In this clip, Cy Kellett welcomes Jimmy Akin to discuss how the Catholic Church interprets Matthew 10:28. Jimmy explains the Church’s lack of an official stance on this passage and offers insights into the broader Christian understanding of hell and annihilationism.
Transcript:
Caller: So how does the Catholic church interpret Matthew 10:28? Because I’m personally an annihilationist.
Jimmy Akin: Now since you mentioned annihilationism, which is the view that the lost are annihilated, they’re reduced to nothing, rather than spending, eternity suffering in some way. I assume what you’re focusing on is the statement that, that here that God can destroy both body and soul in hell. Am I correct in that?
Caller: Yeah, so that’s the part I’m definitely focused on because.
Jimmy Akin: Yeah, because the way we use the term destroy in English, you could get annihilationism out of this, so first we better familiarize people with what this passage is because it won’t be familiar to a lot of people just from the name of it. so in a standard English translation, Jesus is saying in this passage, do not fear those who kill the body, but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell. Or in Gehenna is the word in Greek there? and so that would be one possible reading of this text. Now, from a Catholic point of view, there are other. And from a general Christian point of view, even though you could read various texts in one way or another, what we need to do is read the Bible in such a way that the parts fit together. We need to harmonize, our understanding of individual texts with things that are said elsewhere in the context of the Bible. And so there are passages elsewhere in the Bible that suggest the lost are not simply annihilated. And the Book of Revelation, for example, talks about, how those who are lost will have the smoke of their torment, go up forever and ever, and they’ll get no rest, day or night, which makes it sound like they’re still going to be around even though they’re in the lake of fire. They’re not just annihilated. There has been some revisiting of this question recently in some circles, and so there are some interesting discussions going on now. But that’s the historic position, majority position, and it’s the official teaching of the Catholic Church. Now, how then, assuming that teaching is true, how might a person who’s not an Annihilationist Understand Matthew 2010, 28 and its statement that God can destroy both body and soul in hell? Well, Sykelit. Let’s talk about what destroy, means in English. You’re a sportsball fan of some kind, aren’t you?
Cy Kellett: I am, yes. Especially basketball. Sportsball.
Jimmy Akin: Okay. And you have a favorite basketball team,
Cy Kellett: Of course, the Boston Celtics. Yes, I do.
Jimmy Akin: Okay, so let’s say the Boston Celtics are playing a game against, you know, whoever their big enemy is, and they really win, and they win decisively.
Cy Kellett: Yes.
Jimmy Akin: Someone, you might hear a Boston Celtics fan say, wow, the Celtics really destroyed their opponents.
Cy Kellett: Yes, the Lakers.
Jimmy Akin: Yes, the Lakers. Okay, so that wouldn’t mean that the Lakers had been physically annihilated. So they’ve ceased to exist.
Cy Kellett: We wouldn’t want that. We wouldn’t.
Jimmy Akin: Okay.
Cy Kellett: No, they’re okay physically.
Jimmy Akin: Yeah. So the term destroy in English, which is what we’re talking about now, can mean, something other than total annihilation. Now, let’s take another example. Let’s suppose that, the Celtics play in an arena. I assume they have some kind of arena in Boston. That’s their home arena.
Cy Kellett: A garden.
Jimmy Akin: Yes, a garden. They play in a garden? Yes, in a garden. And let’s suppose that, one day an asteroid comes hurtling out of space and smashes into the garden where the Celtics play.
Cy Kellett: I think I have to go home. I don’t think I can go on. I’m feeling very upset right now.
Jimmy Akin: Could you say. I’ll understand if you’re a little verklemp.
Cy Kellett: Yes.
Jimmy Akin: But could. Could you say that the asteroid destroyed their garden?
Cy Kellett: Yes, you could. Yes, you could.
Jimmy Akin: Okay. And this would be in a way that still doesn’t mean the matter that the garden was made out of had ceased to exist. I mean, there’d still be girders and metal and concrete. All that would still be there. It’s just been ruined, right?
Cy Kellett: Yes.
Jimmy Akin: Okay. So in English, sometimes the term destroy can mean ruin. Well, same thing’s true in Greek. the word in Greek that Paul uses, or, that I’m sorry, that Jesus uses here is apollumi. And apollumi can be translated destroy, but it can also be translated damage or ruin. And so, if I have other passages of scripture that tell me that, the lost are not annihilated, then I would say, okay, well, then in this passage, what Jesus must be affirming is that they’re going to suffer destruction. Not in the sense of being annihilated, but in a different sense. Like, the Lakers might get annihilated in, in Sportsball, or the Celtics, arena is destroyed by an asteroid without being reduced to utter non existence. And so I would say that, in terms of how this verse should be interpreted, if, perpetual survival is true, I would say, well, this is just a different sense of destroy. It would mean in this context, ruin. That God will take a person and ruin their circumstances, body and soul, so that they suffer and they keep on suffering. So that’s how I at least would interpret this passage. based on the official, if not infallible, teaching of the church.
Cy Kellett: John.
Caller: Yeah, so there’s definitely a lot there. There’s some things I’d want to respond to. So you mentioned the Greek of Matthew 10:28. there is a place that it’s actually used that I Think is in Matthew 2:13, and that’s where Herod is seeking to destroy, or Apollemi Apollo, Jesus.
Jimmy Akin: Apollumi,
Caller: Yeah. So that’s one pushback I would have, personally, it’s not used to refer to that. there’s other places where it can be used to, like, lose something. I think the parable, the lost drachma or the lost coin. it’s also.
Jimmy Akin: Yeah, so you mentioned that, Herod is at one point described as wanting to apollumi the child Jesus. Well, okay, first thing, Herod was not wanting to, annihilate Jesus. He wasn’t. Not in any literal sense of. Reduce him to nothingness so that Jesus ceases to exist. That would be beyond Herod’s power. And in fact, that’s the exact point Jesus is making here. Humans can only kill your body. And so Herod could only. If he had gotten his way, he would have only killed Jesus’s body. He wouldn’t have annihilated him. He wouldn’t have sent him to nothingness. So, so that’s one point to make about the use of apollumi in the other context. The other point to make, which is the more fundamental is I’m not denying that apollumi can mean annihilate. I need to see evidence that that’s what it means in a particular passage. But different passages are different, and you have to take each passage on its own and say, what can we reason about this passage given what the passage itself says and the context, whether it’s the immediate context in the document or the broader context of Scripture. And, Even if ruin is not the most common usage of apollumi, it is a usage. And the argument would be, well, since we’ve got to take each passage on its own, and here in Matthew 10, it, could mean either annihilate or destroy or ruin. And we’ve got other passages that would say it doesn’t mean annihilate. Well, then that would tell us, okay, here we need to take it in a different sense. That doesn’t mean annihilate. It means ruin in this passage, regardless of what it means in other passages. So that’s my response to that point. What’s your next?
Caller: All right, so you brought up Revelations 14:11, I think so. I do have a verse that I connect that to. And that would be an Isaiah or. Sorry, I say Isaiah. I should be saying Isaiah because most people say like that, Isaiah.
Jimmy Akin: Either way, I know what you mean.
Caller: Yeah. it will not be quenched, night or day. Its smoke will go up forever. From generation to generation. It will be laid waste and then will pass through it forever and ever. So I personally connect that to Revelation 14:11 to say that, it is still talking about a destruction because this is one place in the Old Testament where it’s used to refer to that, and that’s going to be reused in the New Testament for symbolic book, you know.
Jimmy Akin: Here, the Lord is talking about, Edom. and so he’s making a prophecy about Edom as a nation. And okay, fine, the language in Revelation 14:10 and 11 may be modeled off Isaiah, but that doesn’t. But two points. First one in Isaiah 34, it’s not talking about annihilation. It’s talking about ruination. because Isaiah is not prophesying that Edom and all the Edomites are going to cease to exist. He’s prophesying the ruin of this place and these people. so that’s the first point. The second point is there’s a difference between talking about a nation and talking about a person. And in Revelation 14, John is clearly talking about a person. He says, this person, this is verse 10, shall drink the wine of God’s wrath, poured unmixed into the cup of his anger, and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. So the focus here is torment that is going on, not annihilation. And then in the next verse 14:11, it says the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever, and they have no rest, day or night, these worshipers of the beast and its image. so if the smoke goes up forever and ever, and they have no rest, day or night, that sounds like they are continuing to survive in spite of the ruination and the torment that they have brought upon themselves. So merely the fact there’s a parallel that talks about a nation and even then doesn’t talk about the annihilation of the nation, does not mean that we can reinterpret, what Revelation 14 says about people and what will happen to the individual person, because he’s using the singular here, he will have this happen, and he will have no rest day or night.
Cy Kellett: Go ahead.
Caller: All right. so there’s two more things I want to respond to. I’m not sure how much more time I have. I’m sorry if I’m taking up too much time.
Jimmy Akin: And you’re also, always. You’re also welcome to call back on another day, and we can go into your additional points.
Caller: Of course, this has been a. Has been a very nice conversation so far. I’m really thankful for it. But,
Jimmy Akin: Oh, no problem.
Caller: There’s a passage from. Could be a couple different places, but Psalm 95:11 is what I’m gonna use, and there’s a couple I can use, but I’ll use this one.
Jimmy Akin: Okay.
Caller: All right. therefore, I swear on my anger, they shall never enter into my rest. So with Revelation 14:11, I would actually interpret rest there to refer to God’s rest, entering his rest, or entering into eternal life.
Jimmy Akin: With the passage from the Psalms you just cited. yeah, there are passages that say so and so shall not enter my rest. But that doesn’t mean that you can interpret the word rest anywhere. It occurs in Scripture as a reference to the Lord’s rest. Here in Revelation 14, the reference to rest is made in the context of torment. And what it says is that they’re going to be tormented and shall have no rest, meaning rest from the torment, day or night. Not they shall have no Lord’s rest. That’s not what’s happening in this passage. It’s specifically the native interpretation, the natural interpretation. It’s going to be they’re not going to have rest from the torment they’re undergoing. So that’s what I’d have to say in brief terms about that. But I’m more than happy to talk about this with you again in the future.
Cy Kellett: And I gotta go to the break. We’ll be right back with more questions for Jimmy Akin on Catholic Answers Live.