Annihilationism verses UR.

[MacPherson]

It seems that sandwiched between ET and UR, is Annihilationism (which really needs an abbreviation) (Come to think of it, abbreviation could use an abbreviation)

Anyways, I know where to go on the internet when it comes to exploring ET. And I know where to go when it comes to exploring UR. But I wonder if there's an Annihilationism website the equivalent of Tentmaker. Or even if those who believe in Annihilationism have a passionate enough feeling about their views to even form a website slash discussion group.

I find myself becoming a fence sitter when it comes to opposing views like Calvinism and Arminianism
for instance as one of many examples. It just seems that when the Bible seems so ambiguous, that both sides can back their dogmas up with a plethora of Scripture and argue in circles until the fatted calf comes home. And perhaps this is because actual truth is somewhere in-between.

I'm wondering about this when it comes to, ET - A - UR. The problem with ET is obvious to everyone here I'm sure. The problem with UR could be that there are those who will always be opposed to God. There are some people who just don't believe out of ignorance, and given the right opportunity will become believers/worshipers. Then there are those who just plain hate God. They hate Christ. They're not Atheists or Agnostics, they're Antichrists.

It could be argued that for such souls, heaven would be like hell to them. And I seriously think, in my tiny human brain, that given the choice, such people would rather just be zapped out of the afterlife. Most such people I'm sure believe that there's no afterlife anyways.

So, does anyone have any thoughts about Annihilationism versus UR? Anyone here a former Annihilationist? Does Annihilationism seem unbiblical? If so, in what way?
It seems like ET and UR get argued back and forth and constantly pitted against each other. But this third option seems to get left more out of the picture.

[MacPherson]

Hey cool! When I Googled "Calvinism Arminianism" to make sure I spelled
"Arminianism" correctly, I saw this add:

Calvinism and Arminianism
Are these Beliefs Biblical?
Absolutely Not. Learn Why?
www.GodsPlanForAll.com

[CHB]

Hi McPherson,

I use to belong to the World Wide Church of God and they believed in annihilation. Actually there is more support in the Bible for annihilation than ET. I grew up in a Baptist environment, I always had my doubts about ET but I was in my teens and thought this belief was all there was.

(Mal. 4:1-3) is one verse those who believe in annihilation use.  Also where it mentions everlasting punishment, they say punishment means an end. They use the fact that it doesn't say punishing to establish annihilation. They believe the second death is a proof for annihilation also. There are other things that I can't even remember now that they use to prove annihilation. I will have to admit I was a believer in annihilation at one time but that has been a few years ago.

CHB

[Kevin]

Again,
Just a thought,
I am a strong UR, and supporter of this web site and it's open support.

That being said, on with it.

Regarding the subject;
and related topics,
I believe God is the creator of everything; , and simplistically, I have come from Him, same as an off spring. Same as
everything in existence. Annihilation kinda sounds like a similar to suicide of a sort...
Just a non scholar's point of view.

Science agrees in it's own deductive way, they just can't handle the creation part.
_________________________
The law of conservation of mass was first clearly formulated by Lavoisier, a french chemist who was beheaded during the french revolution.

E = mc2 , derived by Einstien, expresses how mass and energy may be converted. They may be interconverted but not created or destroyed

[sven]

this pages have strong arguments, there also seems to be a book avaiable, "the fire that consumes"

http://www.jewishnotgreek.com/
http://www.sheol-know.org/
http://www.hell-know.net/

[AJ]

Hi MacPherson,
You asked:
Annihilationism (which really needs an abbreviation) .... well there is one...ED = Eternal Death.
ED'ers are twin brothers to ET'ers.
They all make our Heavenly Father a loser.
They all make our savior Jesus Christ a liar, saying that he cannot / or will not draw all unto himself.


MacPherson said:

The problem with UR could be that there are those who will always be opposed to God. There are some people who just don't believe out of ignorance, and given the right opportunity will become believers/worshipers. Then there are those who just plain hate God. They hate Christ. They're not Atheists or Agnostics, they're Antichrists.

It could be argued that for such souls, heaven would be like hell to them. And I seriously think, in my tiny human brain, that given the choice, such people would rather just be zapped out of the afterlife. Most such people I'm sure believe that there's no afterlife anyways.

Actually MacPherson, ...no one will oppose God forever.  Those who hate God during this lifetime, have been taught to do so.
Our loving heavenly Father will reteach them to forgive and love.  He has all the time in the world to accomplish His will.

http://jesusthelightoftheworld.yuku.com/topic/1990/t/EVERYBODY-WILL-BECOME-SAVED-CONFESS-THAT-JESUS-IS-LORD.html

[WhiteWings]

It seems that sandwiched between ET and UR, is Annihilationism (which really needs an abbreviation) (Come to think of it, abbreviation could use an abbreviation)

Anyways, I know where to go on the internet when it comes to exploring ET. And I know where to go when it comes to exploring UR. But I wonder if there's an Annihilationism website the equivalent of Tentmaker. Or even if those who believe in Annihilationism have a passionate enough feeling about their views to even form a website slash discussion group.

ED=Eternal Death.

Personally I find ED far more realistic that both ET and UR.
I don't fear it either because what is there to fear about a state of knowing nothing. Sound a bit like being alive  :laughing7:
That said the Bible seems to support UR best. And ET least.

[Doc]

ED... :laughing7:  is also the abbreviation for Erectile Dysfunction.

Joking aside, the scripture is clear that death will be destroyed. Is death powerful enough to thwart God's plan? I think not.

[Taffy]

ED... :laughing7:  is also the abbreviation for Erectile Dysfunction.

Joking aside, the scripture is clear that death will be destroyed. Is death powerful enough to thwart God's plan? I think not.

Hi Doc
I thought it already was..just some folk dont realise it Yet,( ie not meaning you)

[WhiteWings]

Joking aside, the scripture is clear that death will be destroyed. Is death powerful enough to thwart God's plan? I think not.

That's just how you read it.
What about this reasoning from the EDs?
God does His judgements. Heaven or death. After those judgements death has no more power because nobody will die from that point on.

[WhiteWings]

ED... :laughing7:  is also the abbreviation for Erectile Dysfunction.

Yep.
I think that's the first death. So it fits well  :laughing7:

[Universalist Catholic]

Personally, I think that Annihilation is just a cross between Universalism and Traditionalism.  It seems like all that has happened was that the people who support annihlation have taken all the traditional understandings of judgment, the Lake of Fire, Gehenna, and other such scriptures as something negative and final, along with their belief that Aion means Eternal.  But they also still read all the other scriptures talking about love, mercy, and the restitution of all things, and a universe with no pain and suffering where every knee bends down before the lord and confesses Jesus as savior, and God is all in all.  However they seem to see the teachings of the narrow path, absolute free will, eternal punishment, the great day of Judgment, and the Lake of fire more how tradition sees it with the new spin.  The people who are punished die never to come back again.  So its only a way of trying to merge traditionalism(very little biblical support), with the Gospel Truth(Full bible support). 

[thinktank]

I think annhilation is not to be feared. But there are two views on annhilation.

1. Only those in this lifetime who know Jesus will get to live

2. There will be chances in this life and the age to come to know Jesus

I think the second choice can be biblical, it supports free will, and makes sense of the lake of fire, which is called the second death. The first death must be a spiritual death and the second death must be complete death.

There's nothing fearfull about this I think and in some ways shows greater love than UN, for God doesn't force worship of him. But I recognize that UN can be also compatible with God's will, overuling mans, such as when God's glory humbled the king of babylon. So in my opinion I think both views are compatible with Gods love, but the first choice I mentioned, is too limited for God and doesn't hold up to when God died for all mankind.

[lookingup]

by: thinktank,

The first death must be a spiritual death and the second death must be complete death.

i haven't read through all these posts, maybe someone has brought up this thought i don't know, but my thought is that if ANY that had life and is now no more then death is still exsisting, but Jesus has abolished death, how is that happening?

if Annihilation was true that would be more merciful than ET  imho

[WhiteWings]

if Annihilation was true that would be more merciful than ET  imho

Yeah. ED is justice and UR is mercy. But ET..... :sigh:

[Paul Hazelwood]

Saul of Tarsus was annihilated.

[WhiteWings]

I agree with that Paul.

[shawn]

if Annihilation was true that would be more merciful than ET  imho

Yeah. ED is justice and UR is mercy. But ET..... :sigh:

With my limited human understanding I would have to totally agree with this statement.  Belief in Jesus' death on the cross for our sins allows God to not to have to hand out justice.  He can deal with his creation with mercy.  With that said, I see no Biblical evidence that we will get a chance to accept Jesus AFTER death.  Could God work it out like that?  I believe so.  Do I have Biblical evidence for that?  I think the Biblical support for that is very weak.  It's why if I was forced to choose I would have to side with the ED arguments.  There is alot more Biblical support for this belief.  No belief in Jesus in this life=God deals with non believers with justice...ED  Belief=mercy....EL.

[WhiteWings]

With that said, I see no Biblical evidence that we will get a chance to accept Jesus AFTER death.

Every knee will and confess....
Every person that kneels accepts Jesus. The person who accepts Jesus is saved.
No time limit.

[shawn]

With that said, I see no Biblical evidence that we will get a chance to accept Jesus AFTER death.

Every knee will and confess....
Every person that kneels accepts Jesus. The person who accepts Jesus is saved.
No time limit.

If we are intellectually honest...we must realize that could mean many things.  And that UR interpretation of that verse doesn't fit with the large bulk of scripture.

[WhiteWings]

If we are intellectually honest...we must realize that could mean many things.  And that UR interpretation of that verse doesn't fit with the large bulk of scripture.

You see it as being forced to kneel?

[shawn]

If we are intellectually honest...we must realize that could mean many things.  And that UR interpretation of that verse doesn't fit with the large bulk of scripture.

You see it as being forced to kneel?

I have no idea what it absolutely means...it could mean various things including metaphorical language of submission.  For me, to pigeon hole scriptures leads to misunderstanding.  While it could mean exactly what you think it means...there is alot of scripture that would contradict that belief. 

For me, UR hinged on what Jesus meant by Gehenna.  That is the key to UR argument.  Debating over forever vs a long period of time has lesser value.  I believe what Jesus says on this issue.  So, what did he mean by Gehenna?  Obviously, it wasn't meant to be interpreted in the literal sense.  It was a metaphor.  Why do you take something or someone to a trash dump/crematory?  To destroy.  You don't take something/someone to a place like this for purification.  1 Enoch 27:1-3 I believe gives us our best look at what Jesus meant by Gehenna.  This idea that it could be a place of purification doesn't fit...not in the metaphical sense or the OT sense of the word.  So, all this debate about anonion which can mean forever or a long period of time is not of great value in determining the nature/reality of hell. 

[WhiteWings]

Gehenna was a place of shame. Only dead criminal were cast into it.

Can you quote the Enoch verses?

[jabcat]

Actually Shawn, there is another way to look at Gehenna (or maybe more accurately, the Lake of Fire, some say symbolized by Gehenna) in the sense of cleansing vs. destroying.  As J. Preston Eby points out, in a scientific sense, something never becomes nothing.  It is just chemically changed into another form.  So not only is there a cleansing process for the surrounding "environment", but also for the substance in the fire.

Quoting from "The Lake of Fire" -  
Because of the gross misunderstanding of almost all people concerning the lake of fire, I would like to draw your attention to three words found in the passage quoted above. "But the fearful, and unbelieving, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which BURNS with FIRE and BRIMSTONE: which is the second death." The word BURN means combustion, or to consume. To consume does not mean to annihilate, for there is no such thing as annihilation in the absolute sense. When fire consumes a log in your fireplace it does not destroy any of the elements within the log, it merely changes their form. Combustion is the process by which chemicals combine to form new chemicals. For example: a tree might be cut down, sawed into fire wood, and burned. When the wood is burning the heat causes the chemicals of which the wood is composed to vaporize, mixing with the oxygen in the air to form new chemicals, including water and the gas carbon dioxide. So what was formerly a tree is no longer identified as the form of a tree, but the substance thereof is now simply CHANGED into a DIFFERENT FORM and exists in its new form within the atmosphere as water, carbon dioxide, etc. Thus, to bum, means to CHANGE. Furthermore, it is interesting to note that fire does not burn down; it always burns up; it seeks the highest level. And all that it consumes "goes up in smoke," to exist in a new form in a higher dimension. Even if you take a pan of water and place it over a fire, before long the water will take on the property of the fire and will begin to go up in steam. To burn means to CHANGE, and the change is always UPWARD in its motion.

FIRE is the heat and light that you feel and see when something burns. It takes heat to start a fire, but once the fire is started it produces heat that keeps the process going. Thus, fire is really HEAT and LIGHT.

In my study of the lake that burns with fire and brimstone I was very much helped and impressed by the understanding given by Charles Pridgeon and I would like to quote from his scholarly work on the subject of BRIMSTONE. He says: "The Lake of Fire and Brimstone signifies a fire burning with brimstone; the word 'brimstone' or sulphur defines the character of the fire. The Greek word THEION translated 'brimstone' is exactly the same word THEION which means 'divine.' Sulphur was sacred to the deity among the ancient Greeks; and was used to fumigate, to purify, and to cleanse and consecrate to the deity; for this purpose they burned it in their incense. In Homer's Iliad (16:228), one is spoken of as purifying a goblet with fire and brimstone. The verb derived from THEION is THEIOO, which means to hallow, to make divine, or to dedicate to a god (See Liddell and Scott Greek-English Lexicon, 1897 Edition). To any Greek, or any trained in the Greek language, a 'lake of fire and brimstone' would mean a 'lake of divine purification.' The idea of judgment need not be excluded. Divine purification and divine consecration are the plain meaning in ancient Greek. In the ordinary explanation, this fundamental meaning of the word is entirely left out, and nothing but eternal torment is associated with it" -end quote.

[shawn]

Gehenna was a place of shame. Only dead criminal were cast into it.

Can you quote the Enoch verses?

I'm at work and don't have my resources with me.  Let me see if I can find an online resource.