First let us define our terms so that the presentation can go forward unhindered by any possible confusion.

Seeing then, these two definitions side-by-side it should be obvious as to why someone who espouses a form of annihilationism would claim they can’t also be a universalist, but we need to understand who they claim is being annihilated.

Under human judicial consideration, a person is typically not considered guilty until he acts against a law or upon deviant intentions.  Knowing this principle, some people attempt to apply human justice to God's justice.  Typically the reasoning will go like this:

Every person is responsible for his own sins & will not be punished for the sins of another, including the sins of their parents therefore a baby, a young child or a person not capable of understanding their moral culpability cannot be held responsible for their sins.  It is only when a person knowing disobeys the commandments of God are they libel for their sins.

This may sound very reasonable & fair to many people but is this really what the Bible says about God's justice?  Again, the person advocating this idea will often provide proof-texts such as:

Ezekiel 18:20
The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.

This should close the discussion, since it seems pretty clear that the son shall not be responsible for the guilt of the father, it appears everyone starts out with a clean slate.  Theologically this is called “moral neutrality” where all people are born morally neutral & only become sinners as they sin.

Again, is this really what the Bible teaches?  What about the concept of “original sin” wherein Adam & Eve’s fall affects all humanity?  Is there anything to this concept?

Since our society is fond of top ten lists, what better way to introduce the subject of how people can avoid hell than in a top ten list format. Take a look at the list below & see if you have ever heard anyone use any of these reasons or ways to avoid & even deny hell.  Then click the title of the article to read the entire article.

Top Ten ways to avoid hell…

10. Claim hell was only a trash heap outside of Jerusalem (see Gehenna)

9. Claim hell was an invention of the Western Greek Hellenistic mindset

8. Claim hell was an invention of Pharisees to threaten people into obedience

7. Claim hell was an invention of Roman Catholicism to threaten people into obedience

6. Claim hell was an invention of Right-wing Fundamentalists to threaten people into obedience

5. Claim hell was an invention of   fill in blank   , with whatever group you hate.

4. Claim hell was an invention of Paul after he high jacked Jesus’ message of “love”

3. Claim hell is just a way for self-righteous people to feel like they are special

2. Claim hell is just a way for self-righteous people to condemn others

1. Claim hell doesn’t exist

Here is a brief explanation of the so-called "five points of Calvinism" -- Keep in mind John Calvin was dead for over 50 years before these points were penned.

During the Reformation (years 1300s-1600s) when the “protestants” like John Huss, Martin Luther, & John Calvin opposed the Roman Catholic church, almost every protestant subscribed to the concept that the Fall of Adam affected all of humanity & caused us to be unable to make the first move toward God.

As long as there have been theological debates there has been the dynamic of dueling positions – a pro & con.  This is most evident by the very words of Jesus:

He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me, scatters. (Luke 11:23)

Now, imagine if someone came along & said to Jesus that there is another position, a “third option” or a “moderate position”.  Indeed, there are even Christians who try to insert a mythical middle ground into the equation.

John 3:16 is thought of as the seminal sword & shield of the Christians that advocate the freewill of mankind.  It is thought that the force of this verse in favor of freewill is beyond dispute.  First, how can anyone deny that God so loved the world? Surely (we are told), this means every individual on the face of the planet.  For what monster-god would create people he never intends to love?  What monster-god would create people already condemned by some inherited sin?  What monster-god would call people to repent & believe but not give every individual that ability?  What monster-god would force someone to believe against their will?

Whether it was privately pondered among a few people or publicly proclaimed in an open forum you have no doubt heard of people questioning the salvation of others.

Ironically enough people have accused me of questioning the salvation of others when as far as I know there is no public or private evidence that I engage in such a practice. (Though I have documented evidence that the very accusers have questioned even my own salvation)

         The hope of the Christian is found completely in Christ. Jesus Christ sufficient and atoning work and establishment of this eternal age solidifies for the believer a solid foundation of an abundant life in the presence of Jehovah Himself. There is and can not be in the life of the regenerated, no greater satisfaction than beholding and experiencing God. The body of believers and those who come into the kingdom by the sovereign hand of God must understand that this is of such great worth because God in Christ is our ultimate inheritance.

There has been an ongoing misconception that Calvinistic Christians don't believe humans have freewill.  This is not true.  Of course all humans have freewill but after the Fall the human will has been corrupted.

Adam & Eve were the only two humans that had unaltered freewill, but as the Bible says, "...through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned—" (Rom 5:12 )