Is annihilation false doctrine?

[Wootah]

This is the philosophical perspective.

This all assumes a just legal system.

When someone is sentenced to go to prison they will only be able to end that prison sentence by paying the measured fine or serving the measured amount of time in prison. If that person has served their prison sentence and then you kill them you are acting unjustly.

If God is holy, righteous and just and we have sinned against God then hell is the prison we go to unless we pay for our sins against God or until we serve our time.

Problem a - is that we can never justly pay for our sins against an infinite God and so can never leave the prison.
Problem b - is that annihilation means that the sentence is over and God killed the person after the sentence was over.

Therefore Annihilation makes God unjust.

Put another way, at the point where God intends to annihilate a being it means that God regards that they have served their sentence. Therefore the being should be allowed into heaven. They have paid for their sins against God.

If they have not served their sentence and God annihilates them fails because as I just said, at the point of annihilation it means they have served their sentence.

Anecdote: I am pro-death penalty but the biggest argument against the death penalty for me is that prison lets the criminal rot for longer. Something about the execution is unjust, it is too light a punishment. I would still reply back that the cost to the state for keeping the criminal alive takes resources away from others and in a fallen world the prisoner could escape.

--

Just thinking about this.

After annihilation has the person paid for their sins?

If yes, then why aren't they in heaven?
If no, then they have escaped punishment or, worse, is God unable to justly punish?

--

Is annihilation false doctrine?

[Wootah]

[Replying to JoeyKnothead in post #27]

OK well, I gave it the good old college try. I'll just ask you to keep your posts on point so that I can save bandwidth and screen reading time. For me, it's back to the topic and trying to see what others think and interact with that.

[Tcg]

Yes - what I am arguing is that we cannot pay our debt to an infinite being and that is why hell is eternal.

You've yet to establish the existence of hell much less that it is eternal. You've also failed to establish the existence of an infinite being.


Tcg

[Wootah]

[Replying to Tcg in post #33]

Hi Tcg - everything I wrote to Joey applies to you. If you don't want to participate in the thread please find another. It saves my bandwidth and reading time.

What is your actual thought on the topic?

[JoeyKnothead]

...
My view is the standard normative Christian view that God creates heaven and hell.

I think it'd be prudent to show Heaven and / or Hell exists, or that God creates em, that we might consider such in terms of the OP.

Yes - what I am arguing is that we cannot pay our debt to an infinite being and that is why hell is eternal.

How can we know Hell is eternal, if we can't show it even exists?

But technically if the debt was possible to be paid then I would expect the prison to be set free and then come to heaven.

How can we know people go to Heaven, if we can't show there's a Heaven?

This relates directly to consideratuons of godly "annihilation".

No Hell, no fret, no Heaven, no reward.

8<...

The purpose of the thread is to allow other ideas to change my view.

I don't know about changing your view, but I seek to show the observer just how many assumptions hafta be entertained to have this discussion.

Let me try to change your view: Can a person who is evil in your view, create heaven better than the heaven that is created by a person that is good?

"Evil" is too loaded in religious propaganda for me. I just think criminals need to be dealt with in a manner consistent with their crimes, and that expecting a god to do any of it is a goofy way to go.

Especially a hedonist - surely they know how to create a good heaven for themselves? And if people create their heavens and hells then doesn't that imply that they get what they want. Where is the justice?

A question best left to the philosophy sub.

I'd propose justice comes to those who marry.

[brunumb]

If God is holy, righteous and just and we have sinned against God then hell is the prison we go to unless we pay for our sins against God or until we serve our time.

If I understand correctly, Jesus has already paid for our sins, so what is the purpose of Hell?

[Wootah]

If God is holy, righteous and just and we have sinned against God then hell is the prison we go to unless we pay for our sins against God or until we serve our time.

If I understand correctly, Jesus has already paid for our sins, so what is the purpose of Hell?

Jesus only saves if you repent and believe in your heart that Jesus is Lord.

Romans 10:9 that if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is ...
Search domain biblehub.comhttps://biblehub.com/romans/10-9.htm
If you openly declare that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

[brunumb]

Jesus only saves if you repent and believe in your heart that Jesus is Lord.

So Jesus only paid for your sins if you believe he paid for your sins. Sounds like something straight out of the 'Great Omnibus Of Christian Loopholes'. It also reminds me of how Peter saved Tinkerbell's life by calling on all of the children who believe in fairies to clap their hands. Belief is powerful magic indeed.

[Wootah]

[Replying to brunumb in post #38]

Let's see if that is true.

Suppose you are in court and owe $100. Suppose I offer to pay the $100. The judge then still has to ask you whether you accept that payment for your penalty. You can say No and so my $100 doesn't pay your fine.

[Bust Nak]

Suppose you are in court and owe $100. Suppose I offer to pay the $100. The judge then still has to ask you whether you accept that payment for your penalty. You can say No and so my $100 doesn't pay your fine.

Or I can just say yes without believing that you've offered to pay $100? What I believe isn't a factor here as the judge accept that the fine has been paid, if it's been paid then it's been paid. You analogy fails to capture the requirement to believe.

As for the topic itself... Not a hill I am willing to die on, but for the sake of argument, what's wrong with the following answers? Seems like it solves the dilemma you outlined in the OP.

After annihilation has the person paid for their sins?

Yes.

If yes, then why aren't they in heaven?

Your question is incoherent since the very concept of being in heaven presumes existence, they have been annihilated and no longer exist.

[Wootah]

[Replying to Bust Nak in post #40]

Or I can just say yes without believing that you've offered to pay $100? What I believe isn't a factor here as the judge accept that the fine has been paid, if it's been paid then it's been paid. You analogy fails to capture the requirement to believe.

Actually, the judge can't just accept any money to pay your fine. It has to be money directed towards it. If you say that money isn't to go towards your fine then you haven't paid your fine. No matter what the judge might do with the $100.

As for the topic itself... Not a hill I am willing to die on, but for the sake of argument, what's wrong with the following answers? Seems like it solves the dilemma you outlined in the OP.

So you would argue that God is not omnipotent and therefore cannot recreate the innocent person? Or that God is omnipotent but not just and so doesn't have to let innocent people into heaven?