This article examines the teaching of annihilationism, and shows that it is biblically indefensible.

This article discusses three main alternative positions to the historic orthodox position on hell: universalism, annihilationism, and a definitive self-exclusion from God's presence. From there it explores the biblical teaching on hell, making use of Christ's teaching in Mark 9:42-48.

This article is a response of Peterson to an article by Glenn Peoples in which Peoples analyzed Peterson's arguments against annihilationism. Relevant Bible texts include 2 Thessalonians 1:9 and 2 Peter 2:6.

This article presents a critique of Robert Peterson who defends the traditional interpretation of eternal torment against the challenge posed by annihilationism. The author critically examines key features of Peterson’s case and suggest that it has some major shortcomings and is ultimately unsuccessful. Annihilationists admit that the Bible teaches eternal punishment. They differ with the more traditional view of what this punishment entails.

What is the final state of the wicked? The paper explores five different conclusions that have been drawn from the biblical evidence: agnosticism, annihilationism, universalism, conditionalism, and eternal punishment. This paper treats all the positions and elaborates on the last one.

When Jesus spoke about eternal punishment from Matthew 25:46, did he have in mind the state of eternal torment in hell or was he speaking about annihilation? This article examines the arguments for annihilationism against the biblical teaching on hell.