Annihilation

Macintosh

Argument based on the use of the Erickson text.

Revised: July 2017

God is perfectly holy.

-Erickson writes that God is totally separate from his creation. Erickson (1994: 284).
-Erickson lists Exodus 15: 11, 1 Samuel 2: 2 and Isaiah 57: 15.
-God is absolutely pure and good; God is not evil. Erickson (1994: 285).
-Erickson lists Job 34: 12, Habakkuk 1: 13 and James 1: 13

Human beings are sinful.

-Jeremiah 17: 9, Romans Chapter 1-3, Romans 3: 23, Romans 6: 23.

Sin must be atoned.

-God is the administrator of justice and cannot justly simply forgive sins. Erickson (1994: 816). God is equally the God of love and justice. Justice is therefore not ignored for the sake of love, as a holy God must be just.

Christ as infinite God outlasted finite sin in the atonement.

-As God, Christ’s death has infinite worth. Erickson (1994: 804). As God he can atone for all finite human sin.

Christ as a perfect man was sacrificed for imperfect persons in the atonement.

-As a human, Christ could redeem other humans. Erickson (1994: 804). Christ redeemed all of human nature through the atonement. Erickson (1994: 804).

The elect exist. (Ephesians 1, Romans 8, John  15)

-God rejects those who are not elect, and they reject God.

Therefore:

Everlasting punishment exists.

-Biblically, all persons exist port-mortem (Revelation, Chapter 20). As spirit, awaiting resurrection. It could be reasoned that everlasting punishment exists as finite unregenerate persons continue to attempt to, in a sense, atone for their sins in hell, but can never fully cover their sins without Christ. Therefore they cannot justly be annihilated. Earthly sins are not covered, and post-mortem sins (rejecting God and related) in disembodied and resurrection states also remain uncovered.

ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

Theology and Christ

Durham Cathedral, England

http://thekingpin68.blogspot.com/2008/08/objections-to-christ.html

Recently I joined a brand new on-line Christian group for persons that have walked away from church, although I have not left church, and have no intention of leaving church. I joined this group at the request of the blogger that is a link. This group has an associated blog. On the blog an article was written suggesting that in the United States there is a tendency to obscure the simple teachings of Jesus with doctrines and theological systems.

From:

http://humanitas.typepad.com/sojourn/2008/07/the-simplicity.html

I noted in comments:

I am a member of a Presbyterian Church of the Reformed tradition. I have not walked away from church, but do reason that in many ways an understanding of Biblical theology has led me to accept that Reformed theology usually provides greater understanding than does evangelical, for example. I would prefer not to call myself evangelical, although there is overlap between Reformed and evangelical views.

The link and blogger answered by noting that theology was a human construct and therefore was prone to error.

I then commented:

There is theological error because there is sin and God has not yet purged us of all sin. We are close to Christ as our theology concerning Christ is correct and as we are guided by the Holy Spirit. We cannot properly focus on Christ without a proper theological understanding. Now this theology may be more practical than systematic in the beginning but a proper understanding of Biblical theology is important or else we risk having an understanding of Christ which is heavily influenced by the ideologies of persons which will be subject to error.

Theology is not just a human construct, but was revealed through the teaching of Old Testament writers, Christ and his New Testament writers.

The blogger stated his disagreement with my view. He deduces that I do not think theology is a human construct

What I had stated was:

Theology is not just a human construct, but was revealed through the teaching of Old Testament writers, Christ and his New Testament writers.

I then added:

Biblical theology is God working through human means, and so the theology is both divine and human.

I also noted in regard to the idea that theology is not simply the study of God:

No, theology is also studying the philosophy of God. This can be seen in the disciplines of Biblical theology, systematic and philosophical theology, and philosophy of religion. The theology/ philosophy of God, was revealed by the prophets, Christ and the apostles. Therefore theology is certainly not just a human construct without understanding that theology is revealed by God to persons in Scripture, and understanding this theology being led by God, the view of Christ can largely be a human construct. This is a reason why there are so many religious groups that claim to know Christ (Eastern Religion, LDS, and others) and yet do not understand or know who the Biblical Jesus is.

The blogger then mentioned that the disciples were not educated in contrast to the Pharisees that were theologians:

I noted:

And then there was Paul too, regenerated and educated, the scholar.:)

The blogger then comments that Paul left the things of the law behind for Christ.

I noted:

Agreed, good point. And the Lord used Paul and his abilities to teach corrective theology in contrast to the teaching of the Jewish leaders.

Romans for example, is a cornerstone of Christian theology.

End

I have received some very important emails recently!

Dear Sir

I am a lawyer and legal representative to a high profile client within the international community that requires your experience and assistance in the investment of her inherited funds,should this transaction be of interest to you contact me for more.

Best regards,

Alexander Smith.

and...

ITOCHU Corporation
5-1, Kita-Aoyama 2-chome
Minato-ku, Tokyo 107-8077, Japan
Email: eizokobayashi_jp34@live.com

Dear Friend,
Good day to you? I am Mr Eizoko Bayashi. I represent ITOCHU Corporation based here in Japan.

Our company exports cement, sugar and textile materials for world trade. We are searching for a representatives who can help us establish a medium of getting to our customers in Europe, America,and Canada as well as making payments through you as our payment officer.
Most of our customers pay out in check and we do not have an account in your country that will clear this money. It is upon this note that we seek your assistance to stand in as our representative in your country.

Note that, as our representative, you will receive 10% of whatever amount you clear for the company and the balance to be paid to us.If you are interested in this business transaction,forward to us the information below:

FULL NAME:
FULL CONTACT ADDRESS:
PHONE:
OCCUPATION:
CELL:
FAX:
COUNTRY:
AGE:

These information should be forwarded to the President and Chief Executive Officer;
Mr. Eizoko Bayashi.





Thanks to Jim and Vicki for the photos.

Recent comments and some free promotion

Fire Lake, BC (photo from trekearth.com)

My friend from Manchester, England, Mr. Richard McIntosh recently interviewed Dr. Gary Habermas concerning the resurrection:

http://www.garyhabermas.com/audio/2008-03_manchester_radio.mp3

Richard's blog:

http://destructionofgog.blogspot.com/

Since I spend about half of my blogging time commenting on other blogs, here are some of my recent comments.

These are my comments and not the comments of the authors of the blog links.

This is free promotion for some of you. I am not favouring anyone's blog, but I am presenting my better comments from what I can remember.

Rick presented a letter from an ex-Mormon:

http://mormonismreviewed.blogspot.com/2008/07/letter-from-ex-mormon.html

For readers to ponder on...

The critic will get nowhere with an educated Biblical Christian or scholar if the critic denies the concept of the Trinity simply because the word is not in the New Testament. The concept is in the New Testament and the word describing it was formulated at a later date.

That is an aspect of systematic theology with many true Biblical doctrines.

Rick discusses Acts 7 and prophets:

http://mormonismreviewed.blogspot.com/2008/07/acts-chapter-7.html

Prophets with such a supposedly important message dealing with restoration LDS doctrine in its early stages should have been found in the Hebrew Bible. The message should be something that can be somewhat gathered from the current text, as in a misinterpretation by Hebrew and Christian scholars.

And polytheism, as in more than one true God in nature, in existence, cannot be theologically sustained in either the Hebrew Bible or New Testament. It has been heretical to believe that more than one true God exists.

Modern Christianity does not need restoration; It needs reformation as the essential truth is already in Scripture.

Jeff writes about Donatists and I need some satire for this article:

http://jeffjenkinsocala.blogspot.com/2008/07/donatists.html

I have heard of Donatists (at TWU), and the Doughnutists/Donutists that anonymous mentioned. Perhaps Jeff, you should arrange an academic debate between the two groups with the loser, if there is one, agreeing to change the sound of their name. This is far, far, far, too confusing.

Will the Doughnutists have holes in their reasoning? Or will they be very holy?

Jim presents an interesting perspective on the relationship between God and Satan:

http://deityquest-jeleasure.blogspot.com/2008/07/satans-relationship-with-god.html

From Revelation 20:10, Satan will be thrown into the lake of fire, and punished forever. This seems to indicate conscious punishment. I can accept the fact that he will be destroyed in the sense of made powerless and his kingdom destroyed.

and:

As God wills all things within Biblical and Reformed theology, Satan is an instrument of God. But, Satan is not forced to commit evil and does this with a degree of freedom.

Robert responds to this:



http://sanctifusion.blogspot.com/2008/07/real-faith-or-realpolitik.html

What 'crap' are they talking about? They can imply that Christian groups that do not agree with them believe in 'crap', but it is rather meaningless to state this without further explanation. It risks simply appealing to persons that hate aspects of traditional Christianity (and others) and want to go to a church with doctrines more acceptable to modern thought.

Abbey presents some interesting history and philosophy:

http://abssoapbox.blogspot.com/2008/07/who-are-you.html

Nice art. I doubt these paintings could be completed in 27 minutes.

Within secular society many persons have an idea of how many things work, but do not have a reasonable handle on the philosophical underpinnings and assumptions that lead to a secular worldview.

and:

The will works through the spirit/mind. As persons are fallen and corrupt this would include the body and spirit/mind, and therefore the will would be corrupted. In my PhD, I speculate a Reformed based chain that starts with the human nature which is now corrupted, consciousness, desires and motives leading to wilful decisions and actions. All things are willed by God and therefore God in a sense is the first cause in this human chain and influences persons as he wills. The human will makes choices and persons commit actions influenced by God within one's corrupted nature. The Holy Spirit can regenerate and influence persons to do God's will obediently as opposed to disobediently when left to the corrupted nature alone. God can also influence the unregenerate for his purposes. The human will to have any freedom at all must make choices without being forced or coerced, and I reason persons have this type of freedom.

Drugs are an unfortunate cultural aspect of rock music. One cannot likely go to a major rock concert without smelling marijuana. Even still a minority of rock musicians are very skilled. As with studying philosophy and theology, one must be able to take the good from a person or group and filter out the rest. The Beatles have had some very good music, but an appreciation of their music should not equal an appreciation of their worldview. Sadly, too many fans do not separate musical appreciation from worldview and are sucked into wrong philosophy and at times religious thought. A Christian must be mature and educated enough to filter out the negative aspects of non-Christian culture. As a fan of the Beatles later music and someone who has studied secular philosophy and liberal theology, I must state the latter would have been potentially much more damaging to me if I was not guided by God. This is because the philosophy and theology was presented in a more convincing professional way than were the Beatles amateurish ramblings.

Vicki discusses healing:

http://vleasure.blogspot.com/2008/07/healing-is-possible.html

I would love to be healed of physical and spiritual problems today. No amount of money would be worth the value of this healing. But, as you mention true (lasting) healing is through Christ, as since we all die, everlasting healing is of primarily importance. God promises a restored Kingdom where suffering will not exist as Revelation 21 explains.

In regard to the naturalistic critics, if there is only death, this life has limited meaning as our suffering here ultimately culminates in death and nothingness. If life continues after death in some way it may have meaning, and definitely has meaning in the presence of the triune God.

GGM presents a project on the Sermon on the Mount:

http://shalomistheword.blogspot.com/2008/07/sermon-on-mount-1.html

I appreciate the overview. Jesus Christ being of the line of David, his virgin birth, his supernatural ministry, and resurrection, are four very important points that demonstrate he is the fulfilment of the Messiah of the Hebrew Bible.

Of course there are other points as well.

http://thekingpin68.blogspot.com/2008/07/theism-and-deism.html

Ad hominem (example in comments)

Macintosh

Douglas Walton explains that argumentation ad hominem is an argument against the man. It is a personal attack against an arguer to refute the argument. In the abusive form the character of the arguer is attacked. These arguments are often used to attack an opponent unfairly. Walton (1996: 374).

Simon Blackburn explains that ad hominem is attempting to disprove what a person is stating by attacking the person, or less commonly by praising the person. Commonly it is a way of arguing forcefully or not, against a view without advancing the counter argument. Blackburn (1996: 24). This latter concept would be that of arguing against a held perspective without making any reasonable counter-arguments.

BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy Oxford, Oxford University Press.

WALTON, DOUGLAS (1996) ‘Informal Fallacy’, in Robert Audi, (ed), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

February 9, 2017

Update

Nine years later there have been several template changes. The switch to Dynamic template quite significant with format. I revised this entry. The comments on this Chrome version are corrupted. Therefore, I provide an example of ad hominem to be at least somewhat true to the entry title.

Pope Chucklins: I do not want to go to that Christian event tonight, because I was working online all day.

Satire Und Theology: Chuck!!! Get off your software and quit being a boop, boop, dork and get over here and be my chauffeur, because your vehicle is newer and I do not like driving in downtown Vancouver.
---

A humourous and insensitive example, but my objection does not deal with Saint Chucklins' actual fatigue. Rather when he does arrive and begins to shut down at around 11 pm, I just make sure he drinks at least one beer mug sized coffee. The physical results of that are his problem...