So you are not sure?
Are you just in this just for the argument? How sure do I need to be? What difference would it make if I said I was sure? If I said I was sure, cross my heart and hope to die, would that convince you? And what would be the source of my "sureness"? Lots of people are "sure" of wrong things. What difference does it make to reality if someone is sure of something or not? Surely some are wrong about the things they are "sure" of. And the annihilation, when and if it happens, is really self-inflicted.
From The Urantia Book:
2:3.2 How futile to make puerile appeals to such a God to modify his changeless decrees so that we can avoid the just consequences of the operation of his wise natural laws and righteous spiritual mandates! “Be not deceived; God is not mocked, for whatsoever a man sows that shall he also reap.” True, even in the justice of reaping the harvest of wrongdoing, this divine justice is always tempered with mercy. Infinite wisdom is the eternal arbiter which determines the proportions of justice and mercy which shall be meted out in any given circumstance. The greatest punishment (in reality an inevitable consequence) for wrongdoing and deliberate rebellion against the government of God is loss of existence as an individual subject of that government. The final result of wholehearted sin is annihilation. In the last analysis, such sin-identified individuals have destroyed themselves by becoming wholly unreal through their embrace of iniquity.
The factual disappearance of such a creature is, however, always delayed until the ordained order of justice current in that universe has been fully complied with.
2:3.3 Cessation of existence is usually decreed at the dispensational or epochal adjudication of the realm or realms. On a world such as Urantia it comes at the end of a planetary dispensation. Cessation of existence can be decreed at such times by co-ordinate action of all tribunals of jurisdiction, extending from the planetary council up through the courts of the Creator Son to the judgment tribunals of the Ancients of Days. The mandate of dissolution originates in the higher courts of the superuniverse following an unbroken confirmation of the indictment originating on the sphere of the wrongdoer’s residence; and then, when sentence of extinction has been confirmed on high, the execution is by the direct act of those judges residential on, and operating from, the headquarters of the superuniverse.
2:3.4 When this sentence is finally confirmed, the sin-identified being instantly becomes as though he had not been. There is no resurrection from such a fate; it is everlasting and eternal. The living energy factors of identity are resolved by the transformations of time and the metamorphoses of space into the cosmic potentials whence they once emerged. As for the personality of the iniquitous one, it is deprived of a continuing life vehicle by the creature’s failure to make those choices and final decisions which would have assured eternal life. When the continued embrace of sin by the associated mind culminates in complete self-identification with iniquity, then upon the cessation of life, upon cosmic dissolution, such an isolated personality is absorbed into the oversoul of creation, becoming a part of the evolving experience of the Supreme Being. Never again does it appear as a personality; its identity becomes as though it had never been.
The call for annihilation is what I take issue with.
Noted, but you'll have to take it up with someone else. So you're against the death penalty in all cases, without exception, no matter how heinous the crime, is that right? Hitler should get off? The guy who gunned down 21 children, he should be allowed to continue, is that right?
>Does annihilation solve problems? No.
So you just answered your own question?
It is just kicking the can down the road.
Well, that's your opinion. Again, noted. And no, it's not just kicking the can down the road. It's final.
Nope. I'm questioning the plea for annihilation.
Yes, you said that.
I will say that I stand against annihilation. Both against any call for annihilation as well as against any actual act of annihilating another.
Yes, yes. I got it.
Were any of the underlying problems addressed?
You have two choices here for this rhetorical question that you know I can't answer except with opinion. Either read the book which you say you haven't done, or find some way to contact the writers of the book and ask them. Perhaps you can hire a channeler or medium of some sort to get your message "up there" to them. Once I told a Catholic what Jesus said (about something the Catholics do (calling priests "Father", but which Jesus said not to do) and he started arguing with me about it, asking me questions about it like you just did above, and I finally had to tell him, "Your argument is with Jesus, not with me. Ask him." If you want to know if any of the underlying problems were addressed, you'll have to ask them. Or perhaps you could contact a priest and ask him to pray to Mary so that she can hand deliver your question to Jesus. Catholics believe that happens, Mary "intercedes" with Jesus on your behalf. One thing is sure is that once a cosmically insane person is gone out of the cosmos, they can no longer threaten the eternal salvation of others with their insanity and their denial of cosmic reality.
Indeed. Were any of the grievances regarding the government actually addressed?
What grievances are you talking about? Do you even know? List them if you think you know. I don't think you do. Were they even grievances at all?