Annihilation or Eternal Punishment?

Annihilationism is the view that lost people in hell will be exterminated after they have paid the penalty for their sins. Its proponents offer six main arguments.

First is an argument based on the Bible’s use of fire imagery to describe hell. We are told that fire consumes what is thrown into it, and so it will be for the lake of fire (Rev. 19:20; 20:10, 14, 15; 21:8)—it will burn up the wicked so that they no longer exist.

Second is an argument based on texts that speak of the lost perishing or being destroyed. Examples include unbelievers perishing (John 3:16) and suffering “the punishment of eternal destruction” (2 Thess. 1:8).

Third is an argument based on the meaning of the word eternal. In hell passages, it is claimed, eternal means only pertaining to “the age to come” and not “everlasting.”

Fourth is an argument based on a distinction between time and eternity. Annihilationists ask: how is it just of God to punish sinners for eternity when their crimes were committed in time?

Fifth is an emotional argument that God Himself and His saints would never enjoy heaven if they knew some human beings (let alone loved ones and friends) were perpetually in hell.

Sixth is an argument that an eternal hell would tarnish God’s victory over evil. Scripture declares that God will be victorious in the end; He will “be all in all” (1 Cor. 15:28). We are told that this idea seems hard to reconcile with human beings suffering endlessly in hell.

I will answer each of these arguments in turn. First is the argument from hellfire. Many passages use this language without interpreting it. It is possible, therefore, to read various views into such passages, including annihilationism. However, we do not want to read our ideas into the Bible, but to get our ideas from the Bible. And when we do, we find that some passages preclude an annihilationist understanding of hellfire. These include Jesus’s description of hell in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus as a “place of torment” (Luke 16:28) involving “anguish in this flame” (v. 24).

When the last book of the Bible describes the flames of hell, it does not speak of consumption but says the lost “will be tormented with fire and sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever, and they have no rest, day or night” (Rev. 14:10–11).

Second is the argument from passages that speak of destruction or perishing. Once again, when Scripture merely uses these words without interpreting them, many views may be read into them. But once again, we want to read out of Scripture its meaning. And some passages are impossible to reconcile with annihilationism. Paul describes the fate of the lost as suffering “the punishment of eternal destruction” (2 Thess. 1:8). Also telling is the fate of the Beast in Revelation. “Destruction” is prophesied for him in 17:8, 11. The Beast (along with the False Prophet) is cast into “the lake of fire that burns with sulfur” (19:20). Scripture is unambiguous when it describes the fate of the devil, Beast, and False Prophet in the lake of fire: “They will be tormented day and night forever and ever” (20:10). So, the Beast’s “destruction” is everlasting torment in the lake of fire.

Third is the argument from the word eternal. In hell passages, it is claimed, eternal means only pertaining to “the age to come” and not “everlasting.” It is true that in the New Testament, eternal means “agelong,” with the context defining the age. And in texts treating eternal destinies, eternal does refer to the age to come. But the age to come lasts as long as the life of the eternal God Himself. Because He is eternal—He “lives forever and ever” (Rev. 4:9, 10; 10:6; 15:7)—so is the age to come. Jesus plainly sets this forth in His message on the sheep and goats: “And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life” (Matt. 25:46; italics added). The punishment of the lost in hell is coextensive to the bliss of the righteous in heaven—both are everlasting.

Fourth is the argument that it is unjust of God to punish sinners eternally for temporal sins. It strikes me as presumptuous for human beings to tell God what is just and unjust. We would do better to determine from His Holy Word what He deems just and unjust.

Jesus leaves no doubt. He will say to the saved, “Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world” (Matt. 25:34). He will say to the lost, “Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels” (v. 41). We have already seen John define that fire as eternal conscious punishment in the lake of fire for the devil (Rev. 20:10). A few verses later, we read that unsaved human beings share the same fate (vv. 14–15). Evidently, God thinks it just to punish human beings who rebel against Him and His holiness with everlasting hell. Is it really our place to call this unjust?

I will treat the fifth and sixth arguments together. The fifth is the emotional argument that God and His saints would never enjoy heaven if they knew loved ones and friends were forever in hell. The sixth is the argument that an eternal hell would tarnish God’s victory over evil. It is noteworthy that universalists use these same two arguments to insist that God will finally save every human being. God and His people would not enjoy the bliss of heaven if even one soul remained in hell, they argue. In the end, everyone will be saved. And God would suffer defeat if any creatures made in His image were to perish forever.

I regard these arguments for annihilationism and universalism—from emotion and from God’s victory—as rewriting the biblical story, something we have no right to do. I say this because the Bible’s final three chapters present the eternal state of affairs. The resurrected saints will be blessed with God’s eternal presence on the new earth (Rev. 21:1–4). And, interestingly for our present discussion, each of Scripture’s final three chapters presents the fate of the unsaved:

And the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever. (20:10)

Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. And if anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown in to the lake of fire. (vv. 14–15)

But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death. (21:8)

Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they may have the right to the tree of life and that they may enter the city by the gates. Outside are the dogs and sorcerers and the sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices falsehood. (22:14–15)

The Bible’s story does not end by saying, “And the unrighteous were destroyed and exist no more.” Neither does it say, “And in the end all persons will be gathered into the love of God and be saved.” Rather, when God brings His story to a close, His people rejoice in endless bliss with Him on the new earth. But the wicked will endure never-ending torment in the lake of fire and be shut out of the Holy City, the New Jerusalem, which is the joyous dwelling place of God and His people forever.

We have no right to rewrite the biblical story. Rather, we must leave it to God to define what is just and unjust and what is commensurate with His being “all in all.” He does not leave us in doubt about hell because He loves sinners and wants them to believe the gospel in this life.

How kind and merciful of Him to include this invitation at the end of His story: “The Spirit and the Bride say, ‘Come.’ And let the one who hears say, ‘Come.’ And let the one who is thirsty come; let the one who desires take the water of life without price” (Rev. 22:17). All who trust Jesus in His death and resurrection to rescue them from hell will have a part in the Tree of Life and the Holy City of God. All who do so with all the saints can say now and will say forever:

Hallelujah! Salvation and glory and power belong to our God, for his judgments are true and just. (19:1–2)

A letter from an atheist

You are really convinced that you've got all the answers. You've tricked yourself into believing that you're 100% right. Well let me tell you just one thing. Do you consider yourself to be compassionate of other human beings? If you're right about GOD, as you say you are, and you believe that, then how can you sleep at night? When you speak with me, you are speaking with someone who you believe is walking directly into eternal damnation, into an endless onslaught of horrendous pain which your ‘loving’ GOD created, yet you stand by and do nothing.

If you believed one bit that thousands every day were falling into an eternal and unchangeable fate, you should be running the streets mad with rage at their blindness. That’s equivalent to standing on a street corner and watching every person that passes by you walk blindly into the path of a bus and die, yet you stand idly by and do nothing. You're just twiddling your thumbs, happy with the knowledge that one day that “Walk” signal will shine your way across the road.

Think about it. Imagine the horrors hell must have in store if the Bible is true. You're just going to allow that to happen and not care about saving anyone but yourself? If you're right, then you're an uncaring, unemotional, and purely selfish (expletive deleted) that has no right to talk about subjects as love and caring.

(A letter as reprinted by Ray Comfort in “The Evidence Bible, Pub. by Living Waters publications, 1-800- 437-1893, or on-line at http://www.livingwaters.com

The story of Lazarus and the Rich man is a parable. Matthew 13:34 tells us that when Jesus spoke to the masses he ONLY spoke in parables.

What Matthew 13:34 actually says is "All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them," "These things was while the Lord sitting by the sea side, where he spoke to "great multitudes" (Mt. 13:1,2) and then departs, while in other places as in Lk. 13 He teaches them both literal things as well as parables that use actual physical things which correspond to actual spiritual realities.

And here is where the parable polemic fails, for besides real names never being used in a parable, if Lk. 16:19-33 is a parable, then for the first and only time the Lord was using science fiction, for according to Annihilationism there is no suffering after the grave, thus unlike in other parables, the Lord would be using an fictional physical reality which corresponds to a spiritual reality.

In addition, the suffering that the rich man experiences is a poor illustration of what the parable polemic sets forth in its interpretation, that of the Pharisees being represented by the rich man and suffering exclusion, as in according to Annihilationism these will not be enduring long term suffering for relief immediate after death in a place of torment, but will be simply annihilated after the last judgment.

Moreover, even if Lk. 16:19ff is a parable, then the spiritual reality it represents can better correspond to the final judgment, with Abraham and the saints representing the jury,as the saints shall sit in judgment, and and the rich man representing the lost, such as who example their lack of Christian faith by not caring for the truly needy, and resulting in the everlasting torment which Scripture warns of.

"When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:" "And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:" (Matthew 25:31-32)

"Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:" (Matthew 25:41)

"And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal." (Matthew 25:46)

"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." (Revelation 20:10)

I can tell that you didn't even read the link I provided explaining the parable, but that's your right. You don't want to fully examine where you might be wrong and you just want to repost what you have been taught.

I have already dealt with Annihilationists. The Lord was not bluffing about eternal torment, " "into the fire that never shall be quenched: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched." (Mark 9:45-46)

You source, Smith, begins by discrediting himself by saying,

Next to the gross error in translating the Greek aion (a period of time with a beginning and an end) into an English eternity (no time at all, neither having a beginning nor an ending),

which is absurd, as the very word he rejects as everlasting is the very word (aiōnios, used in Mt. 25:46) used to describe God in the LXX in such places as Psalms 90:2: "from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God." And for "eternal" as in "eternal life" in the NT. Thus based on myopic annihilationism reasoning, aiōnios cannot mean God is eternal, as He is in Tim 1:17 "Now to the King eternal.

If aionios says God is eternal, then He is, likewise for life, likewise for punishment.

Smith also tries the same argument you did, that Jesus spoke to the multitudes in parables ONLY based on Mat. 13:34, but which renders as symbolic such teachings as, "And he called the multitude, and said unto them, Hear, and understand: Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man." (Matthew 15:10-11) "But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living. And when the multitude heard this, they were astonished at his doctrine." (Matthew 22:31-33) "Also I say unto you, Whosoever shall confess me before men, him shall the Son of man also confess before the angels of God:" (Luke 12:8)

Yet this is irrelevant, as Lk. 16 is not addressed to the multitudes, but begins with "he said also unto his disciples," to whom He told both true stories and parables as well as prophetic events.

It is true that the Lord told many stories as parables, but it cannot be proved that all stories as "as a certain man" were simply parables with no real events as their basis.

Also, and while stories are identified as parables 45 times, this is not the case in Lk. 16:19ff. Moreover naming two persons is unique, and real names are used when teaching such stories as, "The men of Nineve shall rise up in the judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: for they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here." (Luke 11:32)

Smith then protests that "If the parable of Lazarus and the rich man is both literal and an historical fact, then it contradicts not only the laws of physics and logic," but on that basis he would have to render the post resurrection of account of the Lord to be fiction. How can a person with holes in his hands come thru a locked door and eat bread? Where did the bread go?

Thus the man is well on his way to rejecting Scriptural doctrine due to it not confirming to the physics of almighty God!

Smith then presents a contrived comparison btwn the rich man and Lazarus, in which he portrays the rich man as simply a man that was rich, with a nice house, and who fed the poor, and reverent towards authority!

And then Smith insolently asks, "Where else in Scripture do the character traits in the left column come under eternal condemnation? "Incredible! In contrast the Lord portrays the rich man as an extravagant glutton who could care less for the poor man who ate the scraps that were tossed out, and to whom dogs gave more care!.

And this is consistent with the Lord's other teaching that states, "And when Jesus saw that he was very sorrowful, he said, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God! For it is easier for a camel to go through a needle's eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God." (Luke 18:24-25)

Smith argues that "neither of those [riches or poverty] is Scriptural grounds for either being rewarded or condemned. Where? Present a Scripture." This testifies once again to to his misrepresentation of the rich man and superficial analysis, as the Lord obviously was portraying the rich man as an uncaring selfish man, and who built bigger barns while neglecting his soul, and which typifies the lost. And while nothing is said of the faith of Lazarus, as affliction is more conducive to faith like as riches is to complacency, Lazarus can be assumed to have been like those who are of a poor and contrite spirit who trembleth at God's word. (Is. 66:2)

And as faith is manifested by what it does, "And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together." (Romans 8:17)

Smith also argues that "When theologians insist that this is a literal story, they place a huge blotch on the character of God! According to the Christian interpretation, this man is spending eternity in Hell fire, but has never had his day in court. "

Yet this displays more ignorance, as it is held that Hades is a type of holding cell, suffering in general as sinners, but awaiting the Great White Throne judgement, when "death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works." (Revelation 20:13)

Furthermore, many texts all work together to support Paradise being Abraham's bosom where OT saints went before the Resurrection, (Hebrews 9:4; 10:4) with Christ setting them free upon His death, (Ephesians 4:8-9) thus the "good thief" went there with the Lord, (1Lk. 23:43) and graves opened up after His Resurrection (Matthew 27:51-53) and now Paradise is the 3rd heaven. (2Cor. 12:4)

Going even further in digging his own grave, Smith asks, "The rich man recognized Abraham on sight. Even called him "Father." How could someone who knows Abraham "...hear Moses...?" Moses didn't live until hundreds of years after Abraham? How could the rich man's "brothers" hear Moses? Moses didn't live until far into their future?"

Is Smith really this unlearned that he cannot comprehend that to "hear Moses" is to hear the law of Moses, or even to do what is contained in the Law by nature? (Rm. 2)

But such is the case with polemicists who have an axe to grind.

Smith then goes on to elaborately attempt the usual interpretation of Annihilationism, that the rich man represents the Jews and Lazarus the Gentiles, yet even if that were tenable, it is is simply spurious as rejecting postmortem torment, for again, it has the Lord teaching science fiction.

For as said, in parables the Lord uses known physical realities which correspond to spiritual realities, but if Annihilationism is true and Lk. 16 is a parable, then it is using fiction, that of a man being dead yet suffering torment, to represent some undefined spiritual reality.

If one wants to hold Lk. 16 as a parable, then he needs to see it as teaching that the lost, represented by the complacent rich man ("But woe unto you that are rich! for ye have received your consolation" - Luke 6:24) will suffer in Hell, while Lazarus represents "Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew 5:3)

Thus Lk. 16 as teaching about literal postmortem punishment for the wicked, and consolation for the redeemed righteous, is what is congruent with the rest of Scripture.

Boy you can sure twist things up and make them complicated

Rather, it is Smith who deceives the willing with a multiplicity of words, while mine is consistent with the use of parables and other texts on the afterlife. Which did not include the use of science fiction.

Annihilationism relies on possible meanings of words to negate the obvious intent, and basically renders the Lord is being misleading and bluffing.

Consider (Mark 9:43-44) "And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched."

This description is clearly warning of an enduring experience, which certainly does have a deterrent effect.

In contrast, despite the solemn warning about being in a place of unquenchable fire which they attempt to explain away, annihilationism renders Jesus to be trying to deter living a whole life indulging in the flesh on the basis that they will be annihilated in the end, and frankly, plenty will gladly trade a life of sin in exchange for being annihilated at the end.

I’m just telling you that your twisting of the Scriptures to fit that narrative convolutes simple verses like John 3:16 which says that if you believe on Jesus you wont perish (die, cease to exist, etc.) but have everlasting life.

That also is absurd, for as in other places, the lot of the wicked is set in contradistinction with the reward of the righteous, but you have the latter receiving eternal life while the former simply are annihilated, but which the Lord elsewhere describes as everlasting punishment in the same places as the devil. .

And anyone hearing the Lord warn of going into the same place as the devil and into everlasting punishment would most naturally understand it as being eternal. Annihilation is simply not dealing straightly with the whole counsel of God Over and out.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.