This is a Q&A blog post by Talbot School of Theology’s Visiting Scholar in Philosophy, William Lane Craig.

Question

Dear Dr. Craig,

My question revolves around your answer to Question of the Week #986 (Why Can't I Just Die?). The gentleman asking the question wanted to know why he couldn't have the choice to just die when his life is over instead of the choice between heaven or hell. You made a good point when you said, “To say, "I just want to die when I die" expresses utter indifference to God and is therefore deeply sinful. Indeed, it is the very essence of sin, to want nothing to do with God.” I agree.

My question to you is, is annihilation at the end of one’s life even an option for God? The wages of sin is death (separation from God). God sent His Son to die in our place on the cross. That substitutionary atonement took place through Jesus’ momentary separation from the Father on the cross. If the wages of sin is annihilation, how can Jesus pay that price on the cross? It is logically impossible for Jesus to cease to exist, even for a moment. It would seem that God’s hands are tied, if He wants to have mercy on us, and pay for our sins (perfect justice), the price paid cannot be annihilation. Is this a possible argument against annihilationism?

Some annihilationists may say that if annihilation cannot be mandated by God as a punishment for sin, then can God give us the option? This would satisfy the punishment requirement, since separation is the default, and annihilation is the option. Our government has the death penalty for murder. It’s a legitimate penalty in that we don’t look at the death penalty as getting away with murder. If a person chooses annihilation, then it would still be in keeping with God’s perfect justice. The unrepentant sinner is separated from God in both scenarios.

It’s also possible that if God gives us the option of annihilation, that nobody actually chooses that option, so given God’s middle knowledge, He doesn’t offer it. We may think that someone might want annihilation, but God may know that when the decision needs to be made, and it is nonreversible, nobody goes down that road. Are these good responses to annihilationists?

William Lane Craig’s Response

I have just begun a study of annihilationism as part of my study of eschatology. For those who are unfamiliar with the term, annihilationism is the view that the final state of the damned is simply non-existence; they just cease to exist and never return.

Now the most important issue regarding annihilationism will be whether Scripture teaches that those condemned to hell undergo everlasting, conscious suffering or are annihilated.

But there are collateral issues as well, and you raise one of the most important. According to a penal substitutionary atonement theory, Christ endured the suffering that we deserved as the punishment for our sins, thereby releasing us from our liability to punishment and affording us the availability of a divine pardon. By fully satisfying divine justice on our behalf, Christ by his vicarious atonement procured for us the possibility of salvation.

I have vigorously defended penal substitution as an essential facet of any biblically adequate and philosophically tenable atonement theory in my Atonement and the Death of Christ (Waco, Tex.: Baylor University Press, 2020). If I am right, then the same punishment that I deserved and that the damned suffer has been borne by Christ on our behalf. If he did not bear our just desert, then divine justice remains unsatisfied, and salvation is impossible.

But, as you discern, this seems to cause real problems for the annihilationist. For Christ did not cease to exist when he died; indeed, it is impossible for him to cease to exist, for he is a divine person, the second person of the Trinity, and therefore necessarily existent and eternal. Therefore, he cannot be annihilated. Therefore, he cannot suffer the punishment that I deserved for my sin.

Now annihilationists are aware of this problem, but I have yet to see them offer a plausible solution to it. It is not enough to say merely that Christ died for our sins. Human death is not extinction but simply the separation of the soul from the body. Christ’s experiencing a human death is far from adequate as a punishment for the sins of all mankind. Annihilationists themselves recognize that the damned do not deserve merely to die, but to be annihilated. So how can Christ, who cannot be annihilated, bear our just desert and so satisfy divine justice?

Now your suggestion that perhaps God might offer to the condemned the option of being sentenced either to everlasting conscious suffering or to annihilation is really intriguing. In our justice system, a person might have the choice between paying a fine or spending some time in jail. In order for alternative sentences to be offered, however, the punishments prescribed need to be equivalent, or justice will not be satisfied. But there’s the rub. Annihilationists are deeply committed to the thesis that everlasting conscious suffering and annihilation are not equivalent punishments. Everlasting suffering is worse, far worse, incomprehensibly worse, than ceasing to exist. Indeed, annihilation might look almost like mercy relative to everlasting suffering. But that entails that if separation from God is the just desert of the condemned, then annihilation cannot be acceptable as an alternative because that would compromise God’s justice. He must give unrepentant sinners what they deserve.

The annihilationist cannot say that nonexistence is a form of separation from God, for in order for two persons to be separated, they must both exist. Separation is a relation, and it is impossible for just one person to be separated. So there’s no need to speculate further about middle knowledge and people’s choices.

I have a hunch that this problem will prompt many annihilationists to abandon penal substitution as a vital facet of an adequate atonement theory in order to save their view. But then I am ready to engage them in that debate!

This Q & A and other resources are available on William Lane Craig’s website.