This used to be a basic question for me. Of course – we’re all eternal, and we’ll either spend it up in Heaven with Jesus or down in Hell with Satan. We’ll either get paradise or suffer forever with no hope. That’s what I grew up hearing, and I just assumed all christians thought the same (except the heretics of course).
A lot of evangelical people probably had the same experience.
However, this is just not the case. There are a lot of Christian understandings of what happens after death, and the one that I learned is just one of them.
The main one I want to talk about today is Annihilationism (or terminal punishment, which is a little different). I think it’s important because A) it’s growing in acceptance by a lot of evangelicals, and B) it seems to me to have some pretty decent Biblical support.
[Quick note: I don’t know that I’d say I fully accept Annihilationism at this time. But I think it’s compelling enough that it should be part of the discussion.]
[Quick note 2: This is going to be a quick sumup, because the last time I wrote a big multipiece blog, I damaged my wrist tendons with all the typing, and I’m still healing. So, brief for now.]
NOT UNIVERSALISM
This is the part that I think a lot of people that believe in Eternal Conscious Torment misunderstand. (Eternal Conscious Torment (ECT) is the idea you probably have of hell – it’s a fiery tortuous place, and our souls or body go there after death if we are unbelievers, and we suffer there forever.)
Annihilationism is not the same as Universalism. Universalists believe that “everyone” is saved. That is, the belief that all people, no matter who they are, what they believe, or what they do, spend eternity in paradise. Of all the heresies, this is the one I hope I’m wrong about. I really hope this is true, and everyone lives forever.
But I can’t get there. I think there are too many verses about separating believers and unbelievers, too many warnings about being “saved,” and so forth. I hope I’m wrong, but so far the Bible compels me to believe that not everyone will be saved.
Annihilationists do not believe everyone will be saved. They believe people are either in paradise, or their existence ends, permanently. That is, both positions believe in a “salvation” of God’s people. It’s what happens to everyone else that is disputed. ECT says those people suffer forever, Annihilationists say they cease to exist.
TREE OF LIFE
One of the big points for ECT is the idea that we are immortal beings, who will live forever, either with God or without. This comes from Augustine, and is arguably more influenced by his Platonic background than Scripture. It is not as clear-cut in the Bible as you might think, and it actually creates some theological problems.
First of all, notice that Adam and Eve are NOT immortal. When they sin, why do they have to leave Eden? So that “they won’t eat from the Tree of Life and live forever.” (Gen 3:22) The idea is that in order to continue living, they must regularly eat from the Tree.
Not only that, this same idea shows up in Revelation 22 – where the Tree of Life grows on both sides of the River, giving fruit for “the healing of the nations.” Now, I agree, Revelation is a tough book to interpret overall, but I think it’s worth noting that eternal life in Eden involved a tree, and the same idea shows up in Revelation for eternal life.
Thus, it could be argued that we are NOT immortal spirits. Rather, we are spirits that DEPEND on God for life. In Him we Live..and have our being.” We do not have life and being within ourselves. You can see the theological implication here – if we say we are “naturally” immortal, we don’t really need God. We just need him to NOT wipe us out.
But, if we are dependent on God for our ongoing life, I think that fits far better with the Bible teaches about our reliance on God for all things, and God as the source of all life and light.
In which case, if we are separated from God, and therefore the Tree, we will die. And so, when we are “saved,” that means we have ongoing access to the tree of Life, to the source of eternal life from God, along the River from his Throne.
That seems pretty Biblical to me.
OLD TESTAMENT
It’s important to note that the concept of Hell is pretty much absent from the Old Testament, in just about any form. There’s an idea of “Sheol,” which to me feels more like Hades or the old Greek/Roman idea of a shadowy underworld, where both good and bad people go, for their possibly hilariously ironic eternal judgement.
I think it’s worth asking, if the idea of eternal punishment was so central to the Gospel, shouldn’t it have at least been foreshadowed in the Old Testament? In the way Jesus’ sacrifice is foreshadowed in Passover?
ARGUMENTS FOR ANNIHILATION
(I’m going to lean heavily on Preston Sprinkle here, and I’ll link to his articles below.)
First off, Sprinkle doesn’t like the term Annihilation – he uses “terminal punishment.” That is, he argues that there is suffering and torment in hell, but that it eventually ends. In other words, he argues that the Bible, when discussing punishment, uses terms like “destruction, death, perish, end, burned up chaff.” That is, the thing being punished is eventually destroyed. Chaff doesn’t burn forever, for example. (verses in comments)
Secondly, he argues that if you go through scripture WITHOUT just assuming ECT, many of the passages that refer to hell or death do NOT indicate it. Consider John 3:16 – “whosoever believes in Him should not PERISH, but have eternal life.” Now, if you just read that, as it stands, you would think “well, that means death, forever.” You wouldn’t think “well, perish clearly means to torture someone forever.”
You can go through scripture and examine this for yourself, but when I did it, I found that very few actually indicate eternal torment. If anything, it’s vague. But far more often, it says terms like destroyed, ended, perished, etc. It seems pretty final (Sprinkle argues that Paul references hell 80 times, and almost none indicate eternal torment. I don’t have all those verses handy, but FYI).
Thirdly (my point, not Sprinkles), Hell was not created for us. According to Matthew, it’s for Satan and his angels. Maybe THEY are eternal, I don’t know. But if we look at Revelation 20: “The lake of fire is the second death. Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.” It sure sounds to me that there is another death, another “ending of life,” here.
COUNTER ARGUMENTS
Obviously ECT didn’t grow out of nothing – there ARE some Biblical passages that support it, or at least you can extrapolate the idea. The main one being Matthew 25:46- “And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.” Seems pretty clear.
Same with verses like “the fire is not quenched, and the worm does not die.” That seems pretty foreverish too. I don’t think we need to hit them all, as you’ve probably heard a lot of them, and the idea of “forever fire” is pretty common.
However, I would argue that a “fire” can be forever, and yet the wood in the fire is itself consumed. That is, just because the actual “place” of destruction is eternal (which, could be as a place “not with God”), that doesn’t mean that the “people” in that place are eternal. They may just as well be consumed.
NOT NEW
Finally, I think it’s important to note that Annihilationism is not a new idea. One of the leading voices of Neo-Evangelicalism (think Billy Graham style evangelicalism) was John Stott, who helped form the Lausanne movement in the 1970s (if you don’t know what that is, it’s basically where we decided what Evangelicalism is). Stott argued that taking the Bible seriously required one to at least concede the possibility of Annihilationism, and he himself was fairly convinced (and took a lot of heat for it, especially from Americans).
Going way back, Irenaeus, one of the early Church fathers wrote in his work Against the Heresies: “But he who shall reject it [life], and prove himself ungrateful to his Maker, inasmuch as he has been created, and has not recognized Him who bestowed [the gift upon him], deprives himself of [the privilege of] continuance forever and ever.” In other words, if we don’t accept God’s gift, we stop existing.
Ignatious of Antioch wrote in the first century: “Let us not, therefore, be insensible to His kindness. For were He to reward us according to our works, we should cease to be.”
As I mentioned earlier, it was Augustine, around the 400s, that really established the idea of eternal conscious torment. Before that, Christians held a variety of views (looking at you, Origen). To be fair, Augustine was one of, if not the, most influential thinkers in Church history, so let’s not poo poo him too quickly. But I think we should also keep in mind that his views are NOT canon in themselves, and we can be a little open to other possibilities.
KEVIN SUMMARY
In a general sense, I don’t think this changes the Gospel much. I don’t think the “threat” of hell is a very good way to evangelize, and I don’t think the apostles did either. Jesus is still the King, His kingdom still comes to Earth, we still serve him forever, he still saves us from a life away from God, and so forth. It all stays the same, with or without the threat of eternal torment. I just don’t think Hell is that important. I want to be with Jesus either way.
However, that said, I think Annihilationists make some pretty good arguments. It seems reasonable to me that God would NOT torture people forever without hope. Yes, I think He gives people freedom to trust him or not. I don’t think universalism is supported from scripture. But, the idea that he welcomes those who choose, and allows those who don’t to cease to exist seems MORE in character for the God I see in the Bible. His anger does NOT last forever – His mercy endures.
So, for me, I’m not willing to say yes or no to Annihilationism yet. I think it’s some good arguments, I think the biblical support is fairly strong, and I think some Christian thinkers I respect are open to it.
But I try to keep my focus is on Jesus and His kingdom coming to earth, not on Hell. I think we should be inviting people to the glories and beauty of Jesus, not threatening them with suffering. The Gospel is the Good News, not the Avoid the Bad News.
Our eyes on Jesus. Now and forever.