article on hell from an annihilationist perspective

[valueallhumanlife2008]

I think universalists and believers in eternal torment alike would have trouble refuting the arguments made by Steve Wohlberg.  Here's the article.

www.thetruthabouthell.org

While I believe eternal torment isn't that difficult to refute, annihilationism on the other hand is a totally different ballgame.  Wohlberg makes a valid argument with this article.

Towards the end of his article he talks about a young man who was able to accept Christ but was unable previously because of the doctrine of eternal torment.  I must admit that annihilationism isn't a doctrine that troubles me very much.  They truly understand that eternal torment only either bars a person from accepting Christ, or puts a strain on someone's relationship with Him.

God bless,
Chris

[Paul Hazelwood]

I'll read the whole article when I get a chance and post my thoughts.   There are a few things I noticed that will not be hard to point out in light of the universalist comment.

I would think that ceasing to exist is far more humane than eternal torture, but, if God created a human being and loves that human being and foreknew that human being he also had to of created that human being with one of two problematic things we must approach.   If annihilationism  is true, then either God does not have the power to reconcile all his creation, or he created a human with the intent of allowing its path to end up there.  We could entertain all sorts of other things perhaps,  but all of them reduce Gods sovereign power to save all mankind and bring them to the realization of truth if anything other than this is indeed true. 

One thing I must say, the means by which someone comes to Christ is not significant to the correctness of the theology someone is trying to prove, it is irrevalent.   You can go to an atheist site and fine "testamonials" for how their life is much better and more free now that they believe there is no God.   

No matter what religious group who offers the opportunity for testamonials there you will find them.  So which one is correct based on that?

[Shadow]

I'll read the whole article when I get a chance and post my thoughts.   There are a few things I noticed that will not be hard to point out in light of the universalist comment.

I would think that ceasing to exist is far more humane than eternal torture, but, if God created a human being and loves that human being and foreknew that human being he also had to of created that human being with one of two problematic things we must approach.   If annihilationism  is true, then either God does not have the power to reconcile all his creation, or he created a human with the intent of allowing its path to end up there.  We could entertain all sorts of other things perhaps,  but all of them reduce Gods sovereign power to save all mankind and bring them to the realization of truth if anything other than this is indeed true. 

One thing I must say, the means by which someone comes to Christ is not significant to the correctness of the theology someone is trying to prove, it is irrevalent.   You can go to an atheist site and fine "testamonials" for how their life is much better and more free now that they believe there is no God.   

No matter what religious group who offers the opportunity for testamonials there you will find them.  So which one is correct based on that?

We may have to consider the possibility that God doesn't want/intend to save everyone, which is exactly what it means if UR isn't true, if so then annihilation wouldn't be such a bad thing, in fact if ET is true then I would want to be erased from existence altogether, I could never go back to the convenient self centered complacency of only having to worry about myself, at the exclusion of the vast majority of the human race :sigh:

I've turned a corner that most christians never even worry or think about, and there's no easy way out :sigh:

[Paul Hazelwood]

We may have to consider the possibility that God doesn't want/intend to save everyone,

Don't intend to be misleading here by only quoting part of your post.

But we have to consider two things.

Jesus is the savior of all mankind.   God wills that all mankind be saved.

If there is any context of desire here, then it by itself contradicts that notion of intent.


No matter what someone wants to work out beyond that as far as intepreting whether or not "God gets his wish"  there is a blatent unresolvable contradiction to the thought that God ever intended to create beings with the desire to then destroy them or punish them forever.


This does not prove annihilation or endless torment wrong all by itself,  but it is a piece of the puzzle that has to remain intact under any rule of context.

You cannot logically or grammatically say under any interpretation of 1 timothy 2:4  whether it should say "God wills" or "God desires" that Gods "Hope" is that not all mankind be saved.

Now I am departing a bit for the sake of demonstration of what I usually will say about 1 timothy 2:4.

I believe that it is  a statement of absolute purpose and that God does not "hope" for "US" in the way we perceive it.

However for the sake of demonstration.   God hoping for anything whether he gets it or not is a direct contradiction to the idea that God intended "Not" to save everyone.

[jabcat]

Jesus is the savior of all mankind.   God wills that all mankind be saved.


No matter what someone wants to work out beyond that as far as intepreting whether or not "God gets his wish"  there is a blatent unresolvable contradiction to the thought that God ever intended to create beings with the desire to then destroy them or punish them forever.

This does not prove annihilation or endless torment wrong all by itself,  but it is a piece of the puzzle that has to remain intact under any rule of context.

You cannot logically or grammatically say under any interpretation of 1 timothy 2:4  whether it should say "God wills" or "God desires" that Gods "Hope" is that not all mankind be saved.

Another very powerful scripture from the good old KJV: 1 John 4:14

14 And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world.     This may be my own faulty thinking somehow, but I believe if God did this, He would succeed, not just wish and hope (?) .

Also, as I've read in the Greek, 'will' is thelema, whereas 'wish' is (I believe) echomai.. they are two totally different words.  And in the Greek God's "thelema" is to save all;  He wills, not wishes.

God's blessing, James.