Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that In Scripture, Peter argues destruction of the wicked

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The Greek term 'apoleia' (destruction) used in 2 Peter 2:1,3 and 3:7 is interpreted by many patristic and Reformed theologians as referring to ruin or perdition rather than annihilation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Origen, Augustine, and the majority of the Christian exegetical tradition read such destruction-language as compatible with eternal conscious torment, not ontological cessation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If 'destruction' in these verses is semantically compatible with multiple eschatological views, Peter's argument cannot be claimed exclusively for annihilationism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The authorship of 2 Peter is disputed by most contemporary biblical scholars, with many attributing it to a pseudonymous author writing after Peter's death.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If 2 Peter was not written by Peter, citing it as 'Peter's argument' misattributes the theological position to a figure who may not have held it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.2 Peter 3:7 is a verse of Scripture by Peter
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.2 Peter 3:7 argues destruction of the wicked
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If the above is true, then in Scripture, Peter argues destruction of the wicked
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.2 Peter 2:1,3 are verses of Scripture by Peter
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.2 Peter 2:1,3 argues destruction of the wicked
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If the above is true, then in Scripture, Peter argues destruction of the wicked
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.