The Annihilation View of Hell

In the previous episode, I talked about the 3 different views of hell that have been taught throughout church history. In this episode, I briefly discuss why I used to hold to the eternal conscious torment view of hell but have come to believe that the annihilation view of hell is the most biblical. You don’t need to agree with me! But, if you claim to be a Christian, you do need to make sure your view of hell is based on Scripture and not just your church’s doctrinal statement or your tradition.
#hell #annihlation #conditionalimmortality #prestonsprinkle #erasinghell #francischan
If you've enjoyed this content, please subscribe to my channel!
Support me through Venmo: @Preston-Sprinkle-1
Support me through Patreon: / theologyintheraw
Visit my personal website: www.prestonsprinkle.com
For questions about faith, sexuality & gender: www.centerforfaith.com
My Facebook public page: Preston-Spri...
My Facebook private page: / preston.sprinkle.7
Twitter: @PrestonSprinkle
Instagram: preston.sprinkle

[@michaelnewzealand1888]

Four things I really love about Preston and his approach. 1) his humility to look at a topic with a teachable spirit 2) his approach in evaluating each view against scripture regardless of his own personal preference/view 3) his conclusion that conditional immortality best fits scripture. 4) his graciousness to those who don't hold to the view that he has landed on. I commend you my brother for all of these things.

[@cgandy2]

This is an excellent exposition of conditional immortality. I used to accept ECT but never really studied WHY I accepted that doctrine. When I did study it, the scriptures revealed to me an annihilation view and now I can confidently support the doctrine of annihilationism. It is so clear to me now. Thank you for the additional scripture verses presented here since I missed some of them in my own study but they all lead to the same conclusion.

[@rosemerrynmcmillan1611]

Hallelujah! Hallelujah! Hallelujah! Fantastic to see EVANGELICAL pastors looking HONESTLY AT THE BIBLICAL EVIDENCE FOR ANNIHILATION! Came to this view 30 years ago after it was brought to our attention by our pastor. It made immediate sense when we saw the overwhelming evidence in the scriptures. It also makes sense historically when we see the Roman Catholic Church using the concept of an eternal burning hell to keep their adherents in fear and bondage to their church. It is just so obvious once you see the truth!

[@ScottBayles]

Good review. I know you're limited by time, but I would also add that contidtional immortality makes better sense of the cross. If, as ECT affirms, the wages of sin is being eternally tormented, then Jesus did not pay the penalty for our sins on the cross because he was not tormented forever. If the wages of sin is death, as the Bible clearly states, then Jesus did in fact pay the penalty for our sins on the cross. Additionally, I believe that even Revelation 20:10 and John's vision of the Lake of Fire actually affirm annihilation when we properly interpret the symbolizism. After all, John specifically tells us that "the lake of fire is the seond death."

[@davidmccolgan6972]

this has been the clincher for me for quite some time. If Jesus paid the penalty for my sin (which He absolutely did) then the penalty for sin cannot be eternal conscious punishment

[@JoeySehn]

@@davidmccolgan6972 calvanists would say that Jesus’s torture was Gods way of practically scaring believers into what his wrath might do to them. The cross was an image of what hell will be like for those who don’t accept Christ; only the pain experienced on the cross will be experienced forever. Clearly not in line with a Christ centered view of scripture, nor is it in line with the God described in 1 Corinthians and the sermon on the mound

[@ttownsupreme2183]

@@davidmccolgan6972 Precisely he paid the death penalty....not the eternally separated from God forever penalty....Jesus finished the transgression of his people on Matthew 9:24 making an everlasting atonement for it....its why the holy of holies was rent in 2.

[@fireandworms]

Scott keep in mind that it says, in Rev 20:10 "age of the ages." Not "eternal" or "forever and ever." This refers to the most preeminent age, just like "king of kings" and "lord of lords" means the most preeminent king and the most preeminent lord.

[@zacdredge3859]

Huh, I actually think the opposite is true; I'm hesitant to accept this view because it diminishes the Cross. If your argument is based on a weak idea of the death and Resurrection I think that's more of a bug than a feature. I mean we tacitly accept that Christ died for everyone who will ever believe in Him and follow his Lordship so why would it paying for eternal damnation be a problem? Are you arguing that the sacrifice of Jesus is able to surely save an indefinite number of saints but is limited to preventing one-time death?

[@3OBTPA]

Rev 21:4 ‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.” I imagine the destruction of the soul being somewhat akin to that person having never existed. How can there be no more morning or crying if you know that loved ones are being forever tormented in hell? Either way, it's not a salvation issue, and no matter which one is true, I don't want to end up in hell.

[@cameronv8943]

So many have read John 3:16 but refuse to interpret it literally.

[@IsaacNussbaum]

You are so right, Cameron. People accept half of John 3: 16 but refuse to accept the other half. Go figure. ✴ _For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not_ PERISH PERISH PERISH PERISH PERISH *[ be utterly destroyed ]* .... (John 3: 16, KJV)

[@MP-sy4zc]

It is important to consider how an author uses each word elsewhere and consider the particular context, rather than just interpreting it "literally." I don't think perishing in John 3:16 would have to be annihilation, particularly if we consider how John immediately contrasts it with eternal life (which isn't just literal everlasting life according to John 17). Eternal life in John is relational, and this word for perishing is also used to describe people being lost (or, rather, that Jesus did NOT LOSE any whom the Father gave him). I think one could make a case that the destruction/perishing in John 3:16 is also understood in terms of the loss of relationship with God, not as the annihilation of their soul. Also, consider how the beast in Revelation 17:8 was going to destruction (same word), which in Revelation 20:10 is described as being tormented day and night forever and ever. Destruction/Death doesn't have to mean the literal ending of their existence.

[@alwaysadawg6488]

Question: if the penalty for sin is eternal death, and Christ paid the price for our sin, was Christ eternally destroyed? A similar question could be asked regarding eternal torment.

[@MrHwaynefair]

@@IsaacNussbaum But keep this in mind: the word translated "lost" in Luke 15 is from the same word, "apollumi" - there the lost sheep, the lost coin and the lost (prodigal) son are not beyond recovery. "Who then can be saved?! With God all things are possible!" Jesus said, "Destroy this temple - and in three days I will raise it again..." Jesus is the last "Word" on everything ❤‍🩹

[@IsaacNussbaum]

​@@MrHwaynefair *"Jesus is the last "Word" on everything"* I agree. And here is an example of His words. ✴ _Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see_ [eternal] _life,_ (John 3: 36a; ESV)

[@robbchristopher158]

Thank you for being a humble man. We need more humble men like you in the Christian community that don't accuse each other of being heretics.

[@jessicaerb7950]

Thank you for this. I’ve been reading and considering these viewpoints and this was very timely.

[@to6955]

Wow great take on all these verses. I used to be ECT but am now more convinced that conditional immortality has more evidence from scripture. It’s been a few years journey and I’ve landed here.

[@MasterporkyMinch]

Conditional immortality turned me into a miso theist

[@to6955]

@@MasterporkyMinch? Explain. How? It made me feel more comforted compared to ECT

[@IsaacNussbaum]

@@MasterporkyMinch For readers unfamiliar with the term "miso theist" (sic): _Misotheism is the "hatred of God " or "hatred of the gods."_ (Wikipedia)

[@marylamb6063]

Eternal conscious torment, a fiery funace, darkness, screams of pain, souls divided by chasms in the underworld--they are not found in the OT, but they are found in the intertestament books like 1 Enoch and Judith, up to 100 years before Christ. When Christ spoke of Gehenna/Hades (translated poorly as "hell"). he was speaking to Jews who could relate to that symbolic language. Revelation was written to Jews using the same symbolic language. Paul , writing to mostly non-Jews never mentioned Hades/Gehenna. He said the wages of sin is death.

[@Charles-tv6oi]

Enoch was wrote after Christ most scholars agree. It's psudopigripha. Enoch also died book of Hebrews shows . He latter died. He didn't see death when opposers sought his life because of his preaching..

[@MP-sy4zc]

I'd dispute the statement that Revelation was written to Jews. Sure, there were doubtlessly Jews in the churches that John wrote to, but there were also plenty of Gentiles. Paul's letter to the Ephesians testifies to the mixed community present even decades before Revelation. Moreover, the frequent mentions of sexual immorality and food sacrificed to idols in Revelation 2-3 are more likely to issues with Gentile Christians than for Jewish Christians.

[@Charles-tv6oi]

@@MP-sy4zc apostle called church saints n revelation says he shall make war with the saints

[@WhiteStoneName]

This is really good, Preston. I'm glad that you're putting this out. All the specifics and substance vs. strawmen is really helpful to people who want to legitimately engage this topic and what the Bible and/or Tradition (depending on your view of that distinction :)) say. "Seek to understand before you seek to refute." Amen

[@noah8699]

Thank you! I’ve been really thinking about this a lot lately, especially since I want to pursue what Scripture points to.

[@tomvondra2632]

it is important to acknowledge the contriburion of Edward Fudge on this questiun

[@user-rh5uu1td7f]

nice work I'm truly on the fence leaning towards annilation aswell. love videos like these to make us dig deeper in scripture. I must admit Chris Dates arguement on annilation inspired me to dig deeper now this video set it over the top... Praise God well done brother

[@Boogachomper]

Thank you so much, Preston. I’m not certain what I believe quite yet. But I love your heart and earnest study. Grace and truth, like Jesus. God bless you.

[@jordanquinley2471]

Great talk, thank you, Preston. Over the last two years or so, I have also changed my view from ECT to annihilationism. I totally agree with the four assumptions you stated around the 10 minute mark. We've always got to go back to the Word. It's funny, because I started listening to Chris Date's stuff and the first interview I heard with you was at a time when you were still undecided about this. Afterwards, I read Erasing Hell. Eventually, I got to the interview where you had landed on annihilationism, and I was nearly there myself.

[@pjdelucala]

Look at the story of the Prodigal Son. That tells it all. A person will suffer from consequences if they are negative. When a person changes their beliefs and behavior that is more loving, then they have come home to the father. That is all you need to know.

[@MP-sy4zc]

There is no indication in that passage or anywhere else in Scripture that a person can convert after death

[@MrHwaynefair]

@@MP-sy4zc Consider Jonah - it can be argued he died and repented *after* dying - then returned to life. If God IS Love - and the One for whom NOTHING is impossible - then this seems to be an open possibility - for, "all things are possible with God" ❤

[@ambassador_in_training]

Thanks a lot brother Preston for putting forth a great Bible-based argument for conditional immortality!!! I find immensely helpful to know this position isn't some kind of outlier, having no basis in Scripture. On the contrary, it is heavily rooted and grounded in the Word. In my opinion, it best describes the character of Jesus Christ: his goodness and severity! Your love & reverence for the Word & your respectful attitude for the position you disagree with is such a good way to communicate your thoughts!!! God bless you richly!!!

[@MichaelBump]

Good teaching

[@thans1UTube]

Thank you very much Preston for this great overview of the 3 historical positions. And, especially thanks for all the research you put into it. Several years ago I was challenged to question the ECT position that I was brought up with. It was through a friend Gerry Beauchemin and his book 'Hope Beyond Hell', arguing for the Ultimate Reconciliation position. I was wondering if you read that book in your research? And if so, did you find any points of his that were non-Biblical?

[@ruthhill2010]

Thanks Preston, really thought provoking. Rev 20:14 I think also supports the annihilation view if I’m not mistaken? Hell itself is burned up!

[@casualgamer542]

Another interesting thought on Rev 20:14 is that the Greek word used there is "Hades" which is synonymous with "Sheol" in the Old Testament. Sheol and Hades are never associated with the final punishment in the Bible.

[@rosemerrynmcmillan1611]

​@@casualgamer542Means the grave or death is abolished in the eternal Kingdom.

[@maceawilder]

@@rosemerrynmcmillan1611 No. That is one interpretation of Sheol/Hades. Sheol and Hades makes no sense to refer to the grave considering ancient thought concerning the two. Hades/Sheol is the holding place of the dead. It is not a place solely for the wicked but has a place of paradise and a place of suffering. You can see Jesus even speak of this in Luke 16 with the rich man and Lazarus.

[@danallison8745]

This makes so much sense. I never knew about the annihilation interpretation before and always struggled how people could be left to suffer for eternity. Both are terrible, but annihilation seems more compassionate. Who am I to even have a clue about such things?

[@weezy894]

The future of debate in regards to the nature of the afterlife is definitely between annihilation and universal reconciliation. I am personally a universalist but I do see where annihilationists are coming from.

[@CaseyOliver-gq9zz]

​@weezy894, well, you know what? Universalism is definitely No good at all and you said you are a Universalist and you think 🤔 that there's Annihilation? And what does the Bible say about that? And where in the Bible does it say anything about annihilation? And u believe it doesn't teach that because There is no such thing as annihilation. And being a Universalist will send you to eternal Lake of Fire of hell and it is eternal and yes it is forever according to the book of Revelations so if you want to believe in a lie then go right ahead and you will regret it and believe in universalism is a one way ticket to send you to hell so you might want to rethink that and read Revelations because you going by your own beliefs but you are not going by what the Bible says.

[@jonnyhughes1689]

Hi Preston and others who might see this, I'm pretty new to this idea and have found myself captivated by the idea and want to research it more in depth. Could you provide some Books or Essays in support and opposition to this view? I'm struggling to find a good set of resources to dive into besides my own attempts at interpreting the scripture you presented.

[@matthewwoodburn4708]

Well articulated. I am not alone in some of my thoughts.

[@labsquadmedia176]

AT 33:59, it's also interesting that "punishment" is contra-posed with "life", not "reward". That seems to possibly strengthen the reading of "punishment" as a synonym for "death".

[@michaelnewzealand1888]

Good point and further to support that conclusion most verses in the Bible that contrast the life use the word death. So if this verse is not talking about death then it is contradicting a whole bunch of others

[@camgalloway691]

Another note to add to the three big passages is that there evidence to support that in Matthew 25 the Greek for our English word “eternal/everlasting” is “age-enduring”. And for the revelation passages, the Greek may be saying “the age of ages, or age to age”. Translations like YLT, Literal Standard Version, and Weymouth translate these passages in these ways.

[@JaySHess]

THANK YOU!!

[@jdlyonsky]

Mathew 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.

[@jdlyonsky]

Revelation 20:14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

[@jdlyonsky]

2 Peter 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

[@jdlyonsky]

There is to be a new creation. A new heaven and earth. Basically a new universe. So if all that currently exists is going to pass away how can there be eternal judgement?

[@MP-sy4zc]

@@jdlyonsky Hell is a misleading translation for Hades. I suppose people can consider this verse as an indication that the lake of fire eliminates (annihilates) the things/people put in it. I wonder, though, if such a view reckons adequately enough with the way that Hades/Death are personified and treated as a cosmic power/force in Scripture. It isn't merely a matter of death and the place of dead ceasing to exist but that they, like the devil and beast, can no longer afflict the people of God.

[@MP-sy4zc]

@@jdlyonsky How would new creation preclude eternal judgment any more than it would preclude eternal life? If I'm going to continue to exist despite the dissolution of the current creation, why couldn't those who would experience torment?

[@robd2650]

I've been back & forth with this for years now as well, & found myself in the middle between ETC, & annihilationism. We were doing bible study recently, & read Mark 9, & off I go again. I agree with you that Rev 14; is the hardest, but I noticed that it was the only place in scripture that talks about people in that sense, and even there, it's only the people that take the mark of beast, which really further limits that. I know it's the waiting period, but I also have a tough time with Luke 16, simply because it shows Jesus himself talking about someone, dead, who's in a lot of suffering, for although not eternity, seemingly quite along time & that in the torment of flames. On the other hand I also struggle with the idea, that when dead, we're not immediately in the presence of the Lord, which some conditional mortality individuals, support. Each time I seem to get closer to just believing the annihilationism view, & it's amazing the peace it gives. I think that perhaps the ETC, brought a lot of us to Christ, in the beginning, but think perhaps, it's chased as many away, because it just seems so insensible, harsh, & inappropriate. After all as Abraham said, shall not the judge of all the earth do right. It just seems to makes so much more sense for the wages of sin to be death, & worms to eat corpses, & God to destroy the wicked with dreadful capital punishment, then for Him to torcher people for trillions of years, & still not destroy them.

[@JasonJohnSwartz]

Amen 👍🙏💙

[@SixStringSlinger1]

Any god that has to scare people into worship isn't worthy of worship. ECT isn't backed by Scripture at all. Literally every verse supports Conditional Immortality and the few verses ppl think supports Eternal Conscious Torment actually do not.

[@judethree4405]

I think the roots of ECT may have come from trying to get as many converts as possible into the seats, combining that with tithing = lots of extra money. The people who love God will be there and stay there (church), as it’s where they want to be out of love anyway, but fear is a strong motivator for more people. I’m not saying there is no fear of the Lord which is appropriate, or even that annhilation isn’t fear inducing, just not as much. More fear = more money. Simple formula.

[@Malachi4-1McCoy]

Eternal torment actually begin with the greek philosophers, primarily Plato, they argued we all have an immortal soul, therefore the wicked burn forever, scripture tells us that we are mortals not inherently immortal, we get immortality through Jesus. I believe as time went on the belief of eternal torment slipped into Christianity and eventually when the Catholics had major power and control they used it as a fear tactic, the Catholics actually claimed it was a heresy to claim that the punishment of the wicked was anything other than eternal torment. So not only were people thinking about being eternally tormented if they don't tithe enough, they also believed they might fall under that eternal torment if they claimed it was actually annihilation. To be honest when people claim we have an immortal soul I almost consider that heresy because it equates man on the level of God, now one could argue, although not Biblically, that God allows man to be immortal, he decides not to destroy, but God most certainlly could annihilate.

[@forwardsdrawkcab]

It's not that complicated. If you gather all Bible passages regarding the ultimate fate of the wicked, and make sure you understand them in their contexts, you will end up with a very very short list in support of eternal life in 'hell' (Gehenna / lake of fire) and a very long list of passages in support of death (unconscious) as the wages of sin, even reduction to smoke and ashes (annihilation)

[@forwardsdrawkcab]

Read what Jesus taught in Matt 10:28.

[@JuanDiaz-uf5ji]

Mabye the Bible is contradicts itself cause humans made it all up and we all make mistakes. Mabye it’s not a god who wrote the stupid book

[@jaredcleevy6667]

You do realize the new testament was written 60 to 70 years after Christ's death? Do you really think they wrote Jesus's words 100% correct?

[@shaunigothictv1003]

@@JuanDiaz-uf5ji Excellent point

[@chadpugh443]

If u could repent after death then life would have no meaning.

[@hawkeye790]

I came to the same conclusion. Thanks! Excellent teaching.

[@coleyoung912]

Great overview Preston! Thank you for the ‘thought-ful’ and ‘thought-provoking’ video!

[@Hulkmosher]

Yes Sodom and Gommorrah are not burning today and those cities are given as an example of what eternal fire is,it's sad but when you ask a Christian are those cities burning today every single time I've asked they completely avoid giving an answer,and they try to bring up other scriptures ,they avoid the question entirely from my experience

[@Mynameisjoof]

Of course the city is gone, as are the bodies of the billions of people that have died are gone. But their souls are not gone. The body is separate from the soul, and Matthew 10:28 tells us, “Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.”

[@Hulkmosher]

@@Mynameisjoof a soul doesn't exist without a body.Genesis says that man became a living soul. Whenever the Bible makes reference to a soul it's talking about a living breathing creature a nephesh, not some disembodied entity. And you're wrong souls die according to the Bible

[@Hulkmosher]

@@Mynameisjoof no reply? Ok

[@Hulkmosher]

@@Mynameisjoof it's been over a week I'm still waiting for a reply do you have one?

[@michaelnewzealand1888]

Jude 7 references Sodom and Gomorrah as examples of those what suffer the punishment of eternal fire. Seems like they are an example of instant destruction. If people suggest it's what is happening to them after death, it's the same for them as anyone else in the torment framework, so they don't serve as a particular example of anything.

[@roderickcruz5234]

I am a filipino. I understand simple english. Death means no more life, ceased from living Destroy means annihilated, permanently broken, of no use and can not be fixed anymore.

[@adenjones1802]

That is true brother. You understand better than most it seems.

[@shaunigothictv1003]

Excellent Roderick.

[@acb9318]

So we can try and interpret Revelations/dreams/visions, or we can look at what God actually said (Ezekiel 18:32, 18:23, 33:11). Some other good verses for annihilation are James 5:20, Romans 6:23, and John 3:16.

[@Landis_Grant]

Why do some people believe annihilation is more scary than eternal conscious torment?

[@chadpugh443]

Would you want to be tortured forever and ever or simply cease to exist?

[@chadpugh443]

I believe theres no way to completely destroy a soul maybe it doesnt exist in heaven or in gods eyes but it exists in hell its just it ceases to exist to believers.

[@IsaacNussbaum]

@@chadpugh443 *"I believe theres (sic) no way to completely destroy a soul"* It appears that God knows a way, Chad. ✴ _'And be not afraid of those killing the body, and are not able to kill the soul, but fear rather Him who is able both soul and body to destroy in gehenna._ (Matthew 10: 28; YLT) (Gehenna is a valley south and west of Jerusalem.)

[@user-pk5mx1pd1b]

You have said CI cancels out UR but what if only some like the worst of the worst gets CIed and the rest get URed? Another question: does CI happen at physical death or is there some 'punishment' before CI?

[@Malachi4-1McCoy]

I honestly hope Revelation 14 is talking about the final judgement because it proves annihilation in my opinion, I think no rest is just imagery used in a book full of imagery connected to already a passage using imagery. The main reason you could believe that this verse in Rev 14 is talking about final judgement is because it says in the presence of the lamb and the angels, but even then it could just be talking about when Jesus returns before the millennial reign and judgement of the wicked. Rev 14:11 “And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever; they have no rest day and night, those who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name.” as you showed Isaiah 34:9-10 “Its streams will be turned into pitch, And its loose earth into brimstone, And its land will become burning pitch. It will not be quenched night or day;Its smoke will go up forever. From generation to generation it will be desolate; None will pass through it forever and ever.” Isaiah 34 gives a clear picture of utter annihilation, it even talks about unquenchable fire, the smoke that rises forever can't possibly be literal because today there is no smoke rising. Revelation 14 is using imagery found in the OT that gives an image of annihilation, this is almost exactly the same as the way Jesus uses worms that will not die.

[@michaelnewzealand1888]

Well said about the usage of those terms and imagery. Even unquencable fire, people think that means it goes on torturing forever, when in fact it just means that it can't be quenched or put out.

[@richtidwell]

Excellent, intellectually honest, humble presentation! I too have arrived at annihilation and now affirm it. Question, since man is a spirit, soul, and body (Rom 8:6). Do you believe the unconscious raw life force (spirit) of a person returns to God and only their body and mind are destroyed? Examples: Matthew 10:28 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.

[@zacdredge3859]

Just to clarify, Romans 8 is referring to how we orient the mind, whether by the flesh(in the sense Paul uses it to describe worldly living and sinfulness) or by the Spirit. So Paul's not really teaching a trifold metaphysics of humanity in the first place, at least not in Romans 8. So in Matthew 10 the body and soul are designating the fullness of a person; in other words the destruction of one bot not the other is partial, but the destruction of both(whether allegorical or literal) is the much greater concern. This doesn't really leave room for any 'return to God.' Honestly that sounds more like the notion of Samsara found in Eastern religions but I don't believe it's compatible with the Bible or Christian theism. Whether or not there is a 3 fold nature to humanity as opposed to strict dualism is still up for discussion; I'd say Jesus is justified in making a polemic statement about Body vs Spirit without precluding a metaphysical concept that doesn't relate to what he is teaching. Personally I'd say the mind is the realm of personal existence whereby the spirit and the body intersect but it doesn't have a distinct substance from the other two.

[@jondoe8014]

I would argue that romans 8:6 is a weak way of declaring mankind is Spirit, Soul, and Body as this verse declares mind within both cases. To be carnally minded and spiritually minded arent used to hint at us being a Spirit. I believe we are body, and soul. The Spirit part isn't ours. For example the Spiritual aspect is something external within us. Having the Spirit of the Lord within us granting life. In Genesis 6 my Spirit shall not always strive with man showing that when the Spirit of GOD is not with man his life span is decreased. Though if one believes we are also spiritual beings I have no way to say they are wrong. I simply don't see a reason to believe we are spiritual beings.. The extrapolation typically comes from being made in the image of GOD saying since GOD is a trinity so too are we, but that is also an assumption. Being created in the image of GOD, to me, doesn't speak directly being like GOD as much as it presents a uniqueness for mankind. I lean towards a soverign individual doctrine in that Who is like unto GOD? There is no GOD before GOD, and there is no GOD after GOD. This applies to us declaring a form of unique property. There will be no me before me, and there will be no me after me. I am a unique individual. The same is true of all of us. Though we are part of a body Paul makes it clear we are individual members as well. So while I don't believe we are spiritual beings I am not against those who do. I just believe it is more of an assumption than an actual fact is my point. (Edited because my auto correct did not capitalize GOD in two instances)

[@noelinmarchuk8717]

Thank you

[@jaredcleevy6667]

With how long we have been reading the book of Revelation, were still scratching our heads over it. The symbolism is unreal. We might not fully understand it until it all comes to pass. Then we will say, oh! That's what the book of Revelation was talking about.

[@michaelnewzealand1888]

That's an honest assessment. As someone who has read it maybe 30-50 times and still aren't sure, it amazes me how those who haven't read it even once seem to "know" what it is talking about. You are real brother.

[@jondoe8014]

Revelation requires a working knowledge of the entire Bible and anyone who tells me they have a working knowledge of the entire Bible I instantly question. Test all things and holdfast to that which is good. That's why prophesy came from person to person because not one human could hold all the truths. I can give you some of the Bibles explanation on some symbols in Revelation I can, by no means, claim I know what every symbol means. So when it comes to things I am unsure of I make sure to make that known. I'll say things like the symbols to me seem to be expressing this, but your interpretation (as long as it falls in line of what is presented) can be just as valid. I will always have questions.

[@Bioboy590]

I loved this talk and how it has made me start questioning the ECT theory, which is the only one I was ever taught growing up. I would say though that I think it would be beneficial to acknowledge the different types of death in the Bible, which proves the word "death" means separation. For instance, Adam and Eve's bodies or souls did not cease to exist the day of their fall, but they did die in the sense of separation from God. Eternal death could therefore be defined as eternal separation from God, which could occur in the lake of fire or through annihilation and neither would create a logical conflict.

[@michaelnewzealand1888]

That's a good point, but I would point out that the Hebrew of the verse mentions the Hebrew word for die twice, so would be better rendered "in dying you shall die". Although that reads strange in English. The idea being, the day he ate from the tree, he became mortal and eventually would die. So whilst, that did create a relational separation, I don't think that is the primary emphasis of what God was saying there, although I can see why many do think that. It's like saying once he commited the crime, his fate (death) was sealed.

[@samuelbarns118]

Really appreciate this calm and thoughtful presentation of the conditionalist perspective. It's crazy how many people simply believe in ECT because its traditional, or because they think that's the only option.

[@chadwardlaw2613]

Good list supporting annihilation. I agree. But the wicked shall perish, And the enemies of the LORD shall be as the fat of lambs: They shall consume; into smoke shall they consume away. (Psalm 37:20) Also check out the seventh day Adventist church doctrine regarding the state of the dead, conditional immortality, judgement(annihilation) for the wicked. Just because the eternal torment view is widely accepted, doesn't make it the correct interpretation. Does that sound compatible with the merciful loving God of the Bible?

[@cherylwilliams4738]

Who are the wicked exactly? I can't see that the young woman {in the remote jungles somewhere} that dies in childbirth, and didn't say "the magic prayer", would count as evil. ?? {Just thinking out loud} Any thoughts? And what about people being saved post mortem? Is that a possibility?

[@shaunigothictv1003]

@@cherylwilliams4738 And what about the ancient aborigines of Australia - or the ancient pygmies of Papua New Guinea - or the ancient blacks of Central Africa - or the ancient red Indians of North America - ALL OF WHOM lived thousands of years before Jesus and never even heard the name of Jesus?

[@austinisakson]

I read Erasing Hell back in 2012 (right after reading Love Wins) mostly due to Francis Chan's name being on the book. It was excellent. I thought it was such a good response to Love Wins.

[@762ammo]

Preston what about Daniel 12:2? Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt

[@linncountycampuslife782]

Never really connected this vs out of Daniel with this conversation. Thanks, this is a really interesting topic. Definitely a topic we need to get right if we are telling people what judgment might look like.

[@Mrm1985100]

It's shame in the eyes of the living...

[@linncountycampuslife782]

@@Mrm1985100 maybe but I think that's doubtful. Daniel 12:2 (NLT): Many of those whose bodies lie dead and buried will rise up, some to everlasting life and some to shame and everlasting disgrace. Doesn't seem to be written that way.

[@davidmccolgan6972]

I think he covered this: the contempt can be everlasting without the need for the object of contempt to still exist. Someone who is currently alive can continue to hold their contempt for someone who is now dead.

[@linncountycampuslife782]

@@davidmccolgan6972 I agree that is possible, however in context both awaken. The reason I even responded to the original comment was that it does seem to be a vs. which defends E.C.T. from the Old Testament.

[@augustusgarton58]

Another subject maybe, it helps to have a Strongs Concordance

[@Manofwar7]

Some say eternal hell is complicated. I wonder if eternal heaven is as complicated 🤔

[@kevcooper3037]

some say eternal life is complicated. I wonder if eternal death is as complicated

[@andrewwhite1318]

Exodus 3:2 And the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush: and he looked, and, behold, the bush burned with fire, and the bush was not consumed. This verse is very interesting in the Greek Septuagint. For "burned" it uses the Greek word "kaio" meaning to burn. But for consumed it uses "katakaio" meaning to burn down or wholly consume. "Katakaio" comes from "kata" meaning down and "kaio" to burn. So the bush was burning but not burned down. 2545. καιὼ̀ kaio kah’-yo; apparently a primary verb; to set on fire, i.e. kindle or (by implication) consume: - burn, light. 2618. κατακαιὼ̀ katakaio kat-ak-ah’-ee-o; from 2596 and 2545; to burn down (to the ground), i.e. consume wholly: - burn (up, utterly). Thus if the wicked in hell are to burn forever they would be burned with fire but not consumed (kaio-ed but not katakaio-ed). So what does the Bible say? Matthew 3:12 Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up (Strong's G2618) the chaff with unquenchable fire. Matthew 13:30 Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn (Strong's G2618) them: but gather the wheat into my barn. Matthew 13:40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned (Strong's G2618) in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world. So, unlike the burning bush, which was not burned up but was only on fire; only "kaio-ed", the unrepentant wicked will be wholly consumed by the fire when the world ends; they will be "katakaio-ed". This is what the Bible teaches. This is why is speaks of them, and even Satan, being turned to ashes. Ashes can't feel or think. There is no eternal torment: no wicked people will be like the bush and be on fire without being turned to ashes. However, there is a second death, which causes the cessation of existence forever.

[@davidmccolgan6972]

I'd be really interested to know how the parable of the rich man and lazarus reconciles with this view of conditional immortality.

[@lovedogs1999]

You said it in your comment, it's a parable. Is heaven literally a treasure in a field? no. parables aren't meant to be taken literally. You could say it isn't a parable since scripture doesn't specify, but the story was used by Jesus as a parable and the language is so literal it's very hard to say it isn't one. Additionally, the support otherwise is very compelling. Even if it is Jesus saying it, I'm not certain the takeaway from that story is what hell looks like.

[@davidmccolgan6972]

thanks for your reply, @@lovedogs1999 . I appreciate it :) Can you please share what you think the takeaway from that story is. I agree that it is a parable but I cannot fathom what Jesus wanted us to understand from it?

[@stephenshutters]

@@davidmccolgan6972 Arguably, the central message of that parable is that wealth won't save you in the end and that many may be surprised by who receives eternal life and who does not.

[@joshuas1834]

Even if it were literal, and not a parable, it would be talking about the intermediate state and not talking about the eternal state.

[@lovedogs1999]

@@davidmccolgan6972 How the meek will inherit heaven

[@oldennongpluh3788]

There are lots of biblical verses to support annihilation. But what if these verses refer to physical death or destruction of the physical body. Rev 20 refers to Lake of fire as second death. It looks to me like the second death is eternal.

[@fireandworms]

That is what it means, the Bible doesn't postulate another kind of death. The second death occurs after you are physically raised for the judgment.

[@jondoe8014]

You shall not SURELY DIE....

[@studyingthebiblewithsheri2371]

I do believe your viewpoint is biblical, but so is mine.

[@orangeandslinky]

pass out of WHAT KIND of existence? Physical ? yes I see that. What happens to the souls that are not affected at all by fire to end them?

[@magictransistorradio4933]

I first heard this view from Chris Date. Being raised on Eternal Consious Torment, I basically thought it was the only biblical view. But then I realized that only 1 chapter in the bible seems to indicate ECT. Revelation 20. A book full of symbolic language. Everywhere else says eternal life or death/perish.

[@marcusmuse4787]

I think it's interesting how the lake of fire is brimstone and fire just like in smelting gold and brimstone or sulfur dioxide is released making the gold pure. God does not cast people out forever. In Lamentations 3:31 it says “For the Lord does not cast off for all time”

[@garycarriger290]

God is love and love never faileth

[@mikhailyaremkiv]

It can sometimes be difficult to know that I belive in conditional immorality while many of my heroes, like the theologians, pastors, teachers and scholars that God used to bring me closer to Truth still hold to ECT. Thing is, I have to part with my brain and ignore what the Bible says, in order to go along with what my "heroes" say on this topic.

[@Mrm1985100]

I'm surprised that Preston Sprinkle downplays conscience as a guide. I think it's actually biblical to give far more importance to it.

[@KevinGeneFeldman]

To hold to ECT you have to take the poetic apocalyptic language of revelation literal and the entire rest of the Bible describing the fate of the unsaved "death" "destruction" "you will look for them but will not find them" "burned up" as figurative. ECT is not reconcilable, morally, Biblically, logically, its actually below universal reconciliation in terms of possibility.

[@michaelnewzealand1888]

Yes I agree, it's the reverse of good biblical understanding. Romans is literal doctrine for example and Revelation is symbolic imagery. Which draws heavily upon the OT.

[@dcnfamilyify]

If ETC is the correct view why don't we see it in the OT? It's so foundational if it's true and God should have presented it to Adam in the garden. But God told them they would die, not be eternally tormented for sinning.

[@Hulkmosher]

And you're correct they did die according to the Bible, the idea of the immortality of the soul is not biblical comes from paganism and it's really sad that most religious leaders and churches are repeating the LIE of the devil"thou shalt not surely die"

[@judethree4405]

@@Hulkmosher Boom. Mic drop!

[@TitusJudah]

Universal salvation/reconciliation is what makes the most sense in love with God’s character. If you and I as human beings will not torture our own kids forever and forever, it makes no sense that God (who is love) would do that to his own creation.

[@KevinGeneFeldman]

What does it mean when all people on earth would PREFER that ultimate reconciliation is true? Does that mean we have conceived of an outcome more just and more moral than God? I think thats something important to think about, how could we hope for something other than what a perfect and just God has made?

[@ilyakazantsev1133]

Instead of yelling “heretic!” at you my actual reaction was “yes, woo-hoa!” After heavily defending traditionalism for YEARS, I thoroughly investigated my heart by talking to the Lord and fellow- believers (including my spiritual leaders) AND by investigating the Scriptures, I’ve finally landed on Conditional immortality - though I don’t believe in total annihilation (in my view, people’s personality, all their good aspirations and hopes cease to exist and their self-consciousness as well, so what IS being tortured is what remains - the sinful nature abominable to God which only confirms a passage from Rev 14 where it says that people will be tortured before the Lamb forever and ever…) thank you for sharing that! 15:06

[@michaelnewzealand1888]

In regards to the verse in Rev 14 there is a very similar verse in Isaiah 34:9-10 where the smoke of their torment, kind of strangely to our ears, speaks about Edom's destruction. You could check out that reference if so inclined.

[@abbysharp9059]

The testimony of the destruction goes up (that is the smoke). When a person is destroyed it is eternal. Being kept somehow to experience an ongoing experience.......it is unnecessary. God will ultimately destroy the soul in Hell/Gehenna. Just like Jesus taught. Remember in Revelation that Hell and death will be destroyed in the Lake of Fire/Gehenna.

[@robwagnon6578]

There is support for each of those 3 scripture for the annihilationism side. The wages of sin is death', not eternal torture...

[@gswhyte]

Very informative video. As a fellow Conditionalist, I can relate to your journey, as well as to the accusations of being "unbiblical", despite the numerous texts that point toward it, in addition to the larger narrative of Scripture that seems to assume it. It's also helpful when you outlined Sodom to include the other Jewish writers, as one of the "Traditionalist" arguments has been that ECT was the ONLY view among the Pharisees, which if you look, it actually wasn't. It might also be helpful to look into the early church writings as well, to give proof that the minority views (Conditional Immortality and Ultimate Reconciliation) were also taught in the early days of the church as well...

[@zacdredge3859]

I'm sincerely considering the annihilation view, or something like it, but I don't find this shotgun Scripture approach very helpful. If a few trolls say you're unbiblical without merit please just ignore them rather than let it affect the way you deal with God's Word in the first place. An in-depth study of a few key passages that support the central premise is more helpful than a lot of redundant verse. The cessation language in the OT may or may not be referring to Hell and may or may not be using destruction as an allegory for eternal suffering; which we have no analogue for in our temporal context or conventional use of language. They could all be referring to Hell(unlikely) yet all be using cessation terminology as the common means of describing eternal suffering. Even among the NT references it seems some of them are referencing the 'son of destruction' or the like where the term is describing the individual or group as being destructive in nature, not bound for destruction. These ones simply don't relate to the premise and the others echo OT language. There's also a way in which this approach neglects to acknowledge the relationship between the OT and the NT; things of the New Covenant often exceed the nature of things in the Old by orders of magnitude. Where the Levites offered sacrifices often and consistently but this never availed to cover sin Jesus offers Himself once for all time as a Priest in the order of Melchizadek and sits at the right hand of the Father. This is the central argument of Hebrews and if the 'lesser to greater' argument applies to Christology and means of our salvation then I don't think we can easily avoid it applying equally to damnation in contrast. Now to be clear, this isn't what I *want* to believe, I came here to see if the Annihilationist view is Biblically consistent and I don't think Preston has been successful at verifying it by that method. It's not to say there's no Biblical basis at all and I intend to keep studying deeper on this issue.

[@ThemCoversMB]

It makes more sense.

[@garyjaensch7143]

Isaiah 5 :13 says therefore my people are gone into captivity, and 5:25 says therefore the anger of the Lord is kindled against my people,I think this is talking about when Jerusalem were taken into captivity by Nebuchadnezzar, it’s not saying God is angry at the Saints, the bodies were literally lying in the streets after Nebuchadnezzar burned Jerusalem, Isaiah 1:1 says this chapter is about Judah and Jerusalem in the days of uzziah and other kings, I don’t think Isaiah 1:27-31 is talking about hell either, it’s about Jerusalem ,I think each verse should be read in context and the whole chapter read

[@maryludwig690]

revelation 14:9-11 To me sounds more like a warning for revelation 16:2 which happens on earth before the lake of fire.

[@johngraham1274]

Hell as eternal torment comes from Plato by way of Augustine, Jerome, Luther & Calvin... Col. 2:8

[@kevcooper3037]

Judith, Maccabees, Enoch all had explicit imagery of eternal conscious torment and they were written BC way before Augustine.

[@garycarriger290]

God taught to love your enemies and that is what He does, love never faileth, love finds a way, Jesus is the way, and after the refiner's fire the wicked will be destroyed and nothing left in them but adoration and repentance and acceptance of the way .

[@judethree4405]

How would punishing them make the evil be purged from them? It seems that that would cause more disdain for God, or just make them selfishly for self preservation reach out to God in an inauthentic way, just to get out of hell.

[@shaunigothictv1003]

@@judethree4405 Excellent point

[@benjamin.misantone]

The only thing I would say Preston that went unaddressed, is that whatever hell is (though more difficult to interpret than assumed) is awful & terrible.

[@user-rh5uu1td7f]

I think all sides already know hell is a bad place.

[@zacdredge3859]

I know. What the hell?! 😂

[@ttownsupreme2183]

Preston Hi...how do I email you?

[@tomgarrison5313]

Mark 9:43-44 "And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched." Hell is eternal, never ending punishment for the enemies of God. They have no rest day or night eternally.

[@IsaacNussbaum]

According to Isaiah, the unsaved will be destroyed by maggots and cremated by fire. ✴ _“And they will go out and look on the dead bodies of those who rebelled against me; the worms that eat them will not die, the fire that burns them will not be quenched….”_ (Isaiah 66: 24, NIV) (Jesus, talking about Gehenna, quotes Isaiah at Mark 9: 48)

[@MrMathjordan]

Sad that religious people can be so cavalier about people being lost forever or “annihilated.” Something is missing.

[@kevinrombouts3027]

I like your humble attitude about this difficult topic. I personally rule out ECT because it has insufficient biblical evidence AND it brings in the issue of the character of God as a torturer. God tells us to live our enemies but he ultimately not only refuses to do so but He exacts the most horrific retribution to a degree we cannot begin to fathom. Conditional Immortality has much more going for it biblically but it also compromises God's character. In both views billions of people are either tortured or destroyed, probably more than n are saved. Does God annihilate those who ate made in His image? Don't we all have at least some vestige of God's image remaining despite sins marring in our lives? For me I believe in the gospel as GOOD NEWS not dreadful news or decidedly dodgy news. You didn't mention much about universal reconciliation, nor did you mention the views of hell in Eastern Chriistianity. What about " Every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father." The only way God can receive glory due is if we all WILLINGLY confess Jesus' Lordship not with our arms twisted behind our backs. The totality of scripture has reconciliation and restoration as it's principle. God's love does win and just as in the parable of the Lost Sheep brings it home to bring all into the shepherd's purview. For God, success is 100% nothing less. I am not saying the Lake of Fire is not real but that it is the Fire of God's love consuming the stubble of our false selves, purifying us in order to fully reconcile each one. Just like the Prodigal Son, we will all come home, I believe.

[@alfredozuniga2956]

Man, it's even hard where to start to identify all the hermeneutical errors in the way he used the text to support his view. So I'll try to point a few since many can be sway by thinking how many verses are been quoted. Bit first of all he never define the difference in those text to the immediate fulfillment of those prophecies and the future fulfillment. For example in the OT the prophet is literally talking about events where judgement was going to be carried on. And they where goingto be killed and wiped out. But then he immediately relate those passages to "hell" or "eternal death ". Ignoring the fact that revelation also includes judgment to the wicked in regards to physical death. For example the battle of Megedo. That will be judgment that will bring literal physical death to some. On the other side he assumes the definition of death in the whole biblical concept means ceasing to exist which is clearly not biblical. The idea of death is separation from God. When you read Genesis 3 that the idea of death was removal of humans from the presence of God. In Eph. 2 talks about been dead in sins and trespasses. Death is been separated from God even in the middle of our existence. And lastly I will say that the words forever and ever are not merely extra words that the Spirit inspired just to fill the space. We need to be serious readers and consider the words specially in clear texts like the ones he said at the end where not that "impressive/strong " in eternal conscious punishment. I see this view is highly influenced by new hermeneutics grounded not in reading the text in light of its context and light of biblical theology. The Old Testament is a shadow of what was to come and the new testament was the substance so obviously the verses specifically about Hell in the New Testament and eternal torment brings clarity to the Old Testament and not the other way around.

[@fireandworms]

Man if you're going to criticize other people's hermeneutics, you should get yours in order first. One important interpretative technique is to read in the original language. In Greek, there is no "for ever and ever," nor does that even make sense in English. "For ever" already means an unending time period, why would you need to add another time period to that? It's grammatically nonsensical, and that's not what the Greek says. It says "aionas ton aionon," age of the ages. In other words, the most preeminent/important of the ages, just like the "Lord of lords" and the "King of kings" is the most preeminent lord and king.

[@jrhemmerich]

Alfredo, you should consider the difficulty of your position. If we say that OT references to physical destruction arn’t about eternity, then why does Revelation use such passages, such as the quotations from Isaiah 34:10 about the destruction of Edom? Should we take this passage which contains a physical hyperbole “the smoke goes up for ever and ever,” because it did not go up forever when Edom was destroyed to mean that it will happen “forever” in the spiritual ream when alluded to by John? It seems that you are picking which description of punishment to take physically or eschatologically in an arbitrary manner. I’d suggest we first read Isaiah 34:10 and decide if it’s hyperbole meaning is permanence, and then decide what to do with that meaning when similar passages appear in Revelation Rev 14 and 20. This is not a new hermeneutic, nor does it deny that the OT should be read in light of the enlightenment of the NT, it is just good old fashion grammatical historical hermeneutics because the when the NT uses the OT it does not expand its meaning unless it explicitly indicates that it is doing that. And in Rev 14 and 20, there is no indication of an expansion of OT meaning but only allusion to use the old meaning. The old meaning is not altered it is reasserted. If one does think there is change of meaning here, then one has the problem of a teaching (based on only two verses) that contradicts, or at the very least, is in strong tension with the majority of other scriptures as well as a sensible view of proportional justice (temporal sins get temporal punishments, which avoids the difficult assertion of infinite punishment in relation to temporal human acts). Also, you are claiming that death means separation from God, but that is an often stated conclusion of those that assume, as I once did, that the soul is immortal. But this assumption needs to be supported from scripture (even if death did mean separation-a spacial metaphor-if it was complete separation, then it would still result in cessation of being, as one cut off from the Lord of life has no life in themselves. So one must posit some separation, but not a complete separation if one is to take your view). The scriptures however teach that the “soul” that sins shall die, Ez. 18:13, Mark 10:28, and Rev. 20:14 (resurrected body/soul). The penalty for unbelief is a permanent “destruction,” which occurs “away from the presence of the Lord”(2 Thess. 1:8). The destruction is the end purpose of the separation, not the substance of it. Only those that know God in Christ are granted eternal life: John 3:16, the rest perish. It is true, sin resulted in Adam and Eve’s exile from Eden, and separation from God, but that was an interm period, on account of God’s long suffering, in hope of redemption for those against whom the divine sentence of death stood. We should not confuse the temporary separation with the ultimate judgment-the second death. Death is the permanent separation.

[@Hulkmosher]

The Bible does not speak of eternal torment, everlasting destruction yes

[@shaunigothictv1003]

@@Hulkmosher Agreed

[@jondoe8014]

I agree with the sentiment, but I dissent in the sense I do believe there are things GOD can not do such as go against his character/nature for example. The fact that GODS character is always the same is what makes him so reliable in my opinion. So while in sentiment I agree GOD can do whatever he wants I mean it in a strict sense when I say it. As for everything else I appreciate the effort you put into it.

[@TRUTHINCHRIST-cw8ke]

Matthew 25:46. 46 “And they will go away into ETERNAL PUNISHMENT, but the righteous into ETERNAL LIFE.” (((( To anyone who does not believe in EVERLASTING conscious TORMENT, please explain why ETERNAL LIFE here means EVERLASTING conscious LIFE but the punishment doesnt????? )))). Please no philosophy, Just answer the question in an honest way. Thank you.

[@OrdoSanctiBenedictus]

Who has the keys?

[@1Kaneohe1]

Mark 9:42-48 Blows away any concept that denies the eternality of Hell. i.e. "where the fire is not quenched". That is a simple phrase repeated several times in scripture. It is REALLY doing an injustice to scripture to make those verses mean anything other than eternal. HUMAN REASONING twisting scripture to fit ones belief system is sad, untrue & damnable

[@IsaacNussbaum]

*"Mark 9:42-48 Blows away any concept that denies the eternality of Hell."* You are wrong. Dead wrong. Woefully and completely wrong. A report of a house fire in my town said that the firemen could not put the fire out (they could not quench it). That fire stopped burning years ago.

[@michaelnewzealand1888]

It's a quote from Is 66 the last verses where worms and fire are consuming dead bodies... It really is an injustice not to cross reference. Jesus was quoting OT scripture. Check it out for yourself.

[@marisademore468]

I haven't listened to this video, I really need to come back and listen when I have time. Suffice to say that if the annihilation view of hell were true, what on earth was the point in John the Baptist warning the hypocrites of the wrath of God to come? Jesus also said it was better to enter heaven with one eye than go to hell with 2 eyes. If annihilation were true, it wouldn't matter whether we went to hell with 1 or 2 or no eyes; it wouldn't matter about God's wrath coming down on us because we'd just cease to exist. The annihilation view of hell just doesn't make sense on any level.

[@Afterword.]

Is eternal life such a small prize that eternal death is no penalty at all?

[@judethree4405]

Getting annihilated is the wrath of God coming down, and what good would having two eyes do you if you are going to get annihilated? This is precisely why it is better to go to heaven minus one eye, because you can at least still see something.

[@judethree4405]

@@Afterword. Mic drop!

[@jondoe8014]

I haven't read your comment, I really need to read it when I have time. Suffice to say if ETC is true then I have questions that requires an answer. If eternal life is a gift from GOD and those who are in Christ Jesus recieve it then how are the unbelievers tormented for all eternity when they don't have everlasting life? If the human soul is naturally eternal then what is the point of GOD telling them they will die when it makes what Satan said true you shall not SURELY DIE. If the punishment for sin is ECT then why was the sacrifice on the cross which isn't eternal suffice to pay this penalty?

[@abbysharp9059]

Hades/Hell Gehenna/Hell One is the place a soul is held the other is where souls are e destroyed.

[@appeal]

When you burn grass it does not pass out of existence. It changes from one state to another. It doesn't just disappear like magic.

[@jondoe8014]

Metaphors are also not perfect examples. They always have a flaw somewhere in the example. The point of a metaphor is not every single possible detail, but the overall message. It's like people using metaphors to explain the Trinity none of them get it 100% right, but the gist of it is there. Kinda reminds me of when Jesus told them you strain at a gnat and swallow a whole camel. Many people will focus on the flaw of the imperfect metaphor instead of what it is trying to portray.

[@jondoe8014]

Sodom is said to be an example of the upcoming judgement. And Jesus gives us a warning to Remember Lots wife.

[@mikeforfar9493]

Matthew 25:41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire that has been prepared for the devil and his angels!... NET Matthew 25:46 “And these will depart into eternal [death] punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.” NET Notice that in the words of Jesus quoted here he compares eternal punishment with eternal life. But what does the bible mean by 'eternal punishment'? Eternal punishment is not eternal life burning in fire. Eternal punishment is eternal death, Romans 6:23 “For the payoff of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.” NET Here the Apostle Paul, as Jesus did, compares eternal punishment with eternal life. The pay for sin is death, eternal death. The penalty for sin is not eternal life in the lake of fire. eternal punishment = eternal death God's own eternal fire being the method of execution. The eternal fire is prepared for the devil and his angels and it was originally only intended for them. No human being was meant to be destroyed there. But we find a large class of humanity side with Satan and his angels in rebellion against God therefore they must meet the same end. The devil does not live in hell as is commonly taught. It is future one off event where Satan and his followers are to be destroyed.

[@shaunigothictv1003]

Excellent point

[@rosemerrynmcmillan1611]

Once you understand Annihilation you are really moving in the Spirit of truth. The false teaching and false idol of Futurism will be the next to fall I predict in your understanding. Ammillenialism is the clear Biblical teaching. The SMOKE of the torment of the false prophet, antichrist, devil ect in the Lake of Fire will rise forever seems to suggest a MEMORIAL of GODS VICTORY TO BE THERE FOREVER.

[@joelhoffman7106]

Preston, I just watched this and know I am late to the game, and in full disclosure I have always read the text as ECT as you did. As I think about this it seems to me like there is scriptural evidence that suggest a complete death, as well as continual torment in hell. Part of our hermeneutics is trying to mirror up the two. Why does it have to be an either/or, but instead a both/and. For example, why can’t it be that the person’s body is annihilated, yet the soul lives on in Hell. This would make sense of all the death passages, and still work with the passages that seem to imply eternal damnation as well. Only those of us who are saved get our glorified bodies and continue to live with God in the new heavens and the new earth.

[@joelhoffman7106]

Clearly Christ dies, but his souls did not, and when he was raised to new life it was in his new body. Therefore, why can’t the lost die and have their life annihilated in the same way, but their soul remain on for eternity in hell? This would seem to me to make sense of the possible issue.

[@fireandworms]

@@joelhoffman7106 Why do you say Jesus's soul didn't die? And what does that have to do with everyone else? Jesus is not equivalent to everyone else. He says that both your body and soul will be destroyed in Gehenna, does that connote a continued life and functionality of the soul?

[@jrhemmerich]

@@joelhoffman7106 Joel, that is an interesting way to reconcile the views. For me I consider whether the scriptures evidences a teaching that the soul/spirit is without end. There are not a lot of scriptures that address the soul/spirit alone, most treat the person as a unity, which I would say favors the annihilationist position. Ezekiel 18:13, does say that the individual soul that sins shall die. One could say that soul here is a wholistic term for the person, body and soul. It’s difficult, however, to say that it just means body. In Mark 16:13 Jesus also makes reference to God’s power to destroy the soul as a punishment along with the body. We also have the reverse case, where eternal life is a positive promise for those that know Christ. Most famously, John 3:16, were it is even in direct opposition to perishing: “who so ever believes in him shall not perish, but have everlasting life.” And in Jn. 17:3 “Now this is eternal life: that they know you,the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.” While one could theoretically separate the punishments of body and soul, the question is do the scriptures support such a conclusion or are we assuming that the soul is immortal and then artificially limiting the passages about destruction to the body?

[@studyingthebiblewithsheri2371]

I am glad that you express that others may have an opposite view of yours. I have a different interpretation of hell from you. I believe my biblical understanding (enteral conscious torment) of hell can stand up to your belief in conditional immortality.

[@Mrm1985100]

No. Maybe actually listen to what he is saying and also listen to your conscience instead of searing it.

[@Hulkmosher]

The Bible doesn't speak of eternal torment, it's only when you take scripture out of its context that you come up with such an idea, the Bible says over and over again that the wicked will be consumed, be no more, does not say they will continue living, that belief comes from the idea that man has an eternal soul.

[@Landis_Grant]

I don’t believe Luke 16 is a parable, but a true life story about a rich man and Lazarus. If annihilation is true, why was the rich man (an unbeliever) being tormented in the flame?

[@jondoe8014]

If he was being tormented in flames why would he ask for a fingertip dip of water for his tongue to cure the flaming torment? I wonder what water did he want to taste? Not really. It's the waters of LIFE. He isn't in literal flames of torment. He is in a torment of flames knowing he will not taste the waters of life and thus asks that he just gets a single taste. That's my take away anyway. Makes sense to me.

[@jondoe8014]

It's like hey I'm burning from head to toe in open flames. Dont rescue me, don't put me out, but just give me a droplet of water on my tongue. I dont know of ANYONE who burst into flames screaming give me a droplet of water!!!

[@Landis_Grant]

@@jondoe8014 Because God gave the deceased rich man immortality, he was able to be tormented (he felt the constant pain of being burned) forever and forever without end. The word “certain” in verse 19 below showed Luke 16 isn’t a parable but an actual on going event. Luke 16:19 There was a “certain” rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day: And there was a “certain” beggar named Lazarus…

[@Landis_Grant]

@@jondoe8014 Because I don’t believe it’s a parable therefore it shouldn’t be allegorized but interpreted literally.

[@jondoe8014]

@@Landis_Grant The word certain doesn't make it not a parable as certain nobleman is also used in luke 19 which matches the same terminology used in the parable of the talents. Just because you BELIEVE it isn't a parable doesn't make it so.

[@davidboyer2290]

Rev 20:10 refutes annihilationism. Not complicated at all.

[@IsaacNussbaum]

You are almost right, David. Revelation 20: 10 says that the devil, the beast, and the false prophet (whatever those symbols might represent) will not be annihilated. All lost humans will suffer the "second death" in the Lake of Fire (whatever that symbol might represent). Death, as in 100%, all-the-way, dead. Not complicated at all. ✴ _And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever._ (Revelation 20: 10; KJV)

[@markhenderson9069]

Listen to the first 3 minutes of his message here.....Conditional immortality a.k.a. annihilationism doesn't mean lack of punishment for the lost. Surely, as God is Wrathful as well as loving, those rejecting Christ will indeed suffer a time of terrible punishment, and only then will they realize it. The true meaning of the words eternal/everlasting and forever are still fuzzy to me, however I will say that the whole idea of the literalist view of ETC doesn't make sense to me in light of a God who is all knowing, all loving, and all powerful. Why He would have designed it this way from the beginning? According to ETC doctrine (and Matt ch 7:13-14), most of the world's population will be burning in hell forever. This sure is a terrible terrible final outcome from a God that is all knowing, all loving and all powerful! What makes it worse is that God has allowed Satan free reign to deceive people. Many people can't see the truth and some of them even want to, they just don't get it. For God to allow such endless terrible suffering for good hearted people who are just merely deceived and lost is beyond cruel to me and not at all indicative of an all knowing, loving and powerful God. A God of wrath - Yes! A God of cruelty - I sure hope not! And yes this is based much on human logic, but didn't God give us brains to use sound logic as well as wisdom from scripture? Secondly, if the level of earthly suffering that Jesus endured for us on the cross was enough to pay for all of the sins of man for all earthly time, then why does God have to forever (with never an end) torture those that missed Jesus? I don't see how anyone with any compassion or reason could be ok with this ETC doctrine, or how God could even expect us to be ok with it! "Eventual" annihilation makes the most logical sense to me (after a fair time of suffering). As far as backing any view up completely with scripture, I am exhausted!! You can find scriptural proof to support any of these doctrines!! Which one best fits God and His omnicient, omnipotent, and omnipresent character??

[@gkd3221]

Preston, I appreciate your approach to difficult topics and your willingness to talk about controversial subjects. I must hold to the position that Hell will be eternal and I base this on multiple factors. I understand your looking back into the OT to pull metaphorical terms however we cannot isolate those verses and forget the words that Jesus used. Before going on let us look at Mal 4:1-6 and the use of the word "ashes." When we die and are buried we all return to our original base which is dirt although it does depend on the quality of your casket. Therefore, from the metaphysical standpoint, we do not possess our earthly body in heaven so why would someone have a body as we know it in Hell. Matthew 25:46 we see the phrase eternal punishment and eternal life. The same Greek words in the New Testament (aion, aionios, aidios) are used to express (1) the eternal existence of God (1Ti 1:17; Rom 1:20; Rom 16:26); (2) of Christ (Rev 1:18); (3) of the Holy Ghost (Heb 9:14); and (4) the eternal duration of the sufferings of the lost (Mat 25:46; Jude 1:6). The idea that the "second death" (Rev 20:14) is in the case of the wicked their absolute destruction, their annihilation, has not the slightest support from Scripture, which always represents their future as one of conscious suffering enduring forever. (Easton) One cannot get past the fact that God has clearly drawn the line of good and evil, the moral and the immoral. In ref to Matthew 25:26, why would we have an everlasting reward and not have everlasting punishment? Anyway, I enjoyed the video and look forward to watching more.

[@dante44]

Couldnt agree more!

[@andrew_veale]

I think you're misunderstanding what an annihilationist believes about Matt 25:46. The majority of them will agree that eternal means exactly what you say here but the contention is with the word "punishment". Annihilationists believe that the punishment is eternal but that the nature of the punishment is death and not torment, as the Bible repeatedly affirms. This does seem like the more natural reading of Matthew 25:46 for two reasons. 1. The Greek word translated as punishment can mean either Corporal punishment or Capital punishment, it had a wide range of meaning and writers of antiquity used it both ways. 2. The punishment stands in contrast to what the redeemed are given which is "life", so whatever the punishment is it mustn't involve life. It is therefore natural upon closer reflection to exegete the passage in the way a Conditionalist would. With all due respect, I do think that the claim that annihilation "has not the slightest support from scripture" reveals a ton of ignorance on the topic. You may disagree with their conclusion but to claim this shows you've never truly taken the time to understand what they believe. Anyways, All the best with your journey!

[@FBIUSDOJ]

P.S. Hell is eternal conscious torment for the fact alone that God allows men to be their own "god" as they have desired and they would rather suffer consciously, eternally, rather than to submit to God whom they despise. God's gifts are without repentance and so it is with the gift of life (existence).

[@kevcooper3037]

This is not even scriptural. Your own speculation at most. But it says nothing about what you wrote in the Bible.

[@Hulkmosher]

Amen I wish more people would come to this understanding

[@1leiffearn]

I’m still having a hard time thinking that is responsible to inject ourselves into an old covenant system created by God for a select group of people at a select time. Then adopt our own version of all of those elements and apply them today. The original covenant was between God and the nation of his choosing. It included description of positions, expectations, promises, blessings if carried out, curses if they don’t carry it out. Always with a promise of judgment and salvation along the way. It’s over! 1st century it was done. Luke 21:22: “These be the days of vengeance in which all things are written must be fulfilled.” I’d rather hear from Christ than my own feelings or preferences. A lot of work to do presently. Enjoy our salvation and new kingdom, represent the King over all of creation well, call to everyone who are “outside the gates”. We are in the new Jerusalem already!!!! If we say otherwise, then Christ did not complete his mission. What do these words mean to us: near, at hand, soon, coming quickly, this generation? Thanks for letting me rant. And thanks for sharing your thoughts Preston.

[@WhiteStoneName]

I would quibble a little bit with the idea that adherents of ECT and Ultimate Reconciliation believe that persons continue "living" in Hell. I understand your precise point, and I agree about the Biblical use of Life and Death. However, I don't think it's an exact equivalence with what we understand as our biological life, at least perhaps in the intermediate state or before the Resurrection. (This gets into the Second Death which would then be a problem for Universalists.) Biblically, I think that death and life are symbolic opposites, like Heaven and Hell and Light and Dark, etc. I think that one's orientation to God aligns them toward one or the other. In obedience, we participate in Life/Christ/Light/Truth and in opposition to God (sin, missing the mark), we participate in Death/AntiChrist/Darkness/Lies. As a Universalist, I would say that eventually everyone will participate in Life and everything will be reconciled to the fullness of participation of God in Christ. And honestly, I can make no sense of the ontology of *what one is* who participates in Death for all time. How do they keep existing if everything that *is* participates in Christ to have its existence?! "In Him we live and move and have our being". Nothing that exists, exists autonomously. That's an a priori impossibility for my understanding. So for someone damned without end (I won't say "eternally", because that's a fudge-y Biblical word)...what continues to exist? Who? How?

[@demlertube]

"I would quibble a little bit with the idea that adherents of ECT and Ultimate Reconciliation believe that persons continue "living" in Hell." I don't know about UR adherents, but proponents of endless torment *themselves* say that the damned continue "living" in hell. A few examples: Charles Spurgeon: “Man was condemned to live forever in Hell.” Billy Graham: “[The soul] will never die, but will live forever in either Heaven or Hell.” John Piper: “You are not mere matter and energy. You are an embodied soul who will live forever in heaven or in hell." Robert Peterson: "Evidently God does not view unbelievers' being eternally alive in the lake of fire as incompatible with His being 'all in all.'" You say: "However, I don't think it's an exact equivalence with what we understand as our biological life" It doesn't need to be an exact equivalence; it just needs to be equivalent enough that it's captured by the colloquial sense of "living." Given endless torment, the damned in hell are "living" in the ordinary sense of the term. It's also completely sensible to speak of those in the intermediate state as "alive" even if they are disembodied, so long as they are conscious. This is why, again, traditionalists describe people in the intermediate state as being alive: Charles Spurgeon: "God is not the God of that which has ceased to be. We have but to put the idea into words to make it dissolve before the glance of reason. A living God is the God of living men; and Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are still alive." D. L. Moody: "Some day you will read in the papers that D. L. Moody of East Northfield, Massachusetts is dead. Don’t you believe a word of it. At that moment I shall be more alive than I am now." John MacArthur: "The present tense is used because God is not the God of the dead but of the living, and if He is presently the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, then those men are obviously still alive in another realm."

[@WhiteStoneName]

@@demlertube Thanks for the response. Lots of good quotes to chew on there. Yes. I agree that life and death are not necessarily as straightforward as they can appear sometimes. Words contain multitudes.

[@macyford1516]

Wouldn’t the living forever in torment be reviving God’s wrath? I understand the point of living is not living without Christ - because indeed, in Him we LIVE and move and have our BEING. But assuming the ECT perspective, wouldn’t that endless torment be endlessly reducing God’s wrath? Because God is eternal and thus His wrath is eternal?

[@aw9680]

The only way that God is love is if he destroys most of his human creation. Nearly all, actually. Only a handful made it past the flood, after all. That's love right there.

[@judethree4405]

Way too much qualification and disclaimer bloviation.

[@appeal]

You started with great assumtions then went on to break them all.