Eternal Conscious Torment

[The Tanager]

As of right now I would consider myself an Annihilationist in regards to my view of Hell. I'm not looking to try to push Annihilationism or get into a debate between the various views. I want to look more deeply into the issues around what Hell is with other minds and I would love to hear from those who believe in the eternal conscious torment view, to the various reasons you believe it makes sense within Christianity. I'm looking to challenge my view and I was hoping you all could help me out.

[brianbbs67]

So you are saying God made a mistake? He changed His mind?


From what I know, He does not make mistakes. But, He does change his mind, depending on what we choose. Boiling it down, an answer from God could be : Yes, No, Maybe later and I changed my mind or no response at all.

In modern times the preferred answer is the last one.

Given how many appeals have been made for him to correct false impressions his silence is deafening. No Red Sea changes. And no threats of torture or torment for those who misquote him.

I have learned from experience, when he doesn't answer, it is one of two things. He either has no opinion one way or the other Or we should already know the answer if we have paid attention and studied. He's not just going to give us the answer(unless its his Will we tread upon). He wants us to think and find it.

[Claire Evans]

How did Jesus take away the sin of the world? Couldn't He have done that without dying for us? If God could not have forgiven sin, then Jesus would never have resurrected as He would have been dead to sin forever. He could not have been forgiven as Jesus took on the sin of the world.

When one dies for someone else, they experience death in place of another so that this other person can be spared the same fate. Likewise, Jesus took on our sin and took on the punishment of hell so that we wouldn't have to if we repented for our sins.

Here is what will actually save Christians:

The two testaments of the Bible contain covenants between God and man. The inheritance received by heirs under either testament is everlasting life.

The path to eternal life under the first covenant was to never sin, as the wages of sin was death. However, there was a fault in that first testament in that all mankind sinned!

Since the first covenant contained a fault, God created a second or New Testament Covenant.

So you are saying God made a mistake? He changed His mind?

No, I never said that.

I said the first covenant contained a fault, so God created a new covenant.

If God made the first covenant and it had a fault in it, He made a mistake. That means He is fallible.

The Word was made flesh as the man Jesus, and Jesus lived a sinless human life under the Old Testament Covenant. Thus, He became the only human to ever qualify for everlasting life under that covenant. The name Jesus Christ is written into the Book of Life as an inheritor of everlasting spiritual life.

However, He will not accept His just reward and inheritance, but will offer it as a gift to those who believe in Him as their Savior under terms of the New Testament Covenant.

By believing in Jesus under the New Testament Covenant, we become joint heirs with Jesus Christ and our names are written into the Book of Life along with His.

Thus everlasting life (salvation from the wages of our sins) becomes a gift of God through Jesus Christ.

How did Jesus take away the sin of the world?

By living a sinless human life under the Old Testament, Jesus became the only heir to everlasting under that covenant.

Then under the New Testament, He offers His inheritance of everlasting life as a free gift to all who believe in Him.

His offer covers the sins of the entire world -- whosoever believeth.

Jesus did not always obey the OT laws. He did not stone an adulteress, punishable with death.

I ask, how did Jesus cover the sins of the entire world? What was the process?

[Claire Evans]

So you are saying God made a mistake? He changed His mind?


From what I know, He does not make mistakes. But, He does change his mind, depending on what we choose. Boiling it down, an answer from God could be : Yes, No, Maybe later and I changed my mind or no response at all.

Numbers 23:19New International Version (NIV)

19 God is not human, that he should lie,
not a human being, that he should change his mind.
Does he speak and then not act?
Does he promise and not fulfill?


James 1:17New International Version (NIV)

17 Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows.

Hebrews 6:17

In the same way God, desiring even more to show to the heirs of the promise the unchangeableness of His purpose, interposed with an oath,

[Claire Evans]

So you are saying God made a mistake? He changed His mind?


From what I know, He does not make mistakes. But, He does change his mind, depending on what we choose. Boiling it down, an answer from God could be : Yes, No, Maybe later and I changed my mind or no response at all.

In modern times the preferred answer is the last one.

Given how many appeals have been made for him to correct false impressions his silence is deafening. No Red Sea changes. And no threats of torture or torment for those who misquote him.

I have learned from experience, when he doesn't answer, it is one of two things. He either has no opinion one way or the other Or we should already know the answer if we have paid attention and studied. He's not just going to give us the answer(unless its his Will we tread upon). He wants us to think and find it.

I believe the silence is a case of refining our faith. Once God reveals the answer, we can understand.


Oswald Chambers:

"Has God trusted you with His silence" a silence that has great meaning? Gods silences are actually His answers. Just think of those days of absolute silence in the home at Bethany! Is there anything comparable to those days in your life? Can God trust you like that, or are you still asking Him for a visible answer? God will give you the very blessings you ask if you refuse to go any further without them, but His silence is the sign that He is bringing you into an even more wonderful understanding of Himself. Are you mourning before God because you have not had an audible response? When you cannot hear God, you will find that He has trusted you in the most intimate way possible" with absolute silence, not a silence of despair, but one of pleasure, because He saw that you could withstand an even bigger revelation. If God has given you a silence, then praise Him" He is bringing you into the mainstream of His purposes. The actual evidence of the answer in time is simply a matter of Gods sovereignty. Time is nothing to God. For a while you may have said, I asked God to give me bread, but He gave me a stone instead (see Matthew 7:9). He did not give you a stone, and today you find that He gave you the bread of life (John 6:35).
A wonderful thing about Gods silence is that His stillness is contagious" it gets into you, causing you to become perfectly confident so that you can honestly say, I know that God has heard me. His silence is the very proof that He has. As long as you have the idea that God will always bless you in answer to prayer, He will do it, but He will never give you the grace of His silence. If Jesus Christ is bringing you into the understanding that prayer is for the glorifying of His Father, then He will give you the first sign of His intimacy" silence."

[marco]

I have learned from experience, when he doesn't answer, it is one of two things. He either has no opinion one way or the other Or we should already know the answer if we have paid attention and studied. He's not just going to give us the answer(unless its his Will we tread upon). He wants us to think and find it.

That was a good lesson but how you reached your conclusion is problematic. Is there any reason for you to assume knowledge of God's way of working? Those children in the Holocaust, who begged their treasured and much worshipped God for help, were met with dark silence. So he had no opinion or the kids knew the answer. Rather callous.


Jesus did, erroneously, say: 'Ask and ye shall receive'. There is no evidence of that ever happening. The beneficiaries of prayers are those whom Chance has favoured. The superstitious, on praying for rain, thank God when it comes and sigh when it doesn't and their kids die. God was at a meeting?

[William]

[Replying to post 138 by The Tanager]

So, is your point that your view of hell as self-induced illusion is a better solution of containment of evil than eternal torment or eternal separation or annihilation?

Ideally - no - but in relation to those other 'solutions', it is better.

For starters, (as I think I have already pointed out) the 'problem' is that all consciousness is derived from the eternal source, therefore annihilation of the conscious individual is an unavailable option.

The problem of consigning all loose ends to an eternal punishment of pain and suffering is that the aspect of eternal consciousness has to endure that reality, so the aspect of GOD - consciousness is involved in enduring the punishment.

(This is one reason why the idea of separating GOD-Consciousness from all other consciousnesses is necessary in order to support the doctrine of the elect opposed to the 'non-elect'.)

However, there are clues within the bible (and elsewhere) which tell us otherwise. GOD breathed life into the human form - as metaphor for the fact that in order for any form to have life, GOD-Consciousness (life) has to be involved in the process.

Why do you think this is a better solution?

Because it continues the opportunity for the individual to exercise their GOD-Consciousness in any creative manner they will, in order to eventually learn by this that they are totally responsible for their own choices and GOD is not to blame, or for that matter, to credit - in the sense that GOD is separate from the individual and has to be worshiped in that manner. (This idea of worshiping a GOD is purely a human concept falsifying the true nature of GOD, as I understand it).

In other words, the individual is GOD (and aspect of GOD is still GOD) experiencing being an individual. In relation to this universe, it is experiencing being an individual human. In relation to the next phase (afterlife as it is referred to - although it is really a continuation of life experience in an alternate reality/universe) it is experiencing something else but largely still identifying with being a 'human'.

The whole idea is to learn what one really is rather than what one either thinks they are- or more often than not, what they have been lead to believe that they are.

The only thing an individual needs to know is that they are an aspect of GOD and in relation to that they need to know exactly what GOD is. The true nature of GOD.

GOD does not judge anyone to hell. Hell is a human construct. However, because it is firmly embedded into the belief systems of humanity, individuals have been led to believe that hell exists and that GOD is someone who will judge them to go there. It is a false impression of GOD, but one which has grown extremely popular.

One problem I see with this kind of view is explaining how or why illusion arose in the first place within God consciousness. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding something about your view and any corrections will spur additional thoughts.

Simply put, the only REALITY is GOD -Consciousness itself. Every THING else is therefore, just illusion.

However, since GOD created the illusion, it can and is experienced as REAL. It is not that the illusion is real but that the consciousness experiencing the illusion is real, and anything which consciousness experiences is regarded as being real.

GOD created 'things' (illusions) in order to experience those things. In the case of the physical universe, the depth of the creation is so intense that this was able to effectively allow for GOD to forget itself while experiencing those particular things - such as - this universe and every thing within it.

The forgetfulness doesn't create amnesia in the whole of GOD-consciousness, but only in relation to that aspect of GOD-consciousness which was placed into the physical universe.
In relation to that, as I understand it, the amnesia is never complete even through the various stages in which that aspect of GOD-consciousness which entered into the experience of the physical universe - from being the complete form of the universe, to experiencing what it is to be a galaxy, a star and a planet or for that matter, individual life forms on a planet - each step furthers the depth of the amnesia, because of the physical constraints involved within the different positions - in relation to GOD -conciseness experiencing those things.

It may well be all illusion, but it is still experienced as being real by those aspects of GOD-consciousness experiencing them. The solution (or antidote) to this is to understand oneself as GOD consciousness - the only REAL attribute involved in any experience of any thing.

So - GOD allows for us to create our own realities in afterlife, NOT as indefinite THINGS but for as long as necessary for us each to come to the realization of who we really are - one by one - so as long as this might take, it will not be a permanent experience.

This of course is problematic in relation to both heavens and hells. This is because each of those experiences impresses the idea of permanence. It may be expected that heaven is harder to break away from, but no more so than hell.

Fortunately GOD allows for those who have come to a fuller knowledge of their true selves and have therefore left behind their preferred realities created in relation to their false self identities, to assist with the reintegration of the lost, back into that same full knowledge.

Which is what I was referring to in some other post where - while the individual does create their own realities, it is permissible for those who have already gone through that process, to interfere with other individuals realities and in doing so create anomalies which potentially can assist those trapped in their own creations to escape those creations.

In relation to eternity, time is no object. In relation to bringing people out of heavens and hells (of their own volition) there is still a healing process to go through which happens mainly in conjunction with the process and 'any/all loose ends tidied up' afterwards.

That whole theology is far more aligned with a just idea of GOD than any other, as far as I am concerned.

Thank you for your questions.

W

[The Tanager]

[Replying to post 145 by William]

You latest post is judging the various theories of hell, assuming your view of all consciousness being eternal and an aspect of GOD-consciousness is true. That's not what I was asking, but we can talk about that.

The problem of consigning all loose ends to an eternal punishment of pain and suffering is that the aspect of eternal consciousness has to endure that reality, so the aspect of GOD - consciousness is involved in enduring the punishment.

Why is this a problem? Is it because GOD-consciousness can't suffer?

However, there are clues within the bible (and elsewhere) which tell us otherwise. GOD breathed life into the human form - as metaphor for the fact that in order for any form to have life, GOD-Consciousness (life) has to be involved in the process.

God is involved, but why do you think the Biblical text means that in the way you take it?

Because it continues the opportunity for the individual to exercise their GOD-Consciousness in any creative manner they will, in order to eventually learn by this that they are totally responsible for their own choices and GOD is not to blame, or for that matter, to credit - in the sense that GOD is separate from the individual and has to be worshiped in that manner. (This idea of worshiping a GOD is purely a human concept falsifying the true nature of GOD, as I understand it).

But if this individual's creativity is stubbornly evil, then why is this a good solution? What if they never learn? Evil could last forever and affect others for eternity. In annihilationism and eternal self-centered separation (like Lewis' view) and even eternal torment, evil is destroyed or made ineffective on others.

GOD created 'things' (illusions) in order to experience those things. In the case of the physical universe, the depth of the creation is so intense that this was able to effectively allow for GOD to forget itself while experiencing those particular things - such as - this universe and every thing within it.

But why would GOD want to experience an illusion that there are things separated from GOD-consciousness? Why would GOD want to experience this illusion that includes evil and ignorance?

That whole theology is far more aligned with a just idea of GOD than any other, as far as I am concerned.

Could you explain this further? How do you define 'just'?

[William]

[Replying to post 146 by The Tanager]

You latest post is judging the various theories of hell, assuming your view of all consciousness being eternal and an aspect of GOD-consciousness is true. That's not what I was asking, but we can talk about that.

Okay.

Why is this a problem? Is it because GOD-consciousness can't suffer?

No. It is because GOD-Consciousness can experience suffering.

God is involved, but why do you think the Biblical text means that in the way you take it?

Well there are other biblical clues regarding this idea - as well as non-biblical ones.

But if this individual's creativity is stubbornly evil, then why is this a good solution?

Perhaps you can give me an example of what you mean by 'stubbornly evil'. Describe such a being and how it behaves.

What if they never learn?

Why would you think that would be the case? I think that if there were not the anomalies which come into its self-created reality, it would take longer to learn, but give me an example of a situation one might create for themselves in which it would be impossibly for them to learn.

Evil could last forever and affect others for eternity.

Not if the individual was experiencing its own creation. Others would not be involved with that in any way which can affect them.

In annihilationism and eternal self-centered separation (like Lewis' view) and even eternal torment, evil is destroyed or made ineffective on others.

If evil is destroyed, please explain the process. Are you thinking evil in terms of individual consciousnesses who use their consciousness primarily for evil?

But why would GOD want to experience an illusion that there are things separated from GOD-consciousness? Why would GOD want to experience this illusion that includes evil and ignorance?

I would say that this is simply part of the creative process. If things did not exist, then all that there would be was GOD.

I think it is a natural reflex of consciousness to create things.

I don't think there was any intent to create good and evil. I think it was just a result of creating form and occupying that form.

I expand on this idea here;

Mirror Mirror

Even given the belief that GOD is omniscient, the fact that It would choose to experience situations where an aspect of It loses full knowledge of Itself, only signifies that It understands that this is never a permanent condition.

Could you explain this further? How do you define 'just'?

Well in relation to the idea of an eternal suffering in hell, I think I have been explaining 'just' in what I have been sharing with this alternative idea.

[The Tanager]

No. It is because GOD-Consciousness can experience suffering.

So, are you saying that eternal punishment is a weaker solution because this means that GOD-consciousness (or an aspect of it) will suffer forever?

If so, isn't that a possibility in your scenario as well? Those creating their own hell are aspects of GOD-consciousness. The only way I see out of this is to say everyone will eventually learn, but I don't think we can say this because of free will. If someone chooses to be stubbornly evil or ignorant of the illusion, GOD-consciousness will experience suffering forever. Or do you think free will doesn't exist?

Why would you think that would be the case? I think that if there were not the anomalies which come into its self-created reality, it would take longer to learn, but give me an example of a situation one might create for themselves in which it would be impossibly for them to learn.

We can't just assume either way. The first step is to look at logical possibility. If something is logically impossible, then we can clearly rule that out. At this level I'm saying that if free will exists, then, by definition, eternal self-induced illusion of hell is logically possible within GOD-consciousness.

At this point, you are seemingly taking it to the next level and claiming that even though logically possible, you think it won't actually be the case. I'm wondering why we should think that is the case. And I think you have the burden of giving reasons why you think this won't be the case.

Not if the individual was experiencing its own creation. Others would not be involved with that in any way which can affect them.

What do you mean? Do individuals not interact with each other in the illusion we call reality? Or why now, but not then? And, regardless, GOD-consciousness is being affected, isn't it?

Well there are other biblical clues regarding this idea - as well as non-biblical ones.

So, are you dropping the creation story as a good clue to this or just stating that there are also more Biblical and non-Biblical clues? I'd love to hear your thoughts on what the clues are and how they best point towards GOD-consciousness, but this may just lead you back to linking to your other posts on this, and I prefer summaries in these posts, not links to other material.

If evil is destroyed, please explain the process. Are you thinking evil in terms of individual consciousnesses who use their consciousness primarily for evil?

In eternal torment, evil is at least made ineffective on the good. In eternal separation (like Lewis' view), evil is at least made ineffective on the good, and really just centered on one's self by one's self, so that they aren't even affecting others in Hell.

But in your view the individual aspect of GOD-consciousness and GOD-consciousness itself are both affected even if other individual aspects of GOD-consciousness aren't, right?

In annihilationism, the ones that would choose more evil are done away with, leaving only the good who no longer will choose more evil. Of course, if consciousness is eternal, like you believe, this doesn't work, but here I'm taking each view on its own terms, not in light of your belief on consciousness.

I would say that this is simply part of the creative process. If things did not exist, then all that there would be was GOD.

I think it is a natural reflex of consciousness to create things.

I don't think there was any intent to create good and evil. I think it was just a result of creating form and occupying that form.

I'll be honest and say I didn't read the link. I'm working off your summary here. My question is why is it natural for consciousness that is all truth to create illusory things? That doesn't make sense to me. Truth begets truth or it isn't truth, is my feeling. Why am I wrong? Saying that is a result of creating and occupying form is too vague. Why is the form created illusory in nature in the first place?

Even given the belief that GOD is omniscient, the fact that It would choose to experience situations where an aspect of It loses full knowledge of Itself, only signifies that It understands that this is never a permanent condition.

But why even desire to experience this temporarily? Why would truth desire to become falsehood?

Well in relation to the idea of an eternal suffering in hell, I think I have been explaining 'just' in what I have been sharing with this alternative idea.

You've been explaining why you think your view is more just, but haven't defined that term. In eternal torment, eternal separation and annihilationism the belief is that not everyone would eventually get it right and so it is just to torment, separate or destroy those individuals. This doesn't counter justice, as I understand that term. You think it does, so how are defining justice?

[William]

[Replying to post 148 by The Tanager]

So, are you saying that eternal punishment is a weaker solution because this means that GOD-consciousness (or an aspect of it) will suffer forever?

I am saying it is not a solution at all. The 'suffering forever' is part of that, and therefore, not a solution.

If so, isn't that a possibility in your scenario as well? Those creating their own hell are aspects of GOD-consciousness.

No. I explained why in my last post.

The only way I see out of this is to say everyone will eventually learn, but I don't think we can say this because of free will. If someone chooses to be stubbornly evil or ignorant of the illusion, GOD-consciousness will experience suffering forever. Or do you think free will doesn't exist?

Would you rather believe that free will is given even though there is a possibility that we will use it to be stubbornly evil or ignorant of the illusion forever?
Free will is only for the purpose of discovering GOD as GOD truly is. After that, there is no need for free will.
Indeed, because anomalies are permitted, there is less free will in the next phase than in this present one.

We can't just assume either way. The first step is to look at logical possibility. If something is logically impossible, then we can clearly rule that out. At this level I'm saying that if free will exists, then, by definition, eternal self-induced illusion of hell is logically possible within GOD-consciousness.

If you were to believe that you would also have to believe that GOD went ahead with this anyway, knowing the risk involved and having no way out of that.
Does that sound logical to you?

Perhaps you are thinking of the individual as separate from GOD whereas GOD sees the individual as an aspect of Itself.

At this point, you are seemingly taking it to the next level and claiming that even though logically possible, you think it won't actually be the case. I'm wondering why we should think that is the case. And I think you have the burden of giving reasons why you think this won't be the case.

Yes - and I gave this further on in my post.

What do you mean? Do individuals not interact with each other in the illusion we call reality?

If they are part of the individuals self created reality, yes. For example, if someone dies and expects to see there loved ones in heaven, then this is what they create for themselves.

Does this mean that the loved ones have to stop whatever they are involved with and play the part?
No.
It means that the individual creates images of the loved ones in their own illusion.

Or why now, but not then?

I think I know what you are asking here, but please expand on your question.

And, regardless, GOD-consciousness is being affected, isn't it?

Always. GOD-consciousness can handle it. It is that aspect of GOD-consciousness directly responsible which is doing the handling of it.

So, are you dropping the creation story as a good clue to this or just stating that there are also more Biblical and non-Biblical clues?

No - I am saying that the creation story metaphor will suffice.

I'd love to hear your thoughts on what the clues are and how they best point towards GOD-consciousness, but this may just lead you back to linking to your other posts on this, and I prefer summaries in these posts, not links to other material.

Then the one example will suffice. Do you have a problem with this?

In eternal torment, evil is at least made ineffective on the good. In eternal separation (like Lewis' view), evil is at least made ineffective on the good, and really just centered on one's self by one's self, so that they aren't even affecting others in Hell.

Okay...

But in your view the individual aspect of GOD-consciousness and GOD-consciousness itself are both affected even if other individual aspects of GOD-consciousness aren't, right?

All are affected within the whole aspect which is participating in this universe. The anomalies I mentioned are the actions of those who are specifically invested in helping those individuals out of their illusions and back towards the fullness of GOD.

These are ones who have either moved out from their self made illusions and are working together to assist others out of theirs, or never created any self made illusion in the first place and are working together to assist others in the reintegration process.

If you can break away from your preference for summaries and try the links to other material, you will see that I expand on this idea in the link I give. I prefer not to write something down repetitively if a facility available gives me the option not to have to do so.

In annihilationism, the ones that would choose more evil are done away with, leaving only the good who no longer will choose more evil. Of course, if consciousness is eternal, like you believe, this doesn't work, but here I'm taking each view on its own terms, not in light of your belief on consciousness.

Annihilation can only be 'explained' if the consciousness involved is not an aspect of GOD.

Of course, the question would then be 'where did the consciousness come from if it is not an aspect of GOD?'

If it isn't, then what is it and where did it originate... etc...

If you think annihilation is the better option then you will need answers to those questions.

I'll be honest and say I didn't read the link. I'm working off your summary here.

(The data linked is more comprehensive so if you choose not to read it, then I hope you won't mind if I don;t repeat myself here should any question you ask re this 'summery' be answered in the link.)

My question is why is it natural for consciousness that is all truth to create illusory things? That doesn't make sense to me.

The only reality is GOD-consciousnesses. I explain this more in the link. Things are not real because they are not eternal. They are non-permanent.

Thus, 'truth' is not found in things - if indeed your understanding of truth is that it cannot be illusion. Yet things exist, so you would have to explain why GOD creates things if those things are not eternal.

Why did GOD create the universe, if the universe is not truth?

Truth begets truth or it isn't truth, is my feeling.

Truth doesn't 'beget' anything. It is what it is and that is the truth.

For example. You might identify as being a male human. Is this truth? Your body will die one day, so if you depart your body and this experience of the universe, is it still truth that you are a male human being?

You might reply that you believe that right now the truth is that you are a male human being, but this only signifies that the truth is conditional on the moment.

Your argument seems to be saying that truth should be perpetual and unchanging, and my argument is that truth is able to experience illusion and still be truth. The illusion does not have to be true in order for truth to experience it.

Why am I wrong? Saying that is a result of creating and occupying form is too vague. Why is the form created illusory in nature in the first place?

Because GOD is not form and because GOD is not THE form. Because GOD is not ANY form. The link I provided extends on this idea in more detail.

But why even desire to experience this temporarily? Why would truth desire to become falsehood?

You are conflating falsehood with illusion as if they have the same intent - to perpetually deceive.

Do you think that having a real experience of being on a roller coaster is 'truthful' while having a simulated experience on a roller-coaster is 'falsehood', no matter that for all intent and purpose the two experiences produce the same kind of experience?

Lets say that the real roller-coaster experience crashes and lives are lost, but the simulated crash does not end in the loss of your life. Which one would you prefer to experience?

In relation to GOD, the simulation of having a beginning and an end does not have to be conflated with being false in the sense that you seem to be arguing it.
The other thing that I mention in the link is that GOD without things is simply GOD.

Things allow for aspects of GOD to become real so that those aspects experience things as real, and this is a type of gift GOD gives to itself through that process, because in doing so the gift is given to us, as those aspects of GOD.

There is no one else to share Itself with, so GOD creates 'others' through this process in order that there can be 'others' to share Itself with.

You've been explaining why you think your view is more just, but haven't defined that term. In eternal torment, eternal separation and annihilationism the belief is that not everyone would eventually get it right and so it is just to torment, separate or destroy those individuals. This doesn't counter justice, as I understand that term. You think it does, so how are defining justice?

I did define the difference in the types of ways in which 'justice' is thought and sought.

I defined my understanding as more mature and fair and the other as being immature and juvenile.

In view of my theology, annihilation would be nothing more or less than a deletion of the individual life-memory and a total reintegration of that blank slate conscious aspect, back into the wholeness of GOD.

Do you think that such a thing would be 'just'?