The case for annihilation
I already partially presented the metaphysical case for annihilation in my recent post, “The justice of God.” To recap, the God of monotheism is essentially the foundation of all existence, and if he were ever to stop maintaining the existence of any person, they would cease to exist. But God is also the foundation of morality, the ultimate standard of goodness and love against which all other things are measured. Any time that I act contrary to goodness and love, I am removing myself from God, the ground of my own existence, and by rights I should cease to exist. This is why the righteous decree of God is that sin results in death, to paraphrase Paul’s letter to the Romans (1:29-32; 6:21-23).
It makes no sense to say that the result of removing myself from the foundation of my own existence is for that Foundation to eternally keep me in existence, even if my continued existence is characterized by torture. Thus, the metaphysical case for the annihilation of sinners is very strong, and much stronger than the metaphysical case for eternal torture (which is virtually non-existent).
The Scriptural case for annihilation is also quite strong. Both the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament emphasize that the just punishment for sin is death, by which the cessation of existence is meant (see esp. Psalm 37:9-10, 20). [1] In the New Testament, the punishment of the wicked is called “destruction” (Gk: apōleia / apōllumi / olethros), “death” (Gk: apothnēskō / thanatos), and “perishing” (Gk: phthora). It’s compared to the burning up of chaff and other plants (Matt. 3:12; 7:19; 13:40-42; John 15:6). In contrast, “torture” (Gk: basanizō / basanismos) is only used to describe the punishment of the wicked twice (Rev. 14:10-11; 20:10), and both in the most symbolic book of the Bible, where it could easily be figurative of annihilation (cf. Rev. 19:3). The clearer, more numerous passages should be used to interpret the fewer, more enigmatic passages, not the other way around.
Furthermore, immortality is said to be a positive gift that results from Jesus’ sacrifice (Lk. 20:34-36; Rom. 2:7; 1 Cor. 15:20-26, 51-57; 1 Tim. 1:10). This is difficult, even impossible, to square with the view that the unsaved will be given immortality and remain unsaved while being tortured forever. “Eternal life” (Gk: zōē aiōnia), which is often interpreted by annihilationists as a synonym for immortality, is a gift belonging only to believers in Christ, and is contrasted with the “death” and “perishing” of unbelievers (Matt. 19:29-30; 25:46; Mk. 10:29-31; Lk. 18:29-30; John 3:15, 16, 36; 5:24; 6:40, 47; Acts 13:46-48; Rom. 2:7; 6:22-23; Gal. 6:8; 1 Tim. 1:16; 6:12, 19; Tit. 3:7). This suggests that unbelievers won’t have immortality, and will eventually cease to exist.
With regard to the characterization of punishment as aiōnios in the New Testament (Matt. 18:8; 25:41, 46; Mk. 3:29; 2 Thess. 1:9; Jude 7), annihilationists typically accept that it means “everlasting,” but argue that it refers to the consequences of the punishment. In a similar way, the Hebraist can speak of “aiōnios judgment” and “aiōnios redemption” (Heb. 6:2; 9:12); the judgment and redemption are not ongoing forever, but their result is everlasting. The “aiōnios punishment” of the wicked is contrasted with “aiōnios life” (Matt. 25:46), implying that the wicked are not made immortal. The telos of certain enemies is destruction, which supports the finality of their annihilation (Phil. 3:19).
For more historically-minded annihilationists, the patristic evidence is also important. The testimony of early church writers, as I covered in a recent series of posts, shows that most in the early church believed immortality to be a gift given by God to the saved. What they disagreed about was whether this would ultimately be given to all people (universalism) or just to those who believed in this life (annihilationism). This strongly supports either of these views against the eternal torture of unbelievers.
The metaphysical case against annihilation
At first, the metaphysical case for annihilation seems very strong. The just punishment for sins is death — for God to stop maintaining the existence of sinners. But the fact is, we don’t die every time we sin. This is because, as Paul said, God “passed over the sins previously committed” (Rom. 3:25). Every time we sin and don’t die, this is a demonstration of God’s mercy; if he didn’t pass over our sins, we would die (cf. 2 Sam. 12:13). God is able to do this and still be righteous thanks to Christ’s sacrifice (Rom. 3:23-26). If he continues to maintain the existence of sinners in this life, in the hope that they will return to him, why would he eventually stop? The only reason would be if there were a point after which a sinner could no longer repent, in which case God would be both merciful and just to annihilate them.
We see that God can allow the existence of (what appears, from a human perspective, to be) evil for a time in order to bring about ultimate good. It would only be consistent with God’s mercy to annihilate a person if that person were wholly evil, with no good in them to preserve at all. But the existence of such a person is impossible! The existence of a wholly evil person would mean that evil does have real, ontological existence; thus, the God who is the foundation of all existence would be partially evil (contra 1 John 1:5). Therefore, the existence of a person whom God could mercifully annihilate is impossible (incompatible with Christian theism) in the first place! [2] To the contrary, God always acts to preserve and ultimately restore whatever good remains in each person.
The Scriptural case against annihilation
The metaphysical case for annihilationism turns out to be supportive of universalism, when the mercy of God is taken into account. Furthermore, there are many Scriptural reasons to believe that God wouldn’t annihilate sinners. Jesus tells us that God loves all people, and that this love is integral to his very perfection (Matt. 5:43-48). God’s salvific love extends even to those who don’t now believe in him (John 3:16 [cf. 12:47]; Rom. 5:8; Eph. 2:4-5; 1 John 4:16, 19). Therefore, he “wills all people to be saved” and sent Jesus as a ransom for all people (1 Tim. 2:4-6). Love is that which does no harm to another person (Rom. 13:10; cf. 1 Cor. 13:4-8). It follows that God only punishes people with the intent to restore them.
This inference is stated explicitly throughout the Scriptures. For example, when David was deciding what to do about his banished son Absalom, he was told,
“We must all die; we are like water spilled on the ground, which cannot be gathered up. But God will not take away a life; he will devise plans so as not to keep an outcast banished from his presence.” (2 Sam. 14:14)
Here, we see that God will not annihilate any person, specifically because he desires to restore them to his presence. This revelation admittedly comes from a “wise woman of Tekoa” and not from God himself (2 Sam. 14:2-3), so it could be false, even though the narrative strongly implies that her words are true.
Nevertheless, the same thing is said elsewhere, for example, “I will not continually accuse, nor will I always be angry, for then the spirits would grow faint before me, even the souls that I have made” (Isa. 57:16). Once again, we’re told that God doesn’t hopelessly punish, for the specific reason that he will not allow any soul that he created to “faint before me.” In context, this deals with the restoration of Israel from the Babylonian exile (57:17-21). However, the same thing is stated as a general principle in the Psalms (30:3-5; 78:38-39; 85:4-7; 103:8-9; cf. Mic. 7:18). Jeremiah prays that God would discipline him, “but in justice, not in anger, or you will bring me to nothing” (10:24).
Lamentations, though still in the context of return from the Babylonian exile, extends this logic to all humanity:
For the Lord will not reject forever. Although he causes grief, he will have compassion according to the abundance of his steadfast love; for he does not willingly afflict or grieve anyone. When all the prisoners of the land are crushed under foot, when justice is perverted in the presence of the Most High, when one’s case is subverted — does the Lord not see it? (Lam. 3:31-36)
God’s unwillingness to hopelessly punish is here applied to all “the sons of men” (3:33). God can’t ignore the pointless oppression of others (3:34-36), nor can he himself pointlessly oppress others. To the contrary, he “causes grief” in order to later “have compassion.”
The theme of punishment-and-restoration resonates throughout all the OT prophets. An example is the judgment of Edom according to Isaiah. This judgment is described in hopeless terms: “its smoke shall go up forever; from generation to generation it shall lie waste; no one shall pass through it forever and ever” (34:10). It is to become the haunt of unclean desert animals (34:11-15). Yet, eventually, “the wilderness and the dry land shall be glad; the desert shall rejoice and blossom” (35:1), and “where jackals once rested, there will be grass with reeds and rushes” (35:5-7). This land will even become a highway, called “the Holy Way,” where the redeemed will walk on the way to Zion (35:8-10). [3]
The same concept of restorative punishment is found in the New Testament. Jesus says that the purpose of judgment is “so that all people will honor the Son just as they honor the Father” (John 5:22-23). Paul speaks of a fire that will burn up a person’s evil deeds while saving the person (1 Cor. 3:11-15), and sends someone to “destruction of the flesh” for the salvation of their spirit (1 Cor. 5:5). The Hebraist tells us that “the Lord disciplines those whom he loves... for our good, in order that we may share his holiness” (12:5-11); and the Lord loves all people (see above). Even in Revelation, after the “second death,” the “rulers of the land” who were previously destroyed are seen entering New Jerusalem (19:19-21; 21:24-26; cf. Isa. 60:8-16).
Thus, the testimony of the Scriptures is wholly against hopeless punishment, whether this is torture or annihilation. In fact, the idea of hopeless annihilation is specifically rejected (2 Sam. 14:14; Isa. 57:16; Jer. 10:24). Furthermore, according to Paul, every person who was condemned in Adam will be resurrected to immortality in Christ (1 Cor. 15:20-22). This will involve the abolition of death and sin (15:26, 51-57). It would be utterly strange for the abolition of death to mean no more people dying, but the majority of people remaining dead forever — if no more people are enslaved, but most people continue in slavery forever, could this really be called the “abolition of slavery”? Every person will eventually confess Jesus, and every person will be subject to his salvific subjugation (Phil. 2:10-11; 3:21).
Why, then, is punishment called aiōnios or “everlasting”? I don’t believe that this word actually refers to an infinite period of time, because it’s used many times in the Septuagint and other texts to refer to things that aren’t without end. [4] But even if it did mean that, it wouldn’t be incompatible with eventual restoration. God has the ability to reverse an aiōnios punishment which he himself has inflicted (Isa. 32:14-15; Jer. 25:9-12; Jon. 2:6, 10 LXX); we saw above an example of a judgment where ‘hopeless’ language was used (“forever... forever and ever”), but a dramatic restoration was still predicted (Isa. 34-35). Thus, aiōnios punishment isn’t incompatible with universal restoration.
Conclusion
Annihilationism, the view that unbelievers will be permanently annihilated, has grown in popularity as a non-universalist alternative to the traditional view that unbelievers will be hopelessly, eternally tortured. This view is certainly morally superior to the traditional view, and a strong Scriptural case can be made in its favor. However, on further examination, it fails as a best explanation of the Scriptural data. The idea of hopeless punishment, including annihilation, is rejected by the biblical authors; even when ‘hopeless’ language (e.g., aiōnios) is used, restoration often goes hand-in-hand with punishment. Paul explicitly says that all people will be ultimately saved. [5] Therefore, the permanent annihilation of unbelievers must be rejected in favor of a much greater hope — their eventual restoration and salvation!
______________________________
[1] Gen. 2:17; 3:3; Deut. 24:16; 2 Sam. 12:13; 2 Kgs. 14:6; 2 Chron. 25:4; Prov. 5:3-5; 12:7; 14:12; 15:24; 16:25; 23:13-14; Ps. 9:17; 31:17; 37:9-10, 20; 73:27; Isa. 1:28; 51:7-8; Jer. 31:30; Ezek. 3:18-21; 18:4-28; 33:8-19; Matt. 7:13-14; John 8:21, 24; Rom. 1:32; 6:16, 21, 23; Phil. 3:18-19; cf. Rom. 5:12-14; 8:6, 12-13; 1 Cor. 15:55-56; Gal. 6:8; Heb. 2:14; 6:8; Jas. 1:15; 5:20; 2 Pet. 2:6, 12-13; 1 John 3:14.
[2] An annihilationist (or even infernalist) might want to respond that such a person, by becoming wholly evil, has become the foundation of their own existence. But that would mean that the ultimate lie — that by sinning, you can become God Most High — turns out to be true after all! The existence, then destruction, of such a wholly-evil person would be a Pyrrhic victory for God, if it could be considered a victory at all (it seems more like a defeat).
[3] Another example: in Isaiah 45, the nations that oppressed Israel are put in chains and confounded (45:14-16), but God swears that they will bow to him and be saved (45:22-25). A third example: in Isaiah 60, the nations that did not serve Jerusalem will “perish... be utterly laid waste,” yet their kings will eventually enter Jerusalem and bring in their wealth (60:8-16). This passage is specifically echoed in Revelation, where the rulers who were “killed” and underwent the “second death” (19:19-21; 20:11-15) are later seen entering New Jerusalem and bringing in their wealth (21:24-26). Yet another example: in Jeremiah 25, the land of Israel is to be “utterly destroyed” and become an “everlasting disgrace,” but only for seventy years, after which they will be restored (25:9-12). A fifth example: in Ezekiel 16, the cities of Jerusalem, Samaria, and Sodom are set forth as examples of abominable sinners who will be killed (16:35-40, 45-51); yet all of them will be restored “to their former state” and forgiven (16:53-55, 59-63). The last example: in Zephaniah 3, the nations are “consumed” by the fire of God’s anger, but their speech is changed to praise and serve God with one accord (3:8-9).
[4] Ilaria Ramelli and David Konstan, Terms for Eternity: Aiônios and Aïdios in Classical and Christian Texts, (Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2013); see also my blog post series, “Just how long is ‘eternal’? A study on the meanings of Αιων and Αιωνιος.”
[5] Rom. 5:12-21; 1 Cor. 15:20-28, 51-57; 2 Cor. 5:14-20; Eph. 1:9-10; Phil. 2:10-11; 3:19-21; Col. 1:16-20; 1 Thess. 5:4-10; 1 Tim. 2:4-6; 4:10-11; Tit. 2:11-15.
No comments:
Post a Comment