“These shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power…”
These
The word “these” is qualitative, emphasizing the class of those described in verse 8.
shall be punished
The word punished means to pay a price [by way of return], to pay a penalty. God will repay the persecutors of the church at Thessalonica by giving them “eternal destruction” in return for rejecting the gospel and persecuting the messengers of the gospel. They will not escape God’s retribution.
with everlasting destruction
“Destruction” means ruin, death. Because a number of evangelicals today reject the idea of eternal punishment, we need to study this word more extensively. Some say that “destruction” means annihilation. This word does not imply annihilation or temporary retribution.
The New Testament uses this word of the physical death for a believer out of fellowship (1 Corinthians 5:5). Because this person did not repent of living in adultery with his stepmother, Paul gave him over to Satan “for the destruction of his flesh [his physical body] that his spirit may be saved in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.”
In 1 Timothy 6:9, Paul shows the consequences of indulging the flesh. There will be irrevocable physical ruin. Indulging the flesh ruins people.
Paul uses “destruction” in our verse and 1 Thessalonians 5:3 to describe the effect of God’s judgments in the Day of the Lord [the Tribulation] and the Second Coming of Christ. The nature of “destruction” in this verse is that it is “everlasting.”
In a few passages (Romans 16:25; 2 Timothy 1:9; Titus 1:2) “everlasting” means duration undefined but not necessarily endless. However, we can see the dominant meaning of “everlasting” in 63 other passages, such as 2 Corinthians 4:18 where it is set in contrast to phrases such as “for a season.”
“For our light affliction, which is but for a moment, is working for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory, while we do not look at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen. For the things which are seen are temporary, but the things which are not seen are eternal” (2 Corinthians 4:17-18).
The New Testament uses “everlasting” for persons and things which are in themselves endless: of God (Romans 16:26), God’s power (1 Timothy 6:16), God’s glory (1 Peter 5:10), the Holy Spirit (Hebrews 9:14), the redemption effected by Christ (Hebrews 9:12), salvation (Hebrew 5:9), Christ’s future rule (2 Peter 1:9) which the Bible declares to be without end, the life received when we believe in Christ (John 3:16) ["they shall never perish"], and the resurrection body (2 Corinthians 5:1) [elsewhere said to be "immortal" in 1 Corinthians 15:53].
“Everlasting” is something without beginning (Romans 16:25; 2 Timothy 1:9; Titus 1:2), without beginning or end (Genesis 21:33; Isaiah 26:4; 40:28; Hebrews 9:14), and without end (2 Corinthians 5:1; 2 Thessalonians 2:16; 1 Timothy 6:16; Hebrews 9:12; 13:20; Revelations 14:6).
The use of “everlasting” here shows that God’s judgment is final with no appeal (Hebrews 6:2) and is “unquenchable” (Mark 9:43). This is not remedial but retributive justice. It is not temporary but final judgment. It is of unlimited duration of time–eternal, as God’s eternal power and divine nature are “everlasting” (Romans 1:20; 16:26).
Note the parallel between “everlasting punishment” and “eternal life.” If heaven is to possess eternal life, then hell is everlasting punishment. Everlasting punishment lasts as long as eternal life. If we shorten hell, we shorten heaven.
“And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life” (Matthew 25:46).
“Everlasting destruction” ultimately means that those without Christ will lose everything that gives worth to our existence. We see that worth in the next two clauses.
Principle:
Non-Christians incur eternal destruction because of God’s justice.
Application:
God is always consistent with Himself. He always uses proper legal procedure in passing out judgment.
The idea that there is no everlasting hell attracts men. They love the idea that God annihilates those without Christ from conscious existence because then they would not have to face their liability before Him. Men are not like horses that black out when they die. People go on forever.
The essence behind the idea of hell in the Bible is justice. God is not capricious or cruel. He must be consistent with Himself. He must be true to Himself. If He bends the policy (steps outside His character), He would no longer be consistent with Himself. If He were no longer consistent with Himself, He would no longer be absolute. If He were no longer absolute, He could not be the supreme God of the universe. He would be a fractured being that we could not trust.
Hell is a place we choose. If we choose to reject God’s plan of salvation in Christ, then we make ourselves sovereign. We think we know what is the best way for the universe to operate. The outcome of this is eternal destruction.
Non-Christians love to say, “I want to go to hell because that is where all my friends are.” They miss the essence of hell in this. Hell is a place of deep alienation, alienation from God and from other people. It is a place of loneliness.
The phrase “spiritual death” is not found in the bible. It is a change from the true biblical teaching that you will in fact die (the second death) if you do not accept Christ.
Read Curtis Dickinson’s 45 page book called “What the Bible Teaches about Immortality and Future Punishment”.
The idea that all men’s “souls” are immortal is a corruption of true bible teaching introduced by church fathers who were influenced by the platonic philosophy.
Russell, I read your source and was unimpressed with his scholarship. You might take a look at this argument: Christian Apologetics Journal, Volume 1, No.1, Spring 1998. ¥ Copyright © 1998 by Southern Evangelical Seminary THE DESTRUCTION OF HELL: ANNIHILATIONISM EXAMINED By Jeff Spencer Answering the Linguistic Arguments As seen above, to the annihilationist, the words used to describe the fate of the unbeliever such as Ôdestroy,Õ Ôperish,Õ Ôconsume,Õ and Ôcut offÕ indicate a total annihilation of the unbeliever. This claim can be shown to be false. For example, Robert Morey, in his book Death and the Afterlife, answers the claims of the annihilationists by rightly pointing out that, [They] simply assert that these terms mean annihilation. Neither Froom nor those who follow him offer any lexicographical evidence or exegetical material. But starting from their unfounded assumption that these words mean annihilation . . . they always claim the authors were conditional immortalitists. They assume that any piece of literature which uses these words automatically teaches conditionalism.51 The problem with the annihilationists most basic linguistic assumption is that it is simply false. The words which are translated Ôdestroy,Õ Ôperish,Õ Ôconsume,Õ or Ôcut offÕ can mean a number of things, depending on the context, but never refer to the total annihilation of the soul. The only way that annihilation is found in any text is for the annihilationist to read his assumption into the text Ð that words such as ÔdestroyÕ or ÔperishÕ mean annihilation. Once this foundational assumption is overturned, their linguistic arguments are exposed for what they are Ð erroneous. For example, the various forms of the words ÔdestroyÕ or ÔdestructionÕ appear 512 times in the New King James Version. Morey states that Òthey represent 50 different Hebrew words and 12 different Greek words. None of them have the lexicographical meaning of ÔannihilationÕ or Ôto cause something to pass into nonexistenceÕÓ52 Rather, they have a wide range of meaning. The uses of these words in the Old Testament range from men being Òsold into slaveryÓ (Num. 21:29), to donkeys being ÒlostÓ (1 Sam. 9:3, 20), or even to denote a vessel which is ÒbrokenÓ (Ps. 31:12). In no case in the Old Testament are these words speaking of the soulÕs annihilation into nonexistence. Annihilationists refer to several Old Testament passages to affirm that abad refers to annihilation. Yet, a close look at the context of the specific passages shows that their claims are unfounded. For instance they point to Proverbs 11:10, which says, ÒWhen it goes well with the righteous, the city rejoices, And when the wicked perish, there is glad shouting.Ó A plain reading reveals that the main idea found is that both the righteous and the wicked have an effect on public life. A city is blessed by the rule of godly men and overthrown by the rule of wicked men. Therefore, the population rejoices when the righteous rule with success, and the public rejoices when the wicked are taken out of ruling positions due, possibly, to physical death. Their influence, or possibly their very life on earth ends. Hence, this proverb has nothing whatsoever to do with the annihilation of the soul of the wicked. Also, annihilationists believe abad verifies their assertions in Psalm 143:12, which says, ÒAnd in Thy lovingkindness cut off my enemies, and destroy (abad) all those who afflict my soul; For I am Thy servant.Ó Again, as with all their linguistic arguments, the context proves their position to be false, and thus, unbelievable. In context, this psalm of imprecation is a plea for the all-powerful God to help the weak and helpless servant by doing away with all of his enemies and those who threaten him. This is not a reference to the annihilation of the soul in hell, but the physical death of the enemy, which according to the psalmist, is an act of GodÕs lovingkindness. The same is true for the New Testament uses of the various forms of the words translated ÒdestroyÓ or Òdestruction.Ó The 12 Greek words that annihilationists claim denote annihilation refer to anything from ÒruinedÓ wineskins (Matt. 9:17), to ÒlostÓ sheep (Matt. 15:24), to ÒspoiledÓ food (John 6:27). However, as we will see, the annihilation of the soul cannot be proved from any New Testament passage. The Greek word for destruction, apollumi, is believed by the annihilationists to refer to the total destruction of the soul in such passages as Matthew 10:28, which says, ÒÓAnd do not fear those who kill the body, but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.Ó Again, an examination of the context proves that annihilation is not taught in this passage. This is a contrast between two types of fear: the fear of men and the fear of God. Men can destroy the body only, and therefore are not to be feared. However, God, in His omnipotence, has the ability to destroy the body and soul. Theologian John Broadus comments on the meaning of ÒdestroyÓ in this passage: ÒÔDestroyÕ need not mean annihilation, but only ruin, perdition, the destruction of all that makes existence desirable.Ó53 The use of the word destroy in this context can be illustrated in modern speech such as ÒThe Panthers destroyed the 49ers last Sunday!Ó It refers to the defeat and ruin of the 49ers, not the total annihilation of their existence. This passage is teaching that it is Òmuch more important that we avoid GodÕs displeasure, than that of our fellow man.Ó54 Concerning the contextual use of the New Testament words for Òdestroy,Ó Morey accurately concludes that Òan exegetical examination of the texts where these words are found reveals they cannot be arbitrarily defined as annihilationism.Ó55 Furthermore, the words translated into various forms of ÒperishÓ are found 146 times in the New King James Version. There are eleven Hebrew words and ten Greek words which are translated as Òperish.Ó56 The main word, abad, is the same word translated ÒdestroyÓ and, as we have seen above, it is erroneous to assume that it means annihilation. Other Old Testament words translated into a form of the word ÒperishÓ mean various things such as being ÒenslavedÓ (Jer. 48:42), girdles and vessels being ÒruinedÓ (Jer. 13:7, 18:4), the physical death of the wicked (Prov. 11:10), or ÒcuttingÓ a covenant or ÒcuttingÓ timber to build the temple (Gen. 15:18, 1 Kings 5:6). None teach annihilation of the soul. New Testament words translated into a form of the word ÒperishÓ mean anything from a grain of wheat which ÒdiesÓ (John 12:24), to things which are ÒcorruptedÓ by moth and rust (Matt. 6:19-20), to a ÒcorruptÓ mind (2 Tim. 3:8). In the New Testament as well as the Old Testament, like the words translated into a form of Òdestroy,Ó none of the words translated into a form of the word ÒperishÓ in context mean annihilation. The same is true for the words translated into a form of the word Òconsume.Ó These include twenty different Hebrew words and three different Greek words. None mean or refer to annihilation. For instance, in the Old Testament, the words can denote the flies ÒdevouringÓ the Egyptians (Ps. 78:45), skin that is Òmade oldÓ (Lam. 3:4), or walls being ÒconsumedÓ by hailstones (Ezek. 13:13). Again, in no case is annihilation the meaning of the word in the passage. Annihilation is nowhere to be found. The New Testament pattern for the words translated ÒconsumeÓ is exactly the same. The annihilationists claim that the unquenchable fire of hell Òconsumes,Ó or totally destroys, the wicked. This seems to be a reasonable point if you assume that ÒconsumeÓ means annihilation, but looking at the context of the unquenchable fire and the forever rising smoke in Revelation 14:11 exposes this reasoning as flawed. Revelation 14:9-11 states that, If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives his mark on his forehead or on his hand, he himself shall also drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out full strength into the cup of His indignation. He shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever; and they have no rest day or night, who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name. Annihilationists claim that the smoke ascending forever proves that the wicked were consumed by the fire, which naturally consumes that which is place into it. However, notice the very next phrase Ð Òand they have no rest day or night.Ó This is an indication that the torment is continual, ongoing, conscious torment. The wicked are not consumed or annihilated as Stott and company claim, for that would be a break or a ÒrestÓ from the torment of the fire! Furthermore, the torment is said to take place Òin the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb.Ó To be annihilated into non-existence is to be taken out of the presence of everyone Ð the completely annihilated have no ÒpresenceÓ Ð therefore this torment cannot be referring to annihilation. If one wants to remain faithful to the Scripture which Òcannot be brokenÓ (John 10:35), one must concede that the torment spoken of in this passage is never-ending, conscious torment. It can be argued that the wicked, at that point, would certainly welcome annihilation. The conclusion is obvious. Once the basic linguistic assumption of the annihilationists (viz. that these key words mean annihilation) is annihilated their linguistic arguments are annihilated too. In no case in the Old or New Testaments do any of these words, in context, refer to the soul being annihilated, that is, going into nonexistence. Like the moral arguments, the linguistic arguments are simply not valid. Answering the Exegetical Arguments The linguistic presupposition of annihilationists also influences their exegesis of the passages which refer to hell. This leads them to the conclusion that unbelievers are annihilated and that the traditional doctrine of hell is immoral and unjust. However, as with their moral and linguistic assertions, the exegetical conclusions are also inaccurate. The following section is an examination of PinnockÕs arguments concerning passages in the Old Testament, sayings of Jesus, the writings of Paul and other New Testament writers. I will attempt to show the error of PinnockÕs conclusions, which are derived from textual eisegesis, or Òreading into the text what the reader wants to say.Ó57 Old Testament. PinnockÕs exegesis of Psalm 37 and Malachi 4:1-2 leads him to believe that the Old Testament teaches annihilation. However, his exegesis proves to be faulty. Psalm 37 is a psalm about dwelling in the Promised Land, trusting and obeying the Lord in the midst of the prospering wicked. It cannot be over-emphasized that the language in the Psalms is poetic, and therefore, often figurative. Psalm 37:2 states of the wicked, ÒFor they shall soon be cut down like the grass, And wither as the green herb.Ó This has nothing to do with the eternal destiny of the wicked, rather it is a statement that even though they now seem to prosper, God will soon extract them from the land which has been promised to Israel, whether by actively killing them (2a) or by their eventual physical death (2b). Even the annihilationists would agree that annihilation is not a slow, withering process as spoken of in 37:2b. Therefore, it is incorrect to believe that verse 2 speaks of annihilation. Pinnock then moves to Psalm 37:9-10 to make his point. The text states that ÒFor evildoers shall be cut off; But those who wait on the LORD, They shall inherit the earth. For yet a little while and the wicked shall be no more; Indeed, you will look carefully for his place, But it shall be no more.Ó Again, this is speaking, not of the eternal destiny of the wicked in hell, but their removal from the land. These verses contrast the wicked, who will be cut off from GodÕs blessing, and the righteous, who will inherit the earth and shall not see the wicked prosper any more. The wicked will disappear from the view of the righteous and the righteous will live undisturbed. This passage refers to the earthly destiny of the wicked, not once mentioning the eternal destiny of the wicked. Therefore, verses 9-10 cannot support annihilationism as Pinnock claims. Pinnock also claims Psalm 37:20 speaks of annihilation. However, look closely at the context (18-20): The LORD knows the days of the upright, And their inheritance shall be forever. They shall not be ashamed in the evil time, and in the days of famine they shall be satisfied. But the wicked shall perish; And the enemies of the LORD, like the splendor of the meadows, shall vanish. Into smoke they shall vanish away. This is clearly speaking of GodÕs preservation of the righteous in times of famine and His elimination of the wicked in the famine. Again, PinnockÕs exegesis is unsatisfactory. Malachi 4:1-2 is also cited by Pinnock as an annihilation passage. This passage also uses figurative language to refer to the wicked. It claims that because of divine punishment they will be left with Òneither root nor branch.Ó This means that none of the wicked will escape the judgment of God. Certainly, the wicked are not literal roots or branches, neither is their punishment a literal burning down to ÒstubbleÓ or nothingness. Furthermore, this passage is another comparison between the wicked and the righteous, showing that the same ÒSunÓ which punishes the wicked also makes the righteous glad. Again, Pinnock fails to consider the context and linguistic factors present, viz. figurative language. The Sayings of Jesus. We have already examined JesusÕ saying of Matthew 10:28 and concluded that it does not teach annihilation. Yet, Pinnock offers more evidence that should be dealt with on an exegetical level. He offers passages such as Matthew 13:30ff as proof that Jesus taught annihilation. As above, a balanced exegesis of these verses reveals that Jesus did not teach annihilation. First, Pinnock claims that Jesus, echoing the teaching of John the Baptist in Matt. 3:10-12, taught annihilation in Matt. 13:30 and 40-42, says of the tares (the wicked) that had grown among the wheat: First gather together the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them, but gather the wheat into my barn. . . . Therefore as the tares are gathered and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of this age. The Son of Man will send out His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and those who practice lawlessness, and will cast them into the furnace of fire. There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth. First, it must be noted that this is a parable which employs much figurative language. The wicked are not literal weeds and they are not stored in a literal barn for literal burning into nothingness. However, the passage is very clear that they will be severely punished at the end of the age. Notice however, that in verse 41 and 42, Jesus ceases with the figurative language to describe the wicked and calls them what they are Ð not tares, but those who are offensive and lawless. He also very plainly states the end of both the wicked and the righteous. While we see the wicked cast into a Òfurnace of fireÓ where there will be Òwailing and gnashing of teeth,Ó we also see that the Òrighteous will shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father.Ó Broadus appropriately comments on the destiny of both: There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth departs from the image of consuming the tares, to introduce another thought of horror, and heighten the terrible picture. The use of various images for future punishment should prevent a crude literalism, and falls in with the important teaching that there will be degrees of punishment. But the images must be understood as representing something real. Reuss, with his rationalistic freedom, justly remarks that the furnace and the gnashing of teeth stand in the same position as the shining glory of the righteous Ð both must be accepted as facts, or else both alike referred to the mere popular beliefs of the time; one cannot accept the Bible descriptions of heaven as representing realities, and reject those of hell.58 Jesus was teaching of a literal, fiery, conscious torment in hell when He spoke in this passage. This is also true of all the other passages in which He spoke of hell. He never once affirmed that the unbeliever would be totally annihilated. Rather, he spoke of a hell being as eternal as heaven. In fact, in Matthew 25:46, commenting on the destiny of the sheep and goats, Jesus said, ÒAnd these (goats) will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous (sheep) into eternal life.Ó This passage clearly states that the punishment of hell is as eternal as the bliss of heaven. However, annihilationists claim that the effects of annihilation are eternal (i.e. the annihilated are gone forever), and that is what is meant by everlasting punishment. That is, the punishment, annihilation of the wicked manÕs soul, is eternal but the actual punishing is not. But this is not correct. First, punishment cannot, by definition, be anything but conscious punishment. A car, a book, or a computer cannot be tormented. By its very nature, punishment requires awareness. Gomes states: The mere fact that the wicked are said to experience punishment proves two inescapable facts by the nature of the case: the existence of the one punished, and the conscious experience of the punishment. If either of these two are lacking, then punishment is not occurring.59 Also, this passage says that this conscious punishment is eternal. Annihilationism or extinction of consciousness cannot be read into this passage because annihilation is a one time, instant event. In contrast, the Greek adjective ai?nion in this verse means Òeverlasting, without end.Ó60 This same adjective is used of eternal life (Matt. 25:46) and our eternal God (1 Tim. 1:7; Rom. 16:26; Heb. 9:14). This means that the punishment in hell is as eternal as the believers life in heaven and as eternal as our eternal God. The Writing of Paul and the other New Testament Writers. Pinnock cites several Pauline passages such as 1 Corinthians 3:17 and Philippians 1:28 as evidence of the annihilation, or Òdestruction,Ó of the soul. Pinnock is once again guilty of eisegesis Ð reading his view into these New Testament passages. 1 Corinthians 3:17 is a warning passage which states, ÒIf anyone defiles the temple of God, God will destroy him. For the temple of God is holy, which temple you are.Ó The temple, many commentators agree, is those who believe in Jesus Ð the Church. From other parts of the epistle, it appears that the false teachers among the Corinthian church taught unholy doctrines. Such teaching tended to defile, to contaminate, and destroy the church, which should be kept pure and holy for God. This passage is a warning that those who spread such false teaching and derision, which render the church of God unholy, bring destruction upon themselves. This destruction, I would argue, refers to the taking of the physical life of the false teacher. However, one lexicon lists this use of the word ÒdestructionÓ as to Òpunish with eternal destruction.Ó61 But whether this punishment refers to the taking of the physical life or to the eternal punishing in hell, it certainly does not refer to the individual being annihilated. The term Òsuggests ruination, or perhaps, desecration in the context, but certainly not the idea of annihilation.Ó62 One would have to bring the preconceived conclusion of annihilation to the text in order see it anywhere in this text. Furthermore, the punishment of those who ÒdestroyÓ the ÒtempleÓ is one that fits the crime Ð they are likewise Òdestroyed.Ó It must be noted that the Church will never be annihilated out of existence (Matt. 16:18), so it is reasonable to conclude that the destruction offered to the offender is not the annihilation of his soul, but strict, severe punishment. Philippians 1:28 is another text offered by Pinnock as proof of annihilationism. It states: Only conduct yourselves in a manner worthy of the gospel of Christ; so that whether I come and see you or remain absent, I may hear of you that you are standing firm in one spirit, with one mind striving together for the faith of the gospel; in no way alarmed by your opponents Ð which is a sign of destruction for them, but of salvation for you, and that too, from God. The meaning of this passage is debated among evangelicals. Other, more plausible explanations have been exegeted from this passage by those who do not hold to annihilationism. The most likely meaning offered for this text is as follows: Because the Philippians were standing firm and not alarmed by their opponents, it could be interpreted as a sure sign that the opponents were likely to be defeated. The fearlessness of the church spoke to the hearts of the opposition, telling them that destruction and defeat were coming. The destruction of the enemies of the God is a common theme throughout Scripture. Paul speaks of their doom in a parallel passage, 1 Thessalonians 1:9, telling us that they Òshall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power.Ó One author comments: ÒEverlasting annihilationÓ is an unlikely meaning for the words Òeverlasting destruction. . . Moreover, does it make sense for Paul to depict unbelieversÕ extinction as their being Òshut out of the presence of the LordÓ? DoesnÕt their being shut out from his presence imply their existence? Paul has in mind an irreversible verdict of eternal nonfellowship with God. A person exists but remains excluded from GodÕs good presence.63 In addition, the Greek word in this passage translated Òdestruction,Ó apoleia, is used 18 times in the New Testament. One commentator remarks on the use of the word: Most instances have the intransitive meaning Ôruin, destructionÕ, particularly in the sense of eternal perdition. In the Synoptics there is the way that leads to destruction (Mt. 7:13, apoleia; the opposite is zoe, ÔlifeÕ), while in Paul reference is made to the objects of GodÕs anger ready for destruction (Rom. 9:22). The end of the wicked is apoleia (Phil. 3:19), . . . the beast is said to go to destruction, an assertion that speaks not of a simple extinction of existence, but of an everlasting state of torment and death.64 Other New Testament passages are quoted by Pinnock as supporting annihilation. Yet, when the passages are viewed in their proper context, it becomes clear that Pinnock has read his view of annihilation into the text. For instance, he refers to Hebrews 10:39 and claims that it teaches annihilation. The text encourages the Hebrew Christians by saying, ÒBut we are not of those who shrink back to destruction, but of those who have faith to the preserving of the soul.Ó The mere fact that this passage is exhorting believers is ample proof that it is not speaking of annihilation. The entire book of Hebrews makes it very clear that some believers were Òshrinking back,Ó moving away from Christ in order to escape persecution. The preceding verse states, Òbut my righteous one shall live by faith; and if he shrinks back, my soul has no pleasure in himÓ (10:38 NASB). The book of Hebrews has several strong passages warning the backsliding Hebrew Christians of the consequences of Òshrinking backÓ from Christ (6:1-8; 10:26-39). One consequence is Òdestruction.Ó However, this ÒdestructionÓ is not a reference to hell because salvation is an eternal gift that cannot be lost. The punishment of Òdestruction,Ó in context, is severe discipline from the Lord which can culminate in physical death for the disobedient Christian (10:27; 28; 6:8; cf. 1 Cor. 11:30; 1 John 5:16). Pinnock also refers to several passages in 2 Peter, which he claims teach annihilation. Again, we see Pinnock reading his view into the text. For instance, the Òdestruction of ungodly menÓ (3:7) and Òswift destructionÓ of false teachers (2:1, 3) are seen by Pinnock as teaching annihilation. But a closer examination proves this is not the case. In 2:1, we see Peter comparing the false prophets of his day to the false prophets of the Old Testament. He adds that for their incorrect teaching they will experience Òswift destruction.Ó A comparison of Old and New Testament false prophets is the key to the passage. We see that the standard of accuracy for the Old Testament prophet was 100% accuracy 100% of the time. Deuteronomy 18:20 tells us the fate of a false prophet, ÒÕBut the prophet who shall speak a word presumptuously in My name which I have not commanded him to speak, or which he shall speak in the name of other gods, that prophet shall dieÓ (cf. 13:5; 18:22). With this in mind, Peter is setting the same standard for the New Testament false prophet Ð if he prophesies falsely, God shall bring upon him Òswift destruction,Ó which refers to the physical death of the false prophet.65 It does not, however, refer to annihilation. Furthermore, Pinnock points to 2 Peter 3:7 as a reference to annihilationism. This speaks of the day of judgment and destruction of the wicked. However, we have already seen above that the term ÒdestructionÓ need not mean annihilation in any context. This one is no different. The destruction of the wicked is to Òbe punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His powerÓ (2 Thess. 1:9). It is a banishment from the presence of the Lord for all eternity. PinnockÕs exegesis is full of problems, the greatest of which is that he is letting his theology dictate the meaning of the text instead of letting the meaning of the text dictate his theology. He fails to grasp the plain teachings on the subject of hell, which lead the Òfair personÓ to see that hell is a place of conscious, eternal torment away from the presence of God. CONCLUSION Pinnock and StottÕs attempt to disprove the doctrine of eternal, literal hell has not accomplished its goal. Their moral, linguistic, and exegetical arguments for the doctrine of annihilation all fall to the ground due to a lack of reason, lack of lexical evidence, and a lack of good, solid exegesis. In short, Pinnock and Stott have failed to establish annihilationism as true. Moreover, due to the grievous trends in modern theology, the defense of the traditional doctrine of hell must continually be presented. Keep in mind that it was Jesus Christ Himself, more than any other teacher, who taught the doctrine of everlasting, conscious torment for those who do not believe the gospel. And Jesus, being God Incarnate, was certainly in a position to know about the eternal, conscious torment that is awaiting all of those who reject the witness of God in creation, conscience, and Christ. However, one need not experience this eternal 65 The New Testament teaches that Christians can bring destruction upon themselves. In 1 Corinthians 11, Paul is writing to the church and telling them that because some of them had taken the LordÕs Supper in an unworthy manner, many of them had become weak, sick, or even died (11:30). Furthermore, the apostle John in his first epistle speaks of a sin unto death (1 John 5:16-17). Many expositors agree that this refers to a believer who lives a lifestyle of unrepentant sin which culminates with the premature death of the Christian. God simply punishes the unrepentant believer with the untimely termination of his physical life because of his sinful behavior, much like He did to the sinful Corinthians who sinfully took the LordÕs Supper. This is certainly a sober warning to those of us who belong to Christ. God punishes the sin of His children. He chastens those whom He loves (Heb. 12:6). And if ÒThe LORD will judge His peopleÓ (Heb. 10:30), we should all live a life of continual repentance and confession of sin. For, as the writer of the book of Hebrews point out to the Hebrew Christians who were tempted to fall back into their less persecuted Judaistic religion, ÒIt is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living GodÓ (Heb. 10:31). punishment at all. Though Jesus did clearly indicate the horrendous destiny of those who reject Him, He also offered eternal life and peace with God to those who trust in Him for salvation. Jesus said, ÒFor God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be savedÓ (John 3:16-17).
We need to get away from the term 'annihiliate'. It causes endless arguments as to the root meaning of various greek words, and is perhaps not the appropriate one to use. When our physical body dies, is it annihilated? No, it decays and becomes dust. It still exists in some form, however no longer functions as a living body, it cannot be used to see, feel, hear etc. Likewise, we are taught that in the second death, God can destroy the soul. Leaving out the debate aroung the meaning of the word 'apollumi', Jesus is speaking to jews who clearly have a belief that after death their soul will go to sheol, from where God will rescue them. Jesus contrasts this first death with the second, where instead of the soul having another chance at an afterlife, it is eternally destroyed. As the body has undergone decay and is no longer what we call a body, so too the soul. Is this a horrific punishment for those who have perhaps spent time in Hades dreading what is to come, and for all those who face the wrath of God on the judgement day? Yes. To come face to face with the glory of immortal God, to understand He created us with the intentiom of eternal life, but instead to be on death row, to realise that unlike the first death, this is the eternal, unending destruction of their soul, from which their will never be an afterlife, will be truly agonising for those facing such a destiny. Does the bible teach 'annihilation'? It's not the right term. What it does teach is eternal punishment by death of both the body and the soul for those who do not believe.
Walker, thanks for your post. In your blog you state a conclusion but do not present evidence for your point. Would you mind stating the evidence here? Thanks
Dr. Richison:
I want to thank you for your excellent website. I have used your notes and commentary over the past two weeks in my adult Sunday School class. I have found your analysis insightful and very helpful in explaining the true meaning of scripture.
Thanks again and looking forward to using your materials in the future.
Mathew chapter 10 verse 28, fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell, simply means: God is love, and he has," faultless memory" and he will surely bring back those who are in the hell, means "sheol / hades" , with his power, including those who have the hope of eternal life, which he has put in the mind, "Ecclesiastes 3:11" , that no body can destroy.
Maya, "Everlasting" means everlasting, not some temporal purgatory or hell.