Annihilation

[Orthodox Christian]

There is no end to the literal scriptures that you will contextualize so as to defend soul sleep.

I just love it how to justify 'immortal soul' which doesn't exist in the bible, traditionalists will pooh-pooh a very biblical belief that permeates throughout scripture.

Read the following:

Death as a Sleep in the New Testament. Death is described as sleep in the New Testament more frequently than in the Old. The reason may be that the hope of the resurrection, which is clarified and strengthened by Christ’s resurrection, gives new meaning to the sleep of death from which believers will awaken at Christ’s coming. As Christ slept in the tomb prior to His resurrection, so believers sleep in the grave while awaiting their resurrection.

There are two Greek words meaning "sleep" which are used in the New Testament. The first is koimao which is used fourteen times for the sleep of death. A derivative of this Greek noun is koimeeteerion , from which comes our word cemetery. Incidentally, the root of this word is also the root of the word "home–oikos." So the home and the cemetery are connected because both are a sleeping-place. The second Greek word is katheudein, which is generally used for ordinary sleep. In the New Testament it is used four times for the sleep of death (Matt 9:24; Mark 5:39; Luke 8:52; Eph 5:14; 1 Thess 4:14).

At the time of Christ’s crucifixion, "many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep [kekoimemenon] were raised" (Matt 27:52). In the original, the text reads: "Many bodies of the sleeping saints were raised." It is evident that what was resurrected was the whole person and not just the bodies. There is no reference to their souls being reunited with their bodies, obviously because this concept is foreign to the Bible.
Speaking figuratively of Lazarus’ death, Jesus said: "Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep [kekoimetai], but I go to awake him out of sleep" (John 11:11). When Jesus perceived that He was misunderstood, He "told them plainly, ‘Lazarus is dead" (John 11:14). Then Jesus hastened to reassure Martha: "Your brother will rise again" (John 11:23).

This episode is significant, first of all, because Jesus plainly describes death as "sleep" from which the dead will awaken at the sound of His voice. Lazarus’ condition in death was similar to a sleep from which one awakens. Christ said: " I go to awake him out of sleep" (John 11:11). The Lord carried out His promise by going to the tomb to awaken Lazarus by calling: "‘Lazarus, come out.’ And the dead man came out’" (John 11:43-44).

The awakening of Lazarus out of the sleep of death by the sound of Christ’s voice parallels the awakening of the sleeping saints on the day of His glorious coming. They, too, shall hear the voice of Christ and come forth to life again. "The hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and come forth" (John 5:28; cf. John 5:25). "For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, . . . And the dead in Christ will rise first" (1 Thess 4:16). There is harmony and symmetry in the expressions "sleeping" and "awakening" as used in the Bible for going into and coming out of a death state. The two expressions corroborate the notion that death is an unconscious state like sleeping, from which believers will awake on the day of Christ’s coming.

Now, since that wasn't credited, I thought to myself, could this be the work of the preeminent SDA scholar (is one preeminent if they are the only one in their class?) Dr Samuel Bacchiocchi. Sure enough, that it is.

Christ "slept in the Tomb," Sez Dr Sam, which means that the second person of the Godhead was unconscious.

Does this mean that God had laryngitis for 3 days?

Lord have mercy.


Nope...no evidence whatsoever for 'soul' sleep. Actually, soul sleep is not a correct term as man doesn't have a soul, but he IS one.

Geesh, I've heard that somewhere before- oh yeah, I just said that very thing in my last post.

I draw to your attention that Jews have a strictly monotheistic view of Yahweh, meaning pooh-pooh to Trinity. I suppose you accept their argument regarding the person of God as well?

And that soul is resurrected at the second coming completely whole. Only then, and not at death with a disembodied soul is death conquered and eternal life gained. (1 Corinthians 15)
Comes now the question: Was Christ just a flesh body, or did He have a divine and second nature, unmixed, yet undivided?

If you say one nature, then we will discuss monophysitism and its deep problems for the enterprise of redemption. Oh, and that portion where it says that he was in all ways tempted as we. Was His God essence thus tempted, or His humanness?

And since he is resurrected, is He just a Body, whole, one nature?

Only a complete fool with blinders on can ignore the obvious evidence that an immortal soul was not supported by Christ or Paul

But I digress...
And now comes the name-calling. Let's see if we can nip that in the bud. Thanks.
Oh, and spare me the hubris, really, you've not established that Christ or Paul denied the continued consciousness of those who die- quite the contrary. In point of fact, what I see you doing here is word parsing and equivocating like Bill Clinton after 5 triple espressos

 

[Soma-Sight]

I have recently come to the conclusion that Annihilation is taught in Scripture. For nearly 30 years I have believed in conscious eternal punishment. It is actually refreshing now when I read Scripture, knowing that we really do have a loving God who isn’t going to punish the unbeliever for eternity. Some suggested readings are Fudge’s book “Hell: A Consuming Fire†and Samuele Bacchiocchi’s book “Hell: Eternal Torment or Annihilationâ€Â. I do not believe in “soul sleep†for the believer, I do believe the wicked are resurrected on the “Last Dayâ€Â. I also believe that the wicked are tormented for a period of time, depending on the severity of the individual’s sin.


Beza

My view on the Biblical hell is the same!

Is Sodom still burning?????

 

[Orthodox Christian]

an aside

BTW
I read the front page intro to Dr Sam's "Immortality or Resurrection?"
http://www2.andrews.edu/~samuele/books/immortality_resurrection/4.htm
He begins the task of discussing historical views on immortality of souls by first tying the concept to Purgatory, then to renewed interest in spiritism, and finally with the the occult. All of this is done as if he is discussing the roots of such beliefs under the Christian umbrella.

This is an embarrasing bit of demagoguery.

he then claims that

Since the time of Augustine (A. D. 354-430), Christians have been taught that between death and resurrectionâ€â€a period known as "the intermediate state"â€â€the souls of the dead either enjoy the beatitude of Paradise or suffer the affliction of Purgatory or Hell.

As if the concept of the eternal soul began with Augustine.

Of course, it would be convenient to pin it all on Augustine and his Manicheastic roots- which, though Augustine refuted these, certainly he is nonethless suspect of introducing the dualism of manicheaism regarding good and evil right smack into a dualistic human nature. Voila! It is now Augustine's fault, whereas we were always led to believe that Constantine and a succession of popes were in fact the culprits.

Round up the usual suspects.

He's about as accurate and unbiased as Ward Churchill. And this guy wins debates?

He employs some rhetorical tacitics that shell shock those naive fellows who come to a debate with an honest quest for truth, expecting reciprocity.

I'm interested in the truth, but I anticipate lies and obfuscations. It comes with the job, ma'am.

I'd love the opportunity to, um, ask him a few questions.

 

[SputnikBoy]

You really ARE a legend in your own mind, OC. ;-)

 

[Soma-Sight]

Hey OC....

You ROCK man....

I have all 55 episodes of Columbo on DVD....

I love that guy.....

My favorite episodes are "Now you see me" and "Any old port in the storm"...

Good stuff man.....

 

[SputnikBoy]

Are there cliff notes available on your posts, OC? You lost me at the dichotomies that occurred just prior to the gradients that resulted in a continuum. :smt017

 

[kwag_myers]

'thanatos' is used to mean 'cease to exist' which is what death is.

That one snuck by me until Kwag responded and I saw it in quotes.
You have inserted a meaning into the term thanatos which is simply not there. Quite the contrary. The word comes from the root thnesko, which means die, or properly, to die, to die physically. The term was used classically to speak of capital punishment. In Greek thinking, it would refer to the separation of soul and body, not the cessation of existence, which was guibox's insertion.

I presume that was an oversight on Guibox's part, and not some sleight of hand.

Guibox has also mistated the proper translation of apollumi. It is also a compound term, coming from apo (away from) and olethros, which refers to ruin, not destruction. Apollumis is best understood as ruin, not destroy. The reason why 'lost' is also a good translation is because, in English, when a house is ruined in a flood, we say it was lost.

OC, you're my new best friend. You noticed that our opponent never supplies notation of source!

Do you think I should call the dean of my seminary to let him know that Strongs is not a credible source? Funny how they never mentioned this Youngs Concordance since it is so superior to all others. Maybe because it's impossible to properly exegesis from a concordance that is not "exhaustive".

As for the "man doesn't have a soul, but he IS one" comment, even a theological freshman can prove that statement to be a lie (in a Biblical sense).

guibox, your argument still has no credibility. You can rant and rave all you want. But that's pretty much all that it is.

 

[SputnikBoy]

That you resort to slapping someone else on the back because you feel you've scored a point for a fellow human being 'writhing in torment for eternity', kwag, boggles the mind!

This argument brings out the worst in people ...Christians, no less!

 

[Solo]

I have recently come to the conclusion that Annihilation is taught in Scripture. For nearly 30 years I have believed in conscious eternal punishment. It is actually refreshing now when I read Scripture, knowing that we really do have a loving God who isn’t going to punish the unbeliever for eternity. Some suggested readings are Fudge’s book “Hell: A Consuming Fire†and Samuele Bacchiocchi’s book “Hell: Eternal Torment or Annihilationâ€Â. I do not believe in “soul sleep†for the believer, I do believe the wicked are resurrected on the “Last Dayâ€Â. I also believe that the wicked are tormented for a period of time, depending on the severity of the individual’s sin.


Beza

My view on the Biblical hell is the same!

Is Sodom still burning?????

Only in the Spiritual realm. Hopefully you won't be a participant with them.

 

[guibox]

OC, you're my new best friend. You noticed that our opponent never supplies notation of source!

First of all, I have given credit many times to the same source.

Second, the lack of credit was merely an oversight. It has been remedied, so get off your high horse.

Do you think I should call the dean of my seminary to let him know that Strongs is not a credible source? Funny how they never mentioned this Youngs Concordance since it is so superior to all others. Maybe because it's impossible to properly exegesis from a concordance that is not "exhaustive".

When a concordance puts their own views in not derived from the word or context at hand, it is suspect. One should find such rhetoric in a 'notated paraphrase bible' but not in a biblical concordance. Proper exegesis is not found in preconceived notions but letting the text and it's meanings speak for itself...like Youngs.

As for the "man doesn't have a soul, but he IS one" comment, even a theological freshman can prove that statement to be a lie (in a Biblical sense)..

Then one should seriously wonder where that freshman is getting his training as the most competent scholars can't find it in the scriptures.

So, my friend kwag, it behooves you to move from sarcastic mud-throwing to proper biblical exegetical studiying to prove from the scriptures that the soul is immortal and that 'nephesh' means some disembodied, thinking part of man that survives death...better get that 'theological freshman' to help you too.

Unlike OC who feels that the OT is not a source of truth on this subject, you will find that the truth (and where many have derived their misinformed version of the 'soul' from) to prove or disprove your point lies in the OT as the NT (other than the souls under the altar in Revelation) makes no mention of the soul leaving the body.

guibox, your argument still has no credibility. You can rant and rave all you want. But that's pretty much all that it is.

Apparently you haven't studied much on the subject then. So far, I have been the only person (other than a few of OCs posts) who actually looks in the scripture for the support. That is more than I can say for yourself..Apparently, smoke and mirrors and preconceived notions is more along the lines of your way of studying instead of logical biblical reasoning

 

[Orthodox Christian]

Unlike OC who feels that the OT is not a source of truth on this subject, you will find that the truth (and where many have derived their misinformed version of the 'soul' from) to prove or disprove your point lies in the OT as the NT (other than the souls under the altar in Revelation) makes no mention of the soul leaving the body.

Not content to merely name-call, you've now chosen to purposefully distort my perspective. I've nowhere diqualified the OT as a source of truth- I've merely, appropriately identified it as a source which must be understood in the light of the NT, not the other way around.

I want to make it clear that I believe that OT has full canonical authority. The distinction I made is a revelatory distinction; that is to say, the NT is a greater, truer, fuller revelation, according to Hebrews 1:1-2 and according to the Gospels and epistles themselves. By no means, however, do we tear the NT fromits OT moorings. As I have stated repeatedly, I see clear evidence of the spirit in the OT, especially in the later writings and the parts that you Protestants disdain (the so-called intertestamental works and Jewish apocrypha)

 

[Bubba]

I started this thread, because I believe “Annihilation†is a wonderful truth and is supported by Scripture, I wasn’t planning on a debate about “soul sleepâ€Â. Why is the “soul†not departing the body or departing so important? Does it effect doctrinal positions held by a certain church, is it a salvation point? Even if I am wrong about believers going to be with the Lord at the moment of death, I am ok, because the alternative is still a win situation in my mind. Why so much passion in the corner of those who believe in “soul sleep†and those who don’t? Annihilation verses eternal punishment is so much larger an issue in respect to what we believe about God.
Beza

 

[SputnikBoy]

I started this thread, because I believe “Annihilation†is a wonderful truth and is supported by Scripture, I wasn’t planning on a debate about “soul sleepâ€Â. Why is the “soul†not departing the body or departing so important? Does it effect doctrinal positions held by a certain church, is it a salvation point? Even if I am wrong about believers going to be with the Lord at the moment of death, I am ok, because the alternative is still a win situation in my mind. Why so much passion in the corner of those who believe in “soul sleep†and those who don’t? Annihilation verses eternal punishment is so much larger an issue in respect to what we believe about God.
Beza


I'm in absolute agreement with you, beza. This particular topic would have to head the list of all-important doctrines. I've heard of people all but shaking their fists at God believing Him to be a cruel and insensitive tyrant based on the 'eternal torment' belief. What I find most alarming is the ACTUAL fervour some Christians put into their defense of this doctrine.

There are indeed ambiguous scriptures surrounding this topic. So, I believe the question we need to ask ourselves from the outset is: "Is 'eternal punishment' consistent with a loving God?" If the answer is "No!" then we need to research those ambiguous scriptures and delve into what they are really saying. And, this IS indeed what some scholars have done. And, they DO find annihilation of the wicked to be consistent with a loving God. Furthermore, they arrive at this conclusion from the scriptures themselves.

What I've found over the years is that the individual has a tendency to apply their own character traits to God. This is silly, of course, because God is far above our petty little natures. But some, maybe all of us, tend to do this anyway. Sadly, I find this topic brings out the worst in people. I've seen comments on this thread - thoughts from the minds of the individual -that appall me. I believe that some people, Christians no less, DESIRE that the wicked be punished for eternity. Consequently, that's the kind of God they seem to opt for.

 

[Orthodox Christian]

I started this thread, because I believe “Annihilation†is a wonderful truth and is supported by Scripture, I wasn’t planning on a debate about “soul sleepâ€Â. Why is the “soul†not departing the body or departing so important? Does it effect doctrinal positions held by a certain church, is it a salvation point? Even if I am wrong about believers going to be with the Lord at the moment of death, I am ok, because the alternative is still a win situation in my mind. Why so much passion in the corner of those who believe in “soul sleep†and those who don’t? Annihilation verses eternal punishment is so much larger an issue in respect to what we believe about God.
Beza

Sorry if the thread has been misdirected. The argument isn't over 'soul sleep' as much as it is over the nature of man, and by extension, the nature(s) of Christ. As I demosntrated earlier, the apologetic of the monist leads to the inevitable conclusion that Christ was of one nature and being also- which means that He was unconscious (sleeping) between crucifixion and resurrection. In other words, God 'died.' This is deeply problematic philosophically, and derails the enterprise of salvation.

Further problems include the severe contextualization of literal scriptural phrases, the subrogation of NT concepts to perceived OT sensibilities, and of course the usual implication that the whole Church went wrong at (pick place in history and insert).

Further, there is a good bit of demagoguery that accompanies this disagreement, with the dualists being assigned to the Greek ghetto and the monists- or as they like to call themselves, holists, bearing the holy grail of Semitic, OT blessing. Or so they say, ignoring the holist/materialist stance of Aristotle and all of his philosophical descendants, as well as the proponents of dualism among the ancient and so-called intertestemental Jews.

Those who are the heirs of the OT Jews have, of course, authority on matters pertaining to apologetics.

So I will recuse myself on this thread from speaking further of the existence or non-existence of the soul, for it is not the intent of the thread.

 

[Bubba]

Orthodox, I understand the implication and the inevitable results of a misunderstanding of the nature of man and I have actually learned from your posts as well as your opponents. So, the threads certainly have had value. I notice after reading Fudge’s and Peterson’s book, (Two Views of Hell) that part of Peterson’s rebuttal was over the “soul sleep†issue, which Fudge purposely did not address, because I believe he felt it to be a non issue in regards to a God who would torment the wicked for eternity. I would also comment that you are obviously a well informed and witty individual who I wouldn’t take lightly debating with.

In Christ our only hope, Beza

 

[John the Baptist]

I have recently come to the conclusion that Annihilation is taught in Scripture. For nearly 30 years I have believed in conscious eternal punishment. It is actually refreshing now when I read Scripture, knowing that we really do have a loving God who isn’t going to punish the unbeliever for eternity. Some suggested readings are Fudge’s book “Hell: A Consuming Fire†and Samuele Bacchiocchi’s book “Hell: Eternal Torment or Annihilationâ€Â. I do not believe in “soul sleep†for the believer, I do believe the wicked are resurrected on the “Last Dayâ€Â. I also believe that the wicked are tormented for a period of time, depending on the severity of the individual’s sin.


Beza

***
Hi. we finally get it right, huh? :fadein: (but think of all the other doctrines that we need help with!)
The Bible is complete on this subject, and with far more than enough Truth for the honest seeker.

One of the easiest verses that I see to finalize this, ...after reading the others, is in Obadiah 1:16 'And be as though they had never been.' (try the K.J. also)

---John

 

[guibox]

beza,

I understand your confusion. However the immortality of the soul is central to whether beings are burned eternally or annihilated.

If I believe that ALL man (including the wicked) have immortal souls, then it is most feasible that I believe it can be tortured for all eternity without death.

If I believe that wicked man does NOT have 'eternal life' as I feel the bible clearly teaches, then he is mortal and therefore cannot be burnt for eternity.

My question is this and then I, as OC is, will step back from the 'soul sleep' discussion:

How can some 'ethereal immortal 'soul'' possibly be burnt when we have ample evidence (even from that allegorical, methaphorical parable of the rich man and Lazarus) that there are bodies being tangibly burned?

I guess the 'soul' is really the spirit body? So it is not really the 'soul' that is immortal but that God resurrects the wicked with a brand new immortal body to be burnt for eternity?

:o

How confusing when one ignores the truths of the scriptures for their own preconceived fancies that can't be supported by the word of God.

 

[Bubba]

Guibox,
I believe that the believer receives his immortality when born again and the wicked are mortal, which will be apparant at the last judgment. All the particulars in regards to the condition of the wicked until that day (stupor, soul sleep, God's memory of them) is a mystery that we can only guess at until we know as He knows. The whole thought of Annihilation has been a liberating revelation to me, especially since I am a firm adherent to God being sovereign in all things, even the lives of the unbeliever.
Beza

 

[kwag_myers]

Apparently you haven't studied much on the subject then. So far, I have been the only person (other than a few of OCs posts) who actually looks in the scripture for the support. That is more than I can say for yourself..Apparently, smoke and mirrors and preconceived notions is more along the lines of your way of studying instead of logical biblical reasoning

One only needs to review my posts to see the absurdity of your statement. There is no sense defending myself when you refuse to see the facts.

But for those who missed it the first three times;

Matthew 10:28, "And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell."

Soul (psuche {psoo-khay'}) according to Strongs (I've omitted the first definition as I feel it does not apply to the context of this verse),
2) the soul

a) the seat of the feelings, desires, affections, aversions (our heart, soul etc.)

b) the (human) soul in so far as it is constituted that by the right use of the aids offered it by God it can attain its highest end and secure eternal blessedness, the soul regarded as a moral being designed for everlasting life

c) the soul as an essence which differs from the body and is not dissolved by death (distinguished from other parts of the body)

Ungers (pg. 1040) concurs and suggests Acts 2:27, "Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption."

Vines,
"...The NT uses may be analyzed approximately as follows:
(b) the immaterial, invisible part of man, Mat 10:28; Act 2:27; cp. 1Ki 17:21; (c) the disembodied (or "unclothed" or "naked," 2Cr 5:3,4) man, Rev 6:9; (d) the seat of personality, Luk 9:24, explained as == "own self," Luk 9:25; Hbr 6:19; 10:39; cp. Isa 53:10 with 1Ti 2:6; (e) the seat of the sentient element in man, that by which he perceives, reflects, feels, desires, Mat 11:29; Luk 1:46; 2:35; Act 14:2,22; cp. Psa 84:2; 139:14; Isa 26:9; (f) the seat of will and purpose, Mat 22:37; Act 4:32; Eph 6:6; Phl 1:27; Hbr 12:3; cp. Num 21:4; Deu 11:13; ..."The language of Hbr 4:12 suggests the extreme difficulty of distinguishing between the soul and the spirit, alike in their nature and in their activities. Generally speaking the spirit is the higher, the soul the lower element. The spirit may be recognized as the life principle bestowed on man by God, the soul as the resulting life constituted in the individual, the body being the material organism animated by soul and spirit. ... "Body and soul are the constituents of the man according to Mat 6:25; 10:28; Luk 12:20; Act 20:10; body and spirit according to Luk 8:55; 1Cr 5:3; 7:34; Jam 2:26. In Mat 26:38 the emotions are associated with the soul, in Jhn 13:21 with the spirit; cp. also Psa 42:11 with 1Ki 21:5. In Psa 35:9 the soul rejoices in God, in Luk 1:47 the spirit..."

And that is just the first time that soul (psudche) is used in the NT. So much for your unnamed "most competent scholars". The portions that I have omitted do not speak of man as one being but of other applications, such as a living thing (animal, man, etc.).

Bottom line, unless you have a legitimate problem with these sources, man is a three-part being, body, soul and spirit. Only the body dies a permanent death. Let me qualify that, only the earthly body (1 Corinthians 15:51-54).
[/b]

 

[guibox]

By kawg

"The language of Hbr 4:12 suggests the extreme difficulty of distinguishing between the soul and the spirit, alike in their nature and in their activities. Generally speaking the spirit is the higher, the soul the lower element. The spirit may be recognized as the life principle bestowed on man by God, the soul as the resulting life constituted in the individual, the body being the material organism animated by soul and spirit. ... "Body and soul are the constituents of the man according to Mat 6:25; 10:28; Luk 12:20; Act 20:10; body and spirit according to Luk 8:55; 1Cr 5:3; 7:34; Jam 2:26. In Mat 26:38 the emotions are associated with the soul, in Jhn 13:21 with the spirit; cp. also Psa 42:11 with 1Ki 21:5. In Psa 35:9 the soul rejoices in God, in Luk 1:47 the spirit...

There is nothing false about this at all. Your problem, though, is to make this 'soul' this 'living being' as is properly translated something that survives death. It doesn't. The spirit goes back to God who gave it, but this is not the soul, nor is it a living thing but the 'life prinicple' or as the bible says, the 'ruach'.

You do not (by any of the above texts you've quoted) have any biblical proof either textually or linguistically to show that the 'soul' survives death. Instead you twist 1 Corinthians 15 around to show that what is resurrected is merely body and no the whole man.

You obviously don't understand this one thing Paul reiterates over and over again: eternal life is found and realized only at the resurrection, not at death. (1 Corinthians 15:13-26,51-55; 1 Thessalonians 4:13-16; 2 Timothy 4:6-8)

I have already addressed 2 Corinthians 5:8 in detail and Philippians 1:21. One is talking about the spiritual body, the other about translation.

Great evidence there...

There is no 'body reunited with the soul' distinction in the NT. It's not there, kwag.

It doesn't exist.

The immortality of the soul is never mentioned (even in your 'proof' texts) and resurrection is the underlying hope and focus of eternal life all through the NT. From Christ to Peter to Paul to John.