This view
has been growing in popularity in churches around the world.
The concept has become known as annihilationism- the
unbeliever is annihilated upon being thrown into hell.
This is in fact what the depictions of hell are
about.
This view
of hell was created because of people’s inability to
associate a loving God who would torment people forever.
Proponents of this view cite a number of scriptures
to back up their point.
They do believe in hell and that a loving God would
punish those who reject Him.
They do not believe that this punishment is eternal
(God can’t hold a grudge forever).
Hell is
known as a place of fire, the Bible uses this description in
many places. Annihilationists
argue that fire consumes and destroys.
Traditional thinking is that the fire is meant for
torture, but proponents of this view say that it is a
consuming fire and destroys anything that is fed into it.
Verses that describe the fire as being eternal and
unquenchable are still correct, but what is thrown into them
is not eternal.
The second
major argument for this view concerns God’s sense of
justice, which is why many hold to this view.
Eternal punishment would not be fitting of the crime.
The Bible proclaims and eye for an eye.
If a person is a murderer, they are to be killed.
If an ox is accidentally killed, the price of a new
ox is to be paid. Eternal
punishment would be hardly fitting for a lifetime of bad
deeds. Even the
worst of sinners would not deserve an eternity of
punishment.
I’ve
also found a great similarity between this teaching and one
of Buddhists. A
good Buddhist's ultimate goal is to reach nirvana, a state of
nonexistence. Buddhists
believe that they will be reincarnated after death until
they reach spiritual enlightenment allowing them to achieve
nirvana. At this
point they believe they will stop being reincarnated back
into a painful world. This
is their equivalent to heaven.
A Buddhist’s ultimate goal is to not exist!
This is what annihilationists argue is what becomes
of an unbeliever after death.
There is still punishment they would argue, but the
end result is the same as nirvana- a state of non-existence.
Most
importantly however, the destruction of the nonbeliever is
contra some passages of the Bible that speaks of eternal
punishment.
In the
passage in Isaiah 66 (referenced to acknowledge the
existence of hell) undying worms and unquenchable fire are
depicted. It was
disgraceful for a body to lie exposed and being eaten by
worms. However,
normally maggots would die once their work was done.
Likewise, a fire goes out when there is nothing left
for it to burn. Both
of these would seem to imply an eternal punishment.
Revelation
20:10
says, “And the devil, who had deceived them, was thrown
into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the
false prophet had been thrown.
They will be tormented day and night for ever and
ever.” Verse
15 depicts those whose names are not found in the book of
life thrown into the same place.
I don’t
know how to spin “for ever and ever” into something that
does not mean eternal punishment.
Those in support of annihilationism I’m sure have
an explanation for this and other references to eternal
torment. The
only way I see around these passages are to say that
everlasting or eternal does not always mean “eternal.”
Depending on the context of the passage, sometimes it
may have limits upon it.
However,
like the argument for the existence of hell, the eternality
of hell is dependent on the eternality of heaven.
Daniel 12:2 speaks of both in the same sentence.
“Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will
awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and
everlasting contempt.”
In this
situation, like before, if everlasting life is forever,
shame and contempt is likewise forever.
If everlasting is something other than forever in
this situation (i.e., a long punishment and then destruction
into oblivion) then heaven would have a time limit placed
upon it as well. I
do not know of any believer who will say that heaven is not
eternal because hell is not.
