Sugar Land Bible Church

Dr. Andy Woods: Father, we're grateful for this bright and sunny day that you've given us here in the Houston area. We are particularly grateful for this time of the year, typically called Holy Week, where we commemorate what you did for us 2,000 years ago, commemorating the crucifixion of your Son this week and then of course on Sunday, the bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead.

And because he has done that, he has given us, as he is the first fruits, he has given the rest of us hope. And so we can walk through this life with all of its problems and deficiencies and declining bodies and everything that goes wrong in our sin-cursed, sin-soaked world. We walk through it with hope that you conquered the grave.

And because you conquered the grave, you laid the foundation for our ultimate hope, which is your imminent return. And so we thank you for those things. We thank you for this week and what it means. In preparation for our time of study this morning, we're just going to take a few moments of silence to do personal business with you so that our hearts are right, so that we can receive what the Holy Spirit has for us by way of illumination through your Word.

We do ask, Lord, that you'd be with all of the classes, youth classes that are meeting even as I speak. I pray you'll be with this session and I pray you'll be with the main service as well. And we ask that you would take the Word and apply it to the deepest needs of our lives, even those needs that we may not even be aware of and can't even see. You see them and you know what they are. And so we ask that you'll do this great work. We ask these things in Jesus' name. God's people said, amen.

Well, this is our last Sunday in March. Can you believe it? We've marched through March. Let's take our Bibles this morning and open them to the book of Colossians, chapter one and verse 20. Coming near the end, believe it or not—I know you don't believe me when I say that, but I don't have a lot of credibility left in that area anyway—but coming near the end, Lord willing, of this study that we're doing on annihilationism versus eternal conscious torment.

What you're starting to see become popularized within Christendom is a combination of two doctrines: conditional immortality, meaning the soul was never created to live forever and people don't become immortal until they trust Christ. So what happens to the unbeliever? Well, that paves the way into annihilationism. Unbelievers, when they die, go into hell or Hades for a season, but they don't stay there forever because they explode or disappear or cease to exist.

So these are ideas that have sort of been lurking in the shadows, but as of December of 2025, Kirk Cameron signed on, so to speak, to these ideas, and they started to become very, very popular. So I wanted you to at least know what this whole thing is about. And it doesn't help when key conservative influencers like Eric Metaxas run interference for Kirk Cameron.

He tweets here, "Anybody who thinks my friend Kirk Cameron is a heretic is a heretic themselves." And he's responding to something Kirk Cameron said in the wake of this controversy. People think I'm a heretic because I'm promoting or open to annihilationism. So we started this study with Roman numeral two after introducing the controversy by taking you through the main scriptures that I know of that not only teach that hell is forever, but unbelievers will be there forever.

And then from there, we went into about four arguments that are more broader theological, philosophical type arguments that not only is hell forever, but people will be there forever—unbelievers, that is. And one of the things you have to understand about false teaching is it never would get off the ground if they didn't have scriptures that they appealed to. So everybody quotes the Bible. The devil quotes the Bible, right?

So just because you're quoting the Bible doesn't mean you're quoting it accurately. And so the annihilationists, conditional immortality advocates, have all these verses that they use: second death, destroy, destruction, burning up, eternal results only, perdition, better to never have been born, perishing, blotted out of existence, life suspended in death. And we've walked through all of those and I tried to show you that they weren't using those verses correctly.

And then from there, we went into their trying to answer their broader theological, philosophical arguments that they use. And there's five of them that we've covered. So we are now at sub-letter F, and then we just have F, G, and H, which I hope we can get through today to finish this particular section.

But one of the arguments that they use—the conditional immortality annihilationist—is the Bible says in the end, all things will be reconciled to God. So if all things are going to be reconciled to God, then how could God allow evil people to exist forever in any state? So they have to be annihilated at some point. So one of their favorites is the book of Colossians, where I had you open up to, Colossians chapter one, verse 20.

And Colossians chapter one, verse 20 says, "and through him to reconcile all things to himself, having made peace through the blood of his cross through him, I say, whether things on earth or things in heaven." So everything is going to be reconciled to God in the end. That's the end game. So how can you have these people living in a state of rebellion against God in hell? So they take that to mean those people in hell, they have to stop existing.

So how would we answer that? With all of these, I'm trying to give you what I think are the best answers. And here's what I think is a very good answer. Continuous existence of the unsaved means all things were not reconciled, thus calling for the unsaved to be annihilated. That's their argument. And so the response is Colossians chapter one, verse 20 is not teaching all things will be reconciled to God without exception. It rather is a statement that all things will be reconciled to God without distinction.

And you're saying, "What? What are you talking about?" Give me a moment to unpack it and I think you'll see what I mean. All things will be reconciled to God does not mean every single thing that's ever existed will be reconciled to God. All types of things will be reconciled to God. All kinds of things will be reconciled to God and not everything. So here is Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum responding to their use of Colossians 1, verse 20.

And he says this: "Colossians chapter one, verse 20, where it states that all things are reconciled"—and now he's giving their argument even though, obviously, he's not promoting their belief—"if there is a continuous existence of the unsaved in eternal punishment, it would mean that all things were not reconciled. But if all things are reconciled, it means there is an elimination and an annihilation of the unbelieving element."

A little bit later, he says, "They, that's the annihilationists, also uses Colossians chapter one, verse 20, which speaks about all things being reconciled. But in the context, the 'all things' does not mean all things without exception. Rather, it means all things without distinction. All kinds of things will be reconciled to God, but not all things as such."

And he's going on now and he's rehearsing their argument. The additional argument is found in Hebrews 2, verse 16, which points out that God didn't even provide salvation for the angels. How is that relevant? Part of the teaching of the annihilationists is based upon the theological argument and the scriptural argument that the Bible promises that all things will be reconciled to God.

But the fact is that the 'all things' here in Colossians chapter one, verse 20, does not mean all things without exception. Rather, all kinds of things will be reconciled to God, but not everyone of every kind. So we could put it like this: the angels will be reconciled to God as a group. But does that mean all the angels? What about the fallen angels? They are not reconciled to God.

So Colossians chapter one, verse 20, should not be taken as some kind of universal statement that every single creature will be reconciled to God. But of human beings, some human beings will be reconciled to God—that's a kind. Of genders, women will be reconciled to God—not every woman. Of genders, males will be reconciled to God—but not every male. Of the angelic realm, the good angels are reconciled to God—but not every angel because Lucifer was a fallen angel.

And he is not reconciled to God. So you can't take Colossians chapter one, verse 20, and turn it into this idea that in the end, everything is reconciled to God, so therefore the evil have to be annihilated, they can't exist anymore because the verse is not saying every thing is reconciled to God, but everything from every category is reconciled to God, if that helps.

He says, according to Hebrews chapter two, verse 16, salvation was not provided for fallen angels. So fallen angels will never be reconciled to God and yet they continue to be eternal beings. The fact that there is no reconciliation for fallen angels shows that the Colossians passage cannot be used to teach that all things without exception are going to be reconciled by means of the annihilation of the evil ones. It simply cannot mean that.

So let me give you, obviously, an example of something that in the end is not reconciled to God, yet it has to continue forever in a state of punishment, and that's the devil. So notice Matthew chapter 25, verse 41. Matthew chapter 25, verse 41—this is the famous sheep and the goat judgment. And it says there, "Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, accursed ones, into the eternal fire which has been prepared for the devil and his angels.'"

So does the devil, because all things have to be reconciled to God, does the devil go into the eternal fire and then at some point disappear? No, because he was originally created as a high-ranking angel. Ezekiel 28, verses 12 through 17 describes him as a guardian cherub. Now he is still an angel, but he's today a fallen angel. And I can tell you very clearly that when he goes into hell, he's not going to stop existing.

And I know that because of that passage: the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. You don't prepare an eternal fire for someone that's only going to be there for a weekend trip kind of thing. And beyond that, we know that angels do not die. Did you know that? There's clear scripture on that. You'll find it in Luke 20, verses 35 and 36.

Jesus here interacting with, I think, the Sadducees, but in the process, he makes an interesting comment about angels which contributes some wonderful information to our angelology, our doctrine of angels. And he says in Luke 20, verse 35, "But those who are considered worthy to attain to that age and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage, for they cannot even die anymore," see that in verse 36, "because they are like the angels, and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection."

So if the annihilationist is right that in the end, all things will be reconciled to God, you have no category for what to do with Lucifer and his rebellion because he's an angel and he lasts forever. So obviously, when Colossians 1, verse 20, says in the end, all things will be reconciled to God, it's not saying everything is reconciled to God. It's saying of all of the different categories that God has created, members of each category will be reconciled to God, but it's not to be taken as a statement that every creature that God has ever made will be reconciled to God.

So I know a little of this sounds kind of esoteric and philosophical, but these are the kinds of things that the annihilationist uses and I wanted to at least bring some of these to your attention. Sub-letter G: another big theological and philosophical argument that the annihilationist uses is they say eternal punishment, which is what we believe here at Sugar Land Bible Church—that's why we're involved in missions. We don't want people to go to this place of eternal damnation.

But they say eternal punishment, our view, is contrary to the universal nature of God's victory. So what they're saying is God's victory in the end is described in such a way that evil cannot even exist in the universe anymore. It can't even have a place, can't even have a foothold anywhere. And so in their minds, that means that God has to take all unbelievers and annihilate them as if they never existed at all.

So let me show you some of the verses that they use because, like all heresies, the Bible is appealed to. That's how people get sucked into this kind of stuff because, on the surface, it looks very biblical—they're using verses. And it's appealing to my emotions. I shared with you when I was a young Christian, I had a Jehovah's Witness—they believe this same kind of thing about annihilation—talk to me and he actually convinced me that annihilation is a true doctrine.

And he was using verses and I didn't really know at that time a lot about the Bible. And emotionally, I wanted to believe what he was saying because who in the world wants to believe in an eternal damnation? So if you're going to give me an out from that one, I'll take it. So verses are always appealed to. So let me show you a few. Notice 1 Corinthians 15, verse 26. This is a description of God's final victory in the end.

And this is a good chapter to review as we approach Resurrection Sunday, by the way—not the way the annihilationist uses the chapter, though. It says, "The last enemy will be abolished is death." And then go down to verse 28, 1 Corinthians 15: "When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself also will be subjected to the one who subjected all things to him, so that God may be all in all." So how can God in the end be all in all when there's rebels in the universe under his wrath? So apparently those rebels under his wrath have to disappear.

Notice 2 Corinthians—comes right after 1 Corinthians, amen. 2 Corinthians chapter five, verse 19, which says, "namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and has committed to us the word of reconciliation." So God has set things up where the world is going to be reconciled to himself, which is kind of the argument they're using in the Colossians 1, verse 20, passage. So how could you move off into eternity and have these unbelievers in existence? They have to be annihilated, or else this verse can't mean what it says, according to the annihilationist.

Another popular one is over in Ephesians 1, verse 10. And again, all of these are under the category of the ultimate victory of God. It says, "with a view to an administration suitable to the fullness of the times, that is the summing up of all things in Christ, things in heaven, things on the earth in him." So everything's going to be summed up, Jesus is going to have the final victory. We're moving into the eternal state, which is a perfect existence, as if sin never entered the picture. So how can you have this corner or lake of fire somewhere where people are in existence? You can't have that, according to the annihilationist.

And then if you just slip over one book to the right, you'll run into Philippians. Philippians chapter two, verse 10—this one you probably know well. It says, "so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth." And they'll say, what about unbelievers that never bowed the knee to Jesus? What about unbelievers that won't bow the knee to Jesus? What about unbelievers who lived this life hating Jesus and went into the next life hating Jesus? There's no knee bowing or bending there. There's no head bowing and knee bending, I should say, there. So obviously what happened to that group of people? Well, they went out of existence.

And because they had souls that are just like the animals—*nefesh* describes animals and human beings, *psuchē* describes animals and human beings—just like animals don't live forever, these people aren't going to live forever either. So again, it's not really so much a specific exegetical argument they're using, it's this kind of broader theological, philosophical reasoning.

So Dr. Norman Geisler kind of summarizes what they're doing here, these annihilationists. And he writes, "While the annihilationist disagrees with the universalist contention that all will be saved"—and those are two different belief systems that you probably should be aware of. There's the annihilationist: the unbeliever stops existing at some point. And then there's the universalist. The universalist is saying something similar, but it's not exactly the same. The universalist is saying, "You know what? Everybody's going to become a Christian in the end."

So both of them are kind of convenient tools, I guess you could say, to escape this very uncomfortable reality of eternal damnation. So Geisler correctly says here, "While the annihilationist disagrees with the universalist contention that all will be saved, nonetheless he, that's the annihilationist, concurs that the passages describing God's universal victory over evil"—we just read a ton of them—"demand that there will be no evil left in the universe. For example, in the end, everyone will bow the knee to Christ (Philippians 2:10). The world will be reconciled to Christ (2 Corinthians 5:19). All will be in Christ (Ephesians 1:10), and death and sin will be destroyed (1 Corinthians 15:26), and everyone will be subject to Christ (1 Corinthians 15:28)."

"Even though universalism's interpretation of these texts is incorrect"—I mean, we know that not everybody's going to be saved. We know not everybody's going to be saved because of Revelation 20, verses 11 through 15. It describes people there that their name is not found written in the book of life. They're cast into the lake of fire where the beast and the false prophet are. So how could a universalist argue that everyone in the end gets saved?

I would love for everyone in the end to get saved, but Jesus talked about, did he not, a narrow road that leads to life and a broad road that leads to destruction? And at the sheep and goat judgment, he talks about those on his left, the goats, are cast into Hades, and those on his right, the sheep, the believers, enter the millennial kingdom in their glorified bodies. So you have to just rewrite all of these passages to come up with this universalist idea.

So Geisler says, "Even though universalism's interpretation of these texts is incorrect, they do indicate that sin will be completely defeated." Now the conditionalist, which is what we're critiquing here, they insist that evil cannot occur. So in the end, not everyone gets saved. Universalism: everyone gets saved in the end. Annihilationist: everyone in the end will not get saved, but they're going to cease to exist at a certain point. They're not going to be in eternal retribution because their soul, even though they're made in God's image—God is forever, so are we from the point you were brought into existence, you were designed to live forever. That's what the annihilationist is denying.

So it's really a discussion about anthropology, the doctrine of man. The annihilationist has a very different doctrine of man than I think the Bible promotes. But universalism: in the end, everyone gets saved. Conditional immortality annihilationism is: in the end, not everyone will be saved. Well, then how do you explain all of these verses describing God's final victory over everything? Well, the unbelievers just go out of existence at some point.

So what is the answer to this? All of those verses that I went through, if you look at their context, they're misusing all these verses. Let me give you Geisler's summary here first: "The annihilationist conclusion does not follow from the universal victory passages. Some refer to the fact that salvation is universally possible." That's what 2 Corinthians 5:19 is saying. It's saying that because of Christ's death for the world, the entire world is savable. That's why we evangelize every person, because the whole human race is savable. It's not a statement that they are saved, because they're not saved until they trust in the provision.

So that's what 2 Corinthians 5:19 is saying. It's not saying in the end, God gains a victory of such a level that the unbelievers stop existing. So they're abusing 2 Corinthians chapter five, verse 19. How else are they abusing these passages? Christ's death for all means salvation is universal in extent but limited in application since not all believe. You can't take 2 Corinthians 5:19 and make it sound like everyone will be saved. That's not what the verse is saying. It's saying the possibility of everyone being saved exists.

And this is why you guys have heard me react to five-point Calvinism and J. Adams, who is known in the counseling world and has actually had a lot of good things to say in the counseling world, but he says in his seminal book, *Competent to Counsel*, he says as a counselor, I don't tell the person that I'm counseling, "Christ died for you," because I don't know if they're one of the elect or not. Now that's in print. That's not a misspeaking on a podcast. That's in print, and I've given you that quote several times.

Well, I'll tell you something, Mr. Adams. I tell every person that I run into, "Christ died for you," and they can go to heaven if they want to receive God's provision. I don't play this game of, "Well, you know, I really can't share the gospel with that person over there because I don't know if they're one of the elect," because I don't embrace five-point Calvinism. So 2 Corinthians 5:19 is a repudiation of five-point Calvinism. 2 Corinthians 5:19 is not saying in the end everyone is going to get saved. It doesn't say in the end evil doesn't exist somewhere in the universe. It's just saying salvation is available for every human being. And this is what we call a belief in universal atonement. Christ laid down his life for the entire world. Simple as John 3:16. You got to be a theologian to mess this up.

For God so loved—you guys have this memorized—for God so loved the elect? No, it doesn't say that. "For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believes in him should not perish but have everlasting life." That's what 2 Corinthians 5:19 is saying. It's not a statement that in the end everyone gets saved and it's contrary to universalism and it's not a statement that evil has to stop existing in hell for God to have the final victory.

Geisler says, "Other passages do not refer to the salvation but the subjugation of all." That's how to handle Philippians 2:10. Philippians 2:10 says, "so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth." That's not a statement that somehow rebels go out of existence. What it's a statement about is they're subjugated. They're separated. And it's almost like they're grudgingly complying with who Jesus is. It's not a statement that they stop existing.

And then Geisler says, "While other passages apply to believers and unbelievers," so that's how he's handling Ephesians chapter one, verse 10. Ephesians chapter one, verse 10, when you look at it in context, is a statement about Christians. It's not even talking about the fate of the unsaved at all there. So anybody can take Bible verses and string them together. And it's typically the way it works. They chain all these verses together and you're supposed to look at them all real fast, kind of horizontal, when God says, "I want to be understood vertically." You don't understand God by looking across the spectrum at a bunch of verses without first understanding what that verse is saying in its own context, see that?

Because if you don't learn that discipline, then you're going to get deceived by a lot of people because anybody can take the Bible and string a bunch of verses together to make it sound any way you want it to sound. I mean, Judas went out and hanged himself. Go thou and do likewise. What you do, do quickly. All right, you guys ready for the mass suicide we're going to do today? Someone back there stir that Kool-Aid up. So just understand that the devil is twisting the Bible constantly because he's the father of lies. And you have the tools to discern correct use of scripture and incorrect use of scripture.

So Ephesians chapter one, verse 10, is really just a statement about the saved. That's the context of it. And then Geisler goes on and he says, "Some texts that the conditional annihilationist is using speak of the universal defeat of death." And this is a great thing to think about this time of the year: in the resurrection of all persons, saved and unsaved. So how do you handle 1 Corinthians 15:26? Well, it's talking about the total resurrection package. And when the total resurrection package happens for saved and unsaved people—because did you know that unsaved people are going to be resurrected too? That's kind of a big thing to learn.

They'll be in a resurrected body that won't ever go out of existence. This is why personal evangelism is such a big deal and what people do with Christ now is such a big deal. So they will be in a resurrected body which, like the angels, will never go out of existence. It will never die in that sense. So that's how to handle 1 Corinthians 15:26. So Geisler says, "Some texts do speak of the universal defeat of all death, but this is fulfilled in the resurrection of persons, saved and unsaved."

Then he says, "The other verses that speak of God's triumph over all evil teach the separation, not the annihilation of all evil." That's how God gains victory over evil: he separates it. Can we use the word quarantine? Geisler uses the word quarantine. He quarantines it. He keeps it under his wrath. That's how he wins. It's not a statement that it stops existing.

Yeah, we're moving into a new heavens and new earth where evil will not get the upper hand ever. But that's not to say that evil doesn't exist somewhere under God's separated, quarantined wrath forever. And you can believe that and not take one millimeter away from God's final victory. You don't have to move into annihilationism to protect God's final victory.

So he says, "The other passages that speak of God's triumph over all evil teach the separation, not the annihilation of all evil. As has been repeatedly demonstrated, no passage speaks of annihilation of evil beings. Evil is defeated by everlasting imprisonment and quarantine." Then he says this: "Once again, for God to annihilate his image, which is what we are—that's what makes us different than the animals. That's why just saying, 'Well, we're just like the animals' because the Hebrew word *nefesh* is used of both humans and animals and *psuchē* is used for both humans and animals, but what about the—just because two things are similar doesn't mean they're the same."

I mean, there's a lot of similarities between us and monkeys. The evolutionists have gone hoarse—pardon the expression there—trying to explain all of these differences between us and monkeys—excuse me, similarities between us and monkeys. And yeah, there are points of similarity. But anyone want to talk about the differences? There's a lot of similarities between me and my wife. I mean, a lot of similarities, but I'll tell you one thing, there's a lot of differences, too. One is gender. She's female, I'm male.

So just because there's similarities between me and her doesn't mean we're one and the same. I've got two cars in my garage. Boy, they sure look a lot alike. They've got an engine and seat belts and a steering wheel and an ignition and this and that. But it's a total logical error to say that those two are the same. They're two different vehicles. And so yes, there are similarities between us and the animals, but there's a big difference: we bear God's image, they don't.

So when God created you and your creation happened at the point of conception, you were designed to live forever because you're an image-bearer and he lives forever. That, by the way, is one of the reasons you have volition. God has volition and freedom to choose, so do you. So Geisler says, "Once again, for God to annihilate his beings made in his image would not be a victory but a defeat, but an attack of God upon himself." See, for God to allow people in an unbelieving state to go out of existence would be for him to deny how he created them to be at the beginning.

And so Geisler's point here is that these verses are all taken out of context. By the way, a little excursus if I may. He talks about the resurrection of all persons, saved and unsaved. You believe that? Jesus sure believed it. He says, "Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming in which all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and will come forth; those who do good deeds to a resurrection of life, and those who committed evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment." So the scripture is very clear that there's a resurrection of both saved and unsaved.

Paul talked about it in the book of Acts chapter 24, verses 14 and 15: "But this I admit to you, that according to the Way which they call a sect, I do serve the God of our fathers, believing everything that is in accordance with the Law that is written in the Prophets, having hope in God which these men cherish themselves, that there shall be certainly a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked." Everyone is placed in a resurrected body.

Daniel 12, verse two—this is one of the clearest Old Testament passages we have on the doctrine of resurrection. It says, "Many of those who sleep in the dust of the ground will awake, these to everlasting life, but others to disgrace and everlasting contempt." And we pointed out that *olam* is used to describe both eternal life and eternal damnation. If you're going to play games with eternal damnation is not eternal, then what do you do with the fate of the saved? Is that not eternal as well? You can't have it both ways, annihilationists. You can't switch your method of interpretation right in the middle of a verse, anymore than you could change horses in midstream.

Now we get to the book of Revelation and we learn that there's a thousand years between those two resurrections. Did you know that? Revelation 20, verses four through six: "Then I saw thrones, and they that sat on them, and judgment was given to them, and I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received the mark on their forehead or on their hand; and they came to life"—*zao*—"and reigned with Christ for a thousand years."

And then a thousand years pass, and what happens? Everyone that's an unsaved person is summoned out of Hades, which is like a holding tank, also a place of wrath—Luke 16, verses 19 through 31. And it says, "the rest of the dead"—that's unsaved people—"did not come to life"—see the same verb there? *Zao*. *Zao* is used for life and *zao* is used for damnation. So you can't have it both ways. These annihilationists all believe in eternal life, but they don't believe in eternal damnation. That is the most inconsistent reading of the Bible you can come up with.

But the problem is they're not teaching their people Bible reading skills, they're stringing a bunch of verses along together, most of them lifted out of context to support a pre-existing narrative. It's result-oriented. We're going to teach this doctrine of annihilationism and we're going to string a bunch of verses together because we've already made up our mind what the Bible says. That's what people do all the time. And if you're really good at it, you can even get on the Supreme Court, because the Supreme Court does this all the time. They figure out what they want to do and then they work backward to come up with the evidence.

That's not how you solve or do anything. People that are really good in forensics will tell you this: that you don't develop a theory on the case too fast, you know, who the bad guy is too fast, because the tendency is to fall in love with your theory and then out of pride, make the evidence fit your theory. You want to let the data come in and then build who the bad guy is from the evidence up. That's how you do it. And that's how you do Bible study. And if you won't do it that way, then you're just twisting the scripture. "The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were completed. This is the first resurrection."

Now when it says "first," it doesn't mean first ever, because that would rule out Jesus' resurrection. It's first in sequence. First, the saved are resurrected at the beginning of the thousand years. And last, the unsaved are resurrected. So "first" doesn't mean first ever and "last" in this—well, not here, but elsewhere—doesn't mean last ever. So my wife says to me, "First, I want you to take the trash out. Last, I want you to pick up the laundry." And so I say to myself, "Well, this is the first time I've ever taken the trash out," which actually in my case might be true. "Oh good, last you want me to pick up the laundry? Oh, I guess you're saying this is the last time I'll ever have to pick up the laundry." See, that's not—first and last is in sequence.

"This is the first resurrection," Greek word is *anastasis*. "Blessed and holy is the one who has part in the first resurrection; over these the second death"—that's the lake of fire—"has no power, but they will be priests of God and of His Christ and will reign for a thousand years." So there's a resurrection of the saved at the beginning of the millennial kingdom and a resurrection of unsaved at the end of the millennial kingdom. It's just with the resurrection of the saved, there's three parts to it.

There's two general resurrections for believers and unbelievers, it's just with the saved, it goes in three phases. That's why Paul analogizes it to Israel's harvest cycle. First fruits comes in, then the general harvest, then the gleanings. Paul says that's how the resurrection of the saved happens. Jesus is resurrected first. And just like the initial harvest guaranteed the rest of the harvest, his resurrection guarantees everyone else's resurrection in the chain.

So that's why everyone's going to get resurrected, because his resurrection started this chain. So first, he's resurrected, then we as church-age believers receive our resurrected bodies—and if you die before this happens, don't sweat it. Absent from the body is what? Present with the Lord. You're just in heaven waiting your resurrected body. But the church age, this body of Christ that started on the day of Pentecost and will last until the rapture—will continue until the rapture its earthly mission—we get our resurrected bodies at the rapture.

And then what about Old Testament saints that aren't part of the church? And what about people that are saved in the tribulation period after the church age is over? Well, they're the gleanings and they get their resurrected body at the beginning of the millennial kingdom. And then a thousand years pass. And after the end of that thousand years, the second resurrection happens for the unsaved. The resurrection unto life just has three parts to it, but there are two basic resurrections at the end: saved and unsaved.

Last argument that the annihilationist uses is: how could heaven be heaven if you know that there are people somewhere in the universe suffering eternally under his wrath? And that's a great question. I mean, how could heaven be heaven when I know that I have maybe friends, family members, number one that aren't there, and number two, they're under God's wrath? I mean, wouldn't that detract from everything we know in the Bible about heaven being a place of joy, etc.? So the annihilationist uses this and they say heaven would not be heaven if I live forever in heaven with the understanding that my unsaved loved ones are eternally suffering.

Therefore God has to, this is annihilationist speaking, have to put those people out of existence. Because just the knowledge that they're out somewhere in the universe suffering would destroy the joy of heaven is the argument. I would say that once we get to heaven, a lot of the blinders are going to be taken off. This is my response. A lot of the blinders are going to be taken off and we're going to see things from a very different angle. As Paul tells us, we see now dimly, darkly, through a mirror, but then face to face.

I don't think when you get to heaven you become omniscient, but a lot of the hindrances, the noetic effects of sin are the way we look at things is tainted today. And by the time you get to heaven and you're out of this corrupted body and you're in a resurrected body, you start to see things from God's angle. And I think you're going to say this: "You know, it's right, what God is doing." I mean, the fact that these people are in damnation forever is actually a right thing. God made a right choice here when all of the factors are considered.

So I know that seems a little harsh, but I think that's what's going to happen. So Arnold Fruchtenbaum writes, "The eighth theological argument is that the righteous ones could not enjoy bliss knowing that others are continually in hell. Those in heaven simply will not be able to enjoy it if they know that there are others suffering continuously in hell. The righteous could enjoy bliss only if they know that others are not suffering eternally. The righteous could not enjoy bliss knowing that others are continually suffering in hell. So for heaven to be fully enjoyable," the annihilationist says, "God has to take the unsaved and put them out of existence."

But Fruchtenbaum says, "But the answer here is that the righteous will enjoy the bliss of God's presence and will not be encumbered with the present perspective regarding what is inappropriate to heaven's bliss." I mean, we have to understand how small we are in this universe. It's like a grain of sand talking to God saying, "I don't agree with your point of view." I mean, it's laughable. And suddenly you're in a situation where the blinders are gone, the selfishness is gone, what psychologists call the narcissism is gone, the sin nature is gone, the weakness of the physical body is gone, the limitations on the mind.

What do they say? We're only designed to use—we only use a very small fraction of our minds. The vast portion of our minds we don't even use. I take that as part of Adam's sin had that kind of effect on our thinking. I mean, the Bible talks over and over again about the mind becoming darkened. And so when we're trying to analyze something like this, you have to understand that you're doing it from a very limited point of view. Well, in heaven, you're in a situation where those blinders are gone. Not that you're omniscient, but any limitation on your thinking is taken away.

And so you're in heaven and you're saying, "You know, it's right what's happening. I mean, these people, they turned down the offer of a lifetime. Jesus bled in their place, and they wouldn't receive it, and they're made in his image." So what is heaven going to be like? Well, here we're talking about the last two chapters of the Bible, Revelation 21 and 22, the eternal state.

John describes it as follows: "He will wipe away every tear from their eyes; there will no longer be any death; there will no longer be any mourning or crying or pain, for the first things have passed away." Yeah, but what about tears that I'm shedding because of people I know are suffering eternally somewhere? What about the mourning that I would experience because of that? What about the basic crying that I would go through if I think about that? What about the basic pain emotionally that I go through when I think about that? And somehow, some way, in the working of God, tears, mourning, crying, pain are gone.

So you're not in heaven just grieving that this eternal retribution is occurring. And this issue is not fixed that they're raising with annihilationism either, because you're enjoying heaven and someone you love isn't there. That's going to cause crying, mourning, and pain too, even if you buy into the fact that they stop existing. So it's kind of interesting that they pose this issue but they don't solve it completely either. What is the eternal state going to be like? Well, you can recognize something not just based on what's there, but what's not there.

What is not there? Satan isn't there. He's in a lake of fire—Revelation 20, verse 10. The sea is not there—Revelation 21, verse 1. The verse I just read: death, crying, and pain is not there—verse four. The sun is not there—chapter 22, verse five. I mean, no need for luminaries if the Son, S-O-N, is there. The light of the world, illuminating everything. And since the moon reflects the light of the sun, the moon is not there either—Revelation 21, verse 23. The temple isn't there. Now in Israel's history, there were four temples. First one built by Solomon, destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar. Second one built by the returnees from the exile, destroyed by the Romans in AD 70. Third one is coming—a lot of talk about it in Israel today. That's the antichrist temple that he'll desecrate at the midpoint of the tribulation period. That one destroyed in the, I believe, seventh bowl judgment with the greatest earthquake in human history.

During the thousand years, Ezekiel 40 through 48 talks about a fourth temple that the Shekinah glory of God will enter, with animal sacrifices looking backward to what Christ did as memorials, I think, reminding us that in a world where death is limited, Jesus did something to get us to that place. And it'd be easy to forget that, wouldn't it, in a world where death is limited? But by the time you get to the last two chapters of the Bible, there's no more temple because Jesus is there. There's no night there because there's no sun and moon. Evil isn't there—Revelation 21, verse 27. And the curse isn't there—Revelation 22, verse 3.

What's normal for God? The first two chapters of the Bible are normal: Genesis 1 and 2, before sin entered the picture. What's normal for God? The last two chapters of the Bible: Revelation 21 and 22, after sin is completely done away with. Evil, if it exists, is under quarantine, imprisonment, judgment. I mean, that's what's normal. Everything else in between is abnormal. Did you know that? Genesis 3, the fall of man, right up to the dissolving of this world and universe by fire. Everything in between there is abnormal. It's not the way it was supposed to be.

And the evolutionist is telling our children that what has been happening today has always been going on for billions of years. You understand how someone that sucks in that propaganda is despairing of life? Our message is so different. What is happening today is a complete and total abnormality because you're going to get witnessing opportunities and someone is going to say, "Your God is a God of love and I have a relative that just died of cancer." And you got to have an answer.

And you have one. Your answer is what is happening today with cancer or drive-by shootings or people getting hit in crosswalks or crime or whatever is an abnormality. God never designed it this way. It was the free will of his creatures that brought this chaos into existence. And God has designed a plan where everything is going to be restored to what it was originally intended to be, and the price that he paid to get the ball moving was the death of his own Son. There's your answer. And you can be involved in the right side of history by trusting in what he did.

So you're living in this environment where all these things are gone, your faculties are restored to where they're supposed to be, and there's no sorrow over who's not there or who suffers. This is right. This is the way God designed it. So that takes us out of our theological arguments, and then next time we'll deal with church history. Let's pray. Father, we're grateful for your truth. Help us to rightly divide your Word in these last days. We'll be careful to give you all the praise and the glory. We ask these things in Jesus' name. God's people said, amen. Happy intermission.