“Almost annhilationism” is an important concept to grasp if one wants to understand precisely what the patristic concept of Hell is. In short, mankind (and all created things) have their very existence constantly sustained by God: “And how could any thing have endured, if it had not been thy will? Or been preserved, if not called by thee?” (Wis 11:25) And so, created things without will persist according to God permitting them to (in the end, God essentially recycles and re-creates inanimate creation when He makes a new heaven and earth). However, for those in creation with free will (specifically humanity), their continued existence depends upon being sustained by God. This mercy is given to man as a default, but when man turns against God and rejects this vivifying grace, man (to quote Saint Maximus in the reblogged article) sets onto a course to non-existence. Man cannot exist rejecting the very basis of his existence. After all, “the Lord said, ‘My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.'” (Gen 6:3)
The damned therefore deteriorate in every way imaginable. In body and soul, in form and in their willing. They start becoming non-entities, just like a log thrown in a fire starts reducing to ashes and is no longer a log.
And so, this begs the question, are the damned ever completely annihilated and cease to exist? Not anymore than the ashes in one’s fireplace. Just as the saved for eternity are transformed into God, never reaching the fullness of His grace but like a line approaching infinity for eternity getting closer and closer to it forever, the damned go in the opposite direction. They increasingly cease existence for eternity, but never entirely so. Instead of approaching infinity and never attaining to it completely, they approach zero but never attain to this.
Just as the state of the saved is incomprehensible in its greatness (“Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, Nor have entered into the heart of man The things which God has prepared for those who love Him,” 1 Cor 2:9), the sorry, annihilated (and practically non-existent) state of the damned cannot be contemplated. The damned almost cease to be entities, weeping and gnashing teeth, having seemingly lost all reason, reflection, and other authentic human mannerisms. Their forms, I speak logically, would be indistinguishable and difficult to make out–just as it would be hard to discern which log the embers in the fireplace belong to. However, the damned will persist for eternity in this state as individuals.
This patristic view of damnation, whose Biblical merits is obvious as the above shows, may be of some ironic “comfort” to the heretics. Universalists and the annhilationists do not actually have real evidence, biblically or traditionally, for their peculiar views. They simply do not think it is “fair” God permits the eternal “torture” of individuals for finite bad decisions. And so, such a view where in 100 years, let along 1,000,000, the damned are virtually annihilated (will they even have awareness of their suffering at a certain point when they lose all reason?), will seem less repulsive to these heretics. It makes Hell “less bad” in their twisted view.
However, the Christian must understand that this is much worse than one can truly contemplate. It is an eternal lobotomy, an infinite separation from God which increases forever and ever. If God is the greatest thing there is and man’s sole comfort is to rest in God, to be eternally denied this and be increasingly distanced from God more and more without end is literally the worst thing imaginable.
The whole judgement of mankind by his works and willing makes sense in such a system. For the saved, such as the Theotokos, their cooperation with the grace of God in their earthly lives translates into a proportionate capacity to receive grace in the afterlife. And so, the Theotokos likely has more grace now then any of us will attain to in 999 quadrillion years, but in that time the Theotokos will have attained to infinitely more grace–as God’s grace is without end. And so, one can see how the “many mansions” in Heaven makes sense given how heavenly reward is contingent upon the will and its faithfulness to God, as that makes the individual receptive to grace–and God’s grace IS heaven.
To the contrary, the damned will suffer their degree (and pace) of almost-annihilation in proportion to how much they were faithless and refused to cooperate with the grace of God. So, just as it will be worse on the day of judgement for Chorazin and Bethsaida than Sodom and Gomorrah (cf Matt 11:21), those with wills more set against God in their faithlessness will suffer more (due to the increased pace of their degeneration) than those who were not as profoundly wicked and faithless.
Lastly, one can see how it is precisely faith, the inclination of the will towards God, which is the determining factor in salvation (and lack of in damnation). Faith is one’s inclination for God, and so those without works in this life (due to lack of time) such as the thief on the cross and sincere deathbed repentants attain to a lifetime of good works simply because their faith substitutes for this. Their wills have become receptive to God and His grace, and a profound enough repentance even without it being experienced in works (again, due to lack of time), eliminates attachments to sin which would inhibit the will from being receptive to God’s grace. Lack of faith, despite a lifetime of good works or obedience to the Jewish Law (or whatever else) are obviously useless, as doing good for the wrong reasons makes one closed off to God’s grace. One cannot become God, which is what grace does and what heaven is, but not want anything to do with God and be closed off from Him. And so, as Saint Nicolai of Zica reminds us, a great ascetic with a lifetime of good works forfeited heaven because he was proud of “his accomplishments” right before he died. The saints give us hard teachings, but they necessarily connect and explain how everything works.
And so, with all of this in mind, we must redouble our repentance. Whether this be in the giving of alms, increasing our prayers, doing good works, or fasting more profoundly, we must do all these things with the goal of making ourselves dependent upon God for our provision, thoughts, motivations, and sustenance. The more one leans upon God and trusts in Him, the more faith one has in God, the more receptive to grace one becomes. And so, it is with this motivation we must pursue the spiritual disciplines and draw near to God so He will draw near to us. (cf James 4:8)
In his paper, “Patristic Views on Why There is no Repentance After Death,” David Bradshaw explains how St. Maximus the Confessor follows St. Dionysius the Areopagite in teaching that all human beings have the free will to either choose God or reject Him, and their eternal fate will simply be the perpetual realization of this free choice. Those who choose God, who is the very foundation of goodness and being itself, will themselves naturally tend towards higher states of goodness and being, which finds its fullest culmination in the age to come when God is all-in-all. When this happens, turning away from God will no longer be an option, as He will simply be fully-filling all things, and so those who have disposed themselves towards receiving God in this life will eternally experience the fullness of the divine presence as a state of never-ending bliss and happiness.
For…
View original post 595 more words
Orthodox Christian Theology 
“the annhilationists do not actually have real evidence, biblically or traditionally, for their peculiar views. They simply do not think it is “fair” God permits the eternal “torture” of individuals for finite bad decisions.”
Actually the annihlationist view is nothing in wicked man is immortal. Thus to say annihlationism is wrong, is to say God is not omnipotent enough to completely destroy sin but can merely reduce it. If all sin and anything tainted with sin is to be destroyed by the eternal fire then there is nothing left to remain, not even ashes because there can be no trace of sin.
Containment of sin vs Removal of sin is the major difference, practically our views about the state of those in hell are virtually the same, a “non-conscious” euthanasia of the wicked.
“to say annihlationism is wrong, is to say God is not omnipotent enough to completely destroy sin”
This is the heresy of predestinarianism. God cannot change the inclination of human willing. This is a fundamental tenet of the faith. It is because human willing can only be aided by grace, but not completely manipulated, which explains how salvation and damnation works. Hence, those who are saved co-operate with grace and truly become God. Those who do not reject grace, and this is what actually is the cause of their annihilation. Because there is not end to God, there is no end to rejecting Him, so this annihilation has no end.
And so, your logic is not even logical, let alone a consensus of Scriptural and Patristic witnesses reject it. I’d advise you revise your views.
“God is not omnipotent enough to completely destroy sin”
Perhaps I should elaborate on this and ask does your view of almost annhilationism apply to fallen angels? In my view it annihlationism applies equally to any created being, ‘God alone possesses immortality’.
“This is the heresy of predestinarianism”
What do you mean? I believe in free will but your final choice when you die is locked in for all eternity, there is no salvation from hell.
“Because there is not end to God, there is no end to rejecting Him, so this annihilation has no end.”
Agree that there is no end to God, but rejection can be final. Rejection is not a process, even if salvation might be.
You are essentially saying because there is no end to wicked man, there is no end to him rejecting God, but if the wicked man ceases so does the rejection.
“Man cannot exist rejecting the very basis of his existence.”
Man is either alive or dead, it’s a binary state, there is no quasi-existence. The wicked are not a version of Schrödinger’s cat. Their existence fully ceases to be.
‘The serpent said to the woman, You certainly will not die!’
“Just as the saved for eternity are transformed into God”
“Hence, those who are saved co-operate with grace and truly become God.”
Could you explain what you mean by this?
Man becoming God sounds like a mormon heresy…even if you say no one reaches that infinite asymptote
“let alone a consensus of Scriptural witnesses”
Perhaps you can provide those references
I’m limited for time, so please forgive my frank reply.
“Perhaps I should elaborate on this and ask does your view of almost annhilationism apply to fallen angels?”
This is moving the goal posts. The short answer is that angels are spiritual beings and incomposite, and so they are eternal by a metaphysical default. (St Gregory of Nyssa teaches this in the Great Catechism)
“In my view it annihlationism applies equally to any created being,”
Two problems with this. 1. St Gregory asserts that incomposite entities are eternal by default, such as angels and human souls. Second, Christ became incarnate and conquered death, so the human nature now is eternal because Christ’s is. This is true across the board.
“What do you mean? I believe in free will but your final choice when you die is locked in for all eternity”
ANd so, due to choice having a proportionate effect on the reception of grace, it is not a matter of God’s omnipotence that determine how human nature is affected by grace.
“Agree that there is no end to God, but rejection can be final. Rejection is not a process,…”
I’m not sure what you mean by process, but rejection is an inclination of a will, inclinations are not frozen in a point in time but rather persist as long as the inclination does (and without repentance after death, that’s forever.)
“You are essentially saying because there is no end to wicked man, there is no end to him rejecting God, but if the wicked man ceases so does the rejection.”
He cannot cease, because human nature has been rendered eternal in the second resurrection because of Christ destroying death.
“Man is either alive or dead, it’s a binary state, there is no quasi-existence.”
Saint Maximus disagree. Man has existence, but the rejection of Christ tends eternally towards non-existence.
“Could you explain what you mean by this?”
Re-read the article you are responding to. 🙂
“Man becoming God sounds like a mormon heresy…even if you say no one reaches that infinite asymptote.”
Orthodox doctrine is that we participate in union with God and become partakers of the divine nature. 2 Pet 1:3-4 teaches this.
“Perhaps you can provide those references”
If you are honestly not aware of this, I suggest you do more research before seriously expounding upon annihilationism. If you are being polemical, I’m not going to respond to this in any serious way.
God bless
Craig
“incomposite entities are eternal by default, such as…human souls”
The idea that human souls are incomposite entities is Platonic in origin and certainly not Hebrew.
That incomposite entities are eternal by default is a philosophical concept of reasonable assumption, but is not a logical necessity.
But lets skip this for now to focus on the more important matter
“Second, Christ became incarnate and conquered death, so the human nature now is eternal because Christ’s is. This is true across the board.”
Yes ‘He Himself likewise also partook of the same, so that through death He might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil,’ but that does not mean that all human nature now is eternal. The ‘gracious GIFT of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord’, human nature can only become eternal when “glorification” happens, which occurs at the resurrection at Christ’s second coming ‘For this perishable must put on the imperishable, and this mortal must put on immortality.’
‘To the one who overcomes, I will grant to eat from the tree of life, which is in the Paradise of God.’
Perhaps you can share St. Gregory’s 6th century quote, it might not address what I’m getting at but I will still read it.
I’m not trying to be polemical, I’m trying to clear secular greek philosophy from the church. I believe Holy Scripture has a different worldview.
Since you are Orthodox I will leave you this link, perhaps Georges Florovsky can articulate what I’m trying to say in terminology more familiar to you:
http://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/immortality_soul.htm
God bless,
Justin
This is an Orthodox blog, so all Greek influence is not bad traditionally. St Maximus believed only God to be incomposite, so while I have speculations concerning the eternity of spiritual beings (Christ’s incarnation makes both humanity, soul, and spirit eternal), this is already a premise we do no share (despite the resurrection of both the wicked and the just, which shows, Christ conquered physical death for all), so I will not belabor the point.
May God bless you in your studies.
“The one who overcomes will not be hurt by the second death.”
“Blessed and holy is the one who has a part in the first resurrection; over these the second death has no power”
“Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire.”
I ask out of genuine curiousity, and won’t critique your reply.
What is your understanding of the second death? can it differ from the [first] death? what is death?
May God bless you in your studies.
Second death is “Almost Annhilationism.”
“Could you explain what you mean by this?
Man becoming God sounds like a mormon heresy…even if you say no one reaches that infinite asymptote”
Deification/Theosis is the doctrine of the Catholic and Orthodox Churches. Yes, the Mormons also believe it, teaching that righteous Christians with valid baptisms will be deified with, though always subordinate to, the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. They believe that because they read the same Bible the rest of us do and it’s clearly in there. The only Christians who deny it are Protestants.
Calling it a “Mormon Heresy” (though I’m sure no offense was meant) is absurd. Just because a church with some other heterodox beliefs teaches something Protestants don’t, doesn’t make it “Mormon” and it doesn’t make it wrong.
The Mormons also, despite having Sacramental theology, somehow also deny the real presence in the Eucharist. Does that make denying the real presence in the Eucharist a “Mormon Heresy”? No, because it predates Mormonism and isn’t unique to them.
I’m Catholic and I have no problem saying that both the Orthodox and the Mormons are right about this particular issue (if only we could get the Orthodox to agree to the primacy of Peter and the Mormons to agree on the identity and occupant of the seat of Peter). TLDR: Other Churches are allowed to get things right, regardless of what else they may get wrong.
Thank you for your question. We do not become God according to essence of substance (i.e. the “stuff” of God). We do not become uncreated. Rather, we participate in God via His energies/works. It is sort of like we are electric motors and God is a power plant. We don’t become power plants, but we are powered by the power plant. The power is not ours, it is His, though we as electric motors authentically spin thanks to God’s grace. Being that power plants have power, the power, though not a power plant in essence, is part of a power plant and in fact a power plant is by definition “power.”
Even more simply, we are one with God by our actions and will, making us God according to work and will.