well as the teen magazine published by WCoG), and from articles it I got the idea that we merely cease to exist after death if we are not “saved.” It’s been eight or ten years since I read them, but they’re the only religious publications I’ve ever read, so I’m 100% positive the articles were from those magazines. It strikes me odd that they’d have articles oposing the views proported by the religion.

17

Elfkin: Could you please explain the difference between being annhilated and ceasing to exist? I thought it was the same thing.

18

It’s a matter of tone. If one is annihilated, they are utterly destroyed by some force. If they simply cease to exist they aren’t necessarily being acted upon by some other violent force, they’re just not any longer. The connotations for being annihilated are much harsher. I suppose it’s a matter of interpreting how it comes about that they no longer exist. If one thinks that they cease to be because God is punishing them, then annihilate is probably appropriate. If one thinks, as I do, that they no longer exist as a result of their lack of faith alone(literally sustained by faith when judgment day comes), not by something else’s actions, then annihilate isn’t appropriate because annilhilation involves an outside force.

19

I think maybe you have a more aggressive perception of the word “annhilation” than what it actually means. It is derived from the Latin word “nihil” which means “nothing.” To be annhilated simply means to become nothing. To be nullified. It does not necessarily imply a destructive force. (although it doesn’t exclude one either)

20

an·ni·hi·late Pronunciation Key (-n-lt)

v. an·ni·hi·lat·ed, an·ni·hi·lat·ing, an·ni·hi·lates
v. tr.

To destroy completely: The naval force was annihilated during the attack.
To reduce to nonexistence.
To defeat decisively; vanquish.
To nullify or render void; abolish.
http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=annihilated
Seems to require a destuctive force to me <shrugs> I’ll concede a difference in preception, though.