What are you thoughts on Annihilation?

[TheDivineWatermark]

@GaryA ,

-- https://biblehub.com/interlinear/revelation/20-14.htm

Where, as I understand it, the appropriate word-order for the grammar of v.14b is like this:

"[14b]... This is the second death - the lake of fire."






IOW, the phrase "the lake of fire" is in this verse TWICE: 14a and then also in 14b (at least in some manuscripts and many versions), like shown here:

https://biblehub.com/parallel/revelation/20-14.htm




Two of my hard-copy interlinears also show it this way (with "the lake of fire" referenced TWICE in v.14).

 

[GaryA]

Tell me what you see differently. Thanks. = )

-- https://biblehub.com/interlinear/revelation/20-14.htm

My Greek Bible has five words that translate directly into 'This is the second death'. (sorry, too much effort to post greek)

BIG difference - EXTRA words in the interlinear

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

Things not alive are simply destroyed.

"Death"... what is said of IT is: "last enemy to be destroyed [ 2673 'rendered inoperative'] is death".


There will be no more use for it.





Not so regarding "the second death" or the "lake of fire" (see again v.10's "unto the ages [plural] of the ages [plural]," which in every occurrence [21x] always means the same thing).

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

My Greek Bible has five words that translate directly into 'This is the second death'. (sorry, too much effort to post greek)

BIG difference - EXTRA words in the interlinear

Well (if I'm reading you correctly), mine is saying that the manuscripts are what is showing this distinction.

Thus the various translations / versions reflect this also.



Usually if there are differences between manuscripts, these differences show up between BLB & BibleHub:

-- BLB - https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/rev/20/14/ss1/s_1187014

-- BibleHub - https://biblehub.com/text/revelation/20-14.htm

 

[GaryA]

I believe the Textus Receptus is the proper rendering of the correct manuscripts.

 

[ewq1938]

Not so regarding "the second death"

Wrong. Death will no longer exist. That applies to the second death. All unsaved and hell and death will all cease to exist.

Rev 21:4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.

These DO NOT exist in NHNE:

1. death
2. sorrow
3. crying
4. pain

If eternal torment was true, then all those things would still exist.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

@GaryA , Plus, doesn't it only make sense that, as the earlier vv.5b,6a speak of "5b THIS is the resurrection the first" / "6a ...in the resurrection the first" and understood as applying to ALL BELIEVERS...

...that therefore in verses 12 and 13 and 14, this is only the resurrection of those who are to be delivered to 'the second death'? (i.e. the "resurrection OF JUDGMENT / DAMNATION" spoken of in Jn5:29)
[i.e. "the DEAD [/unsaved of all times]"]

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

I believe the Textus Receptus is the proper rendering of the correct manuscripts.

Here's BLB for Rev21:8 -

But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is [G3603 - ho estin ] the second death. - kjv


-- https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/rev/21/8/ss1/s_1188008



[bearing in mind the specific wording in 20:10!! ( "unto the ages [plural] of the ages [plural]" - i.e. forever and ever)]

 

[peldom10]

As far as I can tell, annihilationism is Biblical after doing an exhaustive study on it. Eternal torment is a false doctrine.

Sorry...wrong!!!

 

[Kino]

Sorry...wrong!!!

In my experience most people's perspective of hell comes from culture not the Bible. ie: Dante's Inferno, Saturday morning cartoons.

When I've heard countless pastors speak of it, it's usually more dogma then expository. Plus, people have raised some good points concerning the doctrine of hell:

1) "The wages of sin is death but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord" these two comparisons don't seem to fit together. It would make more sense if it was "The wages of sin is eternal torment but the gift of God is eternal life."

2) As Christians like to often say, "Jesus died the death I should have died" Jesus was beaten and executed in probably the worst way a man can. Is it possible that a similar punishment awaits those unrepentant in judgement to then be annihilated when it is through? Isn't eternal torment a greater punishment then what Jesus endured?

3) In Genesis Adam and Eve were kicked out of the Garden of Eden that led to the tree of life and God said "Now that the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil, what if he should stretch out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever!"

Scripture also heeds us to work out our own salvation with fear and trembling, and no one can stand before a holy God. I dare not say that NO judgement awaits those who do not repent and turn to God. Although I side more with annihilation, I am still open to the fact that I am wrong, but the dogma needs to stop.

 

[justbyfaith]

1) "The wages of sin is death but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord" these two comparisons don't seem to fit together. It would make more sense if it was "The wages of sin is eternal torment but the gift of God is eternal life."

Death has been defined as eternal separation from God as it applies to Romans 6:23.

 

[justbyfaith]

2) As Christians like to often say, "Jesus died the death I should have died" Jesus was beaten and executed in probably the worst way a man can. Is it possible that a similar punishment awaits those unrepentant in judgement to then be annihilated when it is through? Isn't eternal torment a greater punishment then what Jesus endured?

No; because Jesus is God and therefore He has an infinite soul. It is like we were all allergic to bee stings but He wasn't...and then He took all the bee stings of the world upon Himself.

3) In Genesis Adam and Eve were kicked out of the Garden of Eden that led to the tree of life and God said "Now that the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil, what if he should stretch out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever!"

How is this relevant?

Scripture also heeds us to work out our own salvation with fear and trembling, and no one can stand before a holy God. I dare not say that NO judgement awaits those who do not repent and turn to God. Although I side more with annihilation, I am still open to the fact that I am wrong, but the dogma needs to stop.

Sound doctrine needs to continue to be preached for the sake of sound teaching being the prevailing factor in the church.

 

[Kino]

No; because Jesus is God and therefore He has an infinite soul. It is like we were all allergic to bee stings but He wasn't...and then He took all the bee stings of the world upon Himself.



How is this relevant?



Sound doctrine needs to continue to be preached for the sake of sound teaching being the prevailing factor in the church.

Sound doctrine coming from the person talking about bee stings as a metaphor for taking the world's sin upon Jesus's shoulders. I don't mean to seem difficult or rude, but that's exactly my point.

The reason I mentioned Adam and Eve is that it's the first mention in scripture of eternal life and it was denied Adam and Eve because of their sin. There was no mention of eternal torment as the punishment. Death is mentioned and so is the foreshadowing of Jesus's redemption of mankind.

 

[Kino]

Also a common verse used is 2 Thessalonians 1:8-9: He will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. 9 They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might."

Most mainstream Bible translations use the word destruction, and when I use the word destruction it means gone, torn down, and no more. Not torment or torture.

 

[Radius]

Why is mentioning a name or not what defines a parable? If the rich man and Lazarus is literal, we don't need the gospel? We can just be poor, slothful, and beg all day to go to paradise?

Because the Bible has patterns, and in NO OTHER parable did Jesus use actual names. It was always a woman, or a man, or a servant or bridesmaid.

 

[ewq1938]

Because the Bible has patterns, and in NO OTHER parable did Jesus use actual names. It was always a woman, or a man, or a servant or bridesmaid.

Fully irrelevant. The rich man was NOT in lake of fire. He was in a place where the unsaved dead wait until the GWTJ. No one disputes where the rich man was was unpleasant.

 

[LoganMcBryde]

my opinion has not been formed yet, but the thoughts of knowledgeable people are interesting

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

Hi, Lucy

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: For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal. - Matthew 25:41-46 (KJV)

"Everlasting fire" simply refers to the eternal fire that consumes until there is nothing left, as in whatever or whoever it is perishes and is gone for all time. Our God is a consuming fire (Hebrews 12:29"). To put it another way, Satan has been sentenced to death by fire, and when this happens, he will be no more. Ezek. 28:18-19 describes both his sentence (vs. 18) and his everlasting demise (vs. 19), both of which have been planned for him at the end of the Millennium (Rev. 20:14).

Thou hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine iniquities, by the iniquity of thy traffick; therefore will I bring forth a fire from the midst of thee, it shall devour thee, and I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all them that behold thee. All they that know thee among the people shall be astonished at thee: thou shalt be a terror, and never shalt thou be any more. - Ezekiel 28:18-19 (KJV)

Ezekiel 28 is referring to the seed of the serpent. "You are a man and not a god"
Satan is indwelling a man. The one referred to as antichrist. His physical aspect will indeed be reduced to ashes.
Satan is a spirit.

Revelation 20 describes his release from prison and final sentence.
Vs 10 describes his fate. It doesn't say he will be no more.

And the devil who deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet are too, and they will be tormented there day and night forever and ever.

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

Hi, Lucy… consider that the eternal fire of God can also be a symbol of His protection and presence, as in Zechariah 2:5. (The word “her” of course refers to Jerusalem.)

Zechariah 2:5 NKJV

5 For I,’ says the Lord, ‘will be a wall of fire all around her, and I will be the glory in her midst.’ ”

Right. His presence is both terror & slendour. Terror to the unrighteous. Splendour to the righteous.

 

[justbyfaith]

Also a common verse used is 2 Thessalonians 1:8-9: He will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. 9 They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might."

Most mainstream Bible translations use the word destruction, and when I use the word destruction it means gone, torn down, and no more. Not torment or torture.

I don't know if 2 Thessalonians 1:9 has been mentioned.

To me, it is explained by the algebraic equation y = 1 / x.

Where x is the allotted period of time and y = the wholeness of the individual.

Here, y keeps getting less as x increases; and y never reaches zero.

So, it is everlasting destruction as y continues to decrease.