God's Word Teaches Annihilationism

Though my opponent says "posting links is not allowed," I would like to assert that any references, or sources that may not be common sense, or common knowledge should be verified in some manner. Any source that cannot be viewed as common sense, common knowledge, or cannot be verified by a simple search on Google should either be rejected for the lack of a linked source, or should be verified by breaking this rule. A source that cannot be verified should not be considered reliable. Though my opponent has stated that "God's word as reference in the title of this debate refers to books included in the Protestant Cannon (sic. )," he has failed to define which version of the canon. Furthermore, we cannot define what is "God's word" unless an actual god is defined, questioned, and documented as having presented his story in his own words. As such, we shall stick to the tried and true translation of the King James bible using the 1960 revision as the oldest one we should reference in this debate. Should an alternative meaning to the exact words in this version be referenced it must be accompanied by the Hebrew, Koine Greek, Aramaic, or Latin word referenced in the discrepancy being challenged in the KJV. If a challenge is not accompanied with original language references justifying the challenge, the KJV will be used. Though semantic arguments are usually discouraged in debate, the translation of ancient texts wholly involves linguistics and semantics. As such it is the task of the debaters to convince the judges who is "more right" rather than "absolutely right. " This debate is about interpretation, and as such, the judges should vote based on the logic in the arguments themselves, not their own philosophy and belief behind the subject. Your reason for voting should not include the fact that your pastor teaches one way or the other, as his ability to argue his interpretation does not reflect mine or my opponents ability to argue our own. Annihilationism is defined as the growing Evangelical Christian belief that condemned unbelievers will be destroyed or annihilated after death, instead of spending an eternity in punishment in hell. It is directly related to the doctrine of "conditional emortality," which teaches that the human soul is mortal unless granted eternal life. As my opponent is arguing for Pro, and the mainstream belief in Christianity is not annihilationism, the burden of proof is on my opponent to prove his premise. We must always remember the crux of the original premise- "God's word teaches annihilationism" should not be confused to read "God's word can be interpreted as teaching annihilationism," "some interpret God's word to teach annihilationism," etc. My opponent needs to show how any normal person reading the KJV bible would reach the rational conclusion (not through science, critical thinking, or common sense, rather through simple reading and unbiased interpretation) that the fate of those who do not believe in Christianity will be annihilated, rather than reaching the mainstream conclusion that sinners will be punished forever in the lake of fire/hell/hades/sheol. So as to not ambush my opponent with these rules, and definitions I will allow him one paragraph to say anything he needs to respond to my Round 1 statements. Thank you to all, and I hope we have a great debate!