What is the Fate of the Wicked?
(Part 4 of 5)
by Paul Hazelden
FotW Index
Contents
6. The Weak Evidence for Eternal Torment
We have seen so far that the vast majority of the Biblical text
supports the idea that the unrighteous will perish.
What about the texts which are used to support the idea that
they will not be destroyed, but instead will suffer eternal
torments?
Let us take a work of systematic theology that argues for the
eternal torment of the lost, and examine every one of the texts
presented to support this view. If anyone wishes to supply any
other passages, I will be glad to add them to this list.
For reasons which, I hope, will become obvious, I have divided
the list into two parts: the weak evidence, and the strong
evidence.
The weak evidence comes in these passages.
- Matthew 25:41,46
- Matthew 18:9
- Mark 9:44 (quoting Isaiah 66:24)
- 2 Thessalonians 1:7-9
- Jude 7, 13
The strong evidence comes in just two passages.
- Revelation 14:9-11
- Revelation 20:10.
This list comes from Know the Truth
(1).
To be fair, Milne does note that "conditional immortality is
viewed by some as a viable biblical understanding of the future
state of the impenitent" (which suggests to me that he does not
fully grasp the concept); he also admits that the terms commonly
used in the
Bible, "such as 'destruction', 'ruin' and 'perishing' can imply
some eventual termination of life" (as if you can perish or be
destroyed without having your life terminated!) - but he clearly
prefers the traditional position, even if it is
uncomfortable.
We have already looked at the 2 Thessalonians passage in the
section on The
Day of the Lord. Here are the others. And, remember, this is
the best evidence in the Bible that the wicked will suffer
eternal conscious torment.
6a. The sheep and the goats
Then he will say to those on
his left, 'Depart from
me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the
devil and his angels.'
(2)
"Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the
righteous to eternal life."
(3)
The first thing to note is that this is a parable - the parable
of the sheep and the goats. A parable is a story
with a message. It is not an allegory: you cannot
take every detail in the story as significant.
The point of the story is that one group of people enjoy a good
destiny based on the way they lived, the other group a bad
destiny based on how they lived. However, if we assume that
the details are significant, what are we actually told?
The goats are to depart into eternal fire, which is eternal
punishment. Remember - fire means destruction, not
pain. Punishment can involve pain, but there are many forms of
punishment which do not.
So there is nothing in this parable to suggest that the wicked
suffer eternal conscious torment. Instead, it fits very well with
the 2 Thessalonians passage we looked at - being consigned to the
fire as an eternal punishment corresponds perfectly to the
doctrine of everlasting destruction: destruction which can never
be reversed, a final punishment which can never be changed.
If the punishment is destruction, why is the fire described as
being 'eternal'? The answer is given in the passage. The fire is
eternal because it is not designed for people. The fire was
prepared for the devil and his angels.
There is a serious case which can be made for the Bible
teaching eternal conscious torment. But it is not the eternal
conscious torment of human beings: it is the eternal conscious
torment of the devil and his angels. We will come back to this
when we look at Revelation.
6b. If your eye causes you to sin
"And if your eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and
throw it away. It is better for you to enter life
with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into the fire
of hell."
(4)
Jesus is repeating a point He made in
the Sermon on the Mount (5). This
time, He is answering the question, "Who is the greatest in the
kingdom of heaven?"
There is not a lot here about eternal conscious torment. Unless
you have already decided, against all the evidence, that 'the fire
of Hell' must mean eternal conscious torment, you would naturally
read this as describing two possible fates: you can either enter
life (and thus, presumably, live), or you can be thrown into the
fire of Hell (and thus, presumably, die).
6c. Causing to sin
The parallel passage in Mark says much the same as the Matthew
passage we have just looked at.
If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for
you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell,
where the fire never goes out. And if your foot causes you to
stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled
than to have two feet and be thrown into hell. And if your eye
causes you to stumble, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter
the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be
thrown into hell, where 'the worms that eat them do not die, and
the fire is not quenched.’ Everyone will be salted with fire.
(6)
The fire never goes out - this could be a reference to the
eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels; it could mean
you should not hope to get
lucky - don't gamble on the possibility that someone will have
let the fire go out on the day you arrive down there; but it is
probably just recognising that there is a fairly constant supply
of food for the worms and fuel for the fire.
The word for 'Hell' is 'Gehenna', which comes from the Valley
of Hinnom to the South-West of Jerusalem (ge'hinnom in
Hebrew) where the rubbish was dumped and burned. The fire never
went out because there was always rubbish being burned.
Mark is quoting from Isaiah 66, a passage which is not entirely
clear. It seems to be describing a massive procession in which all
the redeemed people go and look at the dead bodies of those who
rebelled against the Lord. Talking about these dead bodies, Isaiah
ends with the following description (partly quoted by Mark).
And they will go out and look upon the dead bodies of
those who rebelled against me; their worm will not die, nor will
their fire be quenched, and they will be loathsome to all mankind.
(7)
The description is of dead bodies rotting and burning, not live
souls writhing in agony. The worms and the fire serve to emphasise
the horror of their fate, the deadness of these dead bodies, as
opposed to the vitality of the survivors. It emphasises that these
people are well and truly dead, and nothing is going to change
that. There is not a single hint of the dead people suffering
in any way.
The final part is a bit obscure, but it is probably a reference
to the idea Paul refers to in 1
Corinthians 3:13, where "fire will test the quality of each man's
work". It certainly does not contain any suggestion of eternal
suffering.
6d. Fire and darkness
And the angels that did not keep their own position
but left their proper dwelling have been kept by him in eternal
chains in the nether gloom until the judgement of the great day;
just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which
likewise acted immorally and indulged in unnatural lust, serve as
an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.
(8)
The punishment of Sodom and Gomorrah is eternal, in the sense
that it will never be changed or undone, but it is not not eternal
in the sense that the fire has now stopped because the occupants
are all dead. Their punishment is complete. Being killed by fire
probably hurt - I am not trying to suggest that God's punishment
does not involve any pain - but it does not hurt for all
eternity.
Talking about the same people, Jude goes on to say that these
men are:
"wild waves upon the sea, casting up the foam of their
own shame; wandering stars for whom the nether gloom of darkness
has been reserved for ever."
(9)
I am not entirely sure what the 'nether gloom of darkness'
means exactly - but it is not exactly convincing proof of the
reality of eternal torment.
And, for those who think that these details are all intended to
be taken literally - how do you combine eternal fire with eternal
darkness? A special kind of dark fire, perhaps? In that case,
maybe it is a special sort of dark fire that does not hurt as it
burns?
From this passage, yet again it is clear that the New Testament
writers never intended us to take 'fire' literally. It is
symbolic, and it means 'destruction', not 'torment'.
6e. Lazarus
The most obvious passage which is not referenced by Bruce
Milne is the parable of the rich man and Lazarus
(10). The reason, of course, is that
no respectable teacher suggests that you can derive doctrine
from the incidental details in a parable.
Jesus is taking a popular story of His day, and twisting the
message. The details in the story are the details His hearers are
familiar with. In telling this story, He is not offering us
teaching about the afterlife, just as, if I tell you a story which
begins "An Englishman, an Irishman and a Scotsman walk into a
pub..." I am not offering you a sociological analysis of what it
means to be English.
If you want to take this one parable as an accurate piece of
on-the-spot reporting, you must also conclude that Paradise and
Hell are close enough to hold a conversation across the gap, and
there will be no judgement at the throne of God.
If you want to take this one parable as an accurate piece of
on-the-spot reporting, you also need to note that it is
clearly a description of a single incident in the after-life.
It does not say or suggest that the torment
is eternal. In fact, since the stated basis of the
torment is the unfairness of their earthly experience (certainly
not an eternal state!), the most obvious implication is that the
different treatment after life will also be limited in time.
And, if you want to take this one parable as an accurate piece
of on-the-spot reporting, you need to ask yourself this question.
If Jesus wanted to teach us that people will suffer torment in
Hell, why did He hide this vital news in the detail of a parable,
and why did He not explain it explicitly to His disciples, as He
did for so many other of the other parables they struggled to
understand correctly?
The message of the parable is found in the final verse: "'If
they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be
convinced even if someone rises from the dead.'" Everything else
is building up to and supporting that one simple message. Milne
knows this, as does every other respectable Biblical teacher.
6f. Shame and contempt
Another passage which is sometimes used comes at the end of
Daniel.
Multitudes who sleep in the
dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to
shame and everlasting contempt.
(11)
The first thing to note is that this comes firmly within the
apocalyptic section in Daniel. This is a form of literature which
people were very familiar with when it was written, but seems very
strange to us today. You have to interpret what is said very
carefully. according to the well established rules, in much the
same way as you have to interpret the meaning of a political
cartoon in a newspaper: they both use symbols and images to
communicate a message, and neither expects to be taken literally.
The great challenge in reading apocalyptic literature lies in
interpreting the images correctly: sometimes it seems reasonably
clear, but at other times there is no agreement on the meaning and
all we have is one person convinced of one interpretation and
someone else convinced of another.
My personal rule of thumb is: if it is not clear, I probably
don't need to worry too much about it. If God needs me to
understand a passage, He is quite capable of making it clear, and
has a wide variety of tools at His disposal to achieve that end.
I study to understand the Bible in order to apply what I
understand.
Other people phrase things a bit differently, but it generally
comes down to much the same point: Biblical interpretation works
from the passages which are clear, and interprets the passages
which are less clear in the light of those which are more clear.
All of which is to say that we don't usually base doctrine on
what we find in apocalyptic literature: it can illuminate our
understanding of Biblical truth, but it should not be used as the
starting point. This becomes quite relevant which we come to look
at the passages in Revelation.
That said, this section of Daniel seems reasonably
straightforward. It is, rarely for the Old Testament, entirely
consistent with New Testament teaching on the end days: there will
be a resurrection; some of those resurrected will enjoy
everlasting life, while others suffer shame and everlasting
contempt.
There is, I admit, nothing here about destruction; but, equally
well, there is nothing about about eternal torment. People can
look back at your memory with contempt long after you have died.
The contempt can be everlasting, even if you are not.
7. The Strong Evidence for Eternal Torment
7a. The lake of burning sulphur
And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the
lake of burning sulphur, where the beast and the false prophet has
been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and
ever.
(12)
Let's admit it up front: this passage talks about eternal
torment. In fact, it is the only
passage in the entire Bible which talks about eternal torment. But
notice who is being tormented: it is the devil, the beast and
the false prophet.
Jesus may have told us that the fire was
"prepared for the
devil and his angels" (13), but this
passage suggests that in fact most of the angels will escape this
fate - if you interpret the passage literally, that is.
And yet again, there is no suggestion here that ordinary wicked
human beings will be tormented for ever. Possibly the beast and
the false prophet are human - the point is not clear - but, even
if this is so, they are the only two humans to suffer eternal
torment.
And we should also remember that several passages in the Old
Testament (14) suggest that the devil's suffering will also come to an end. And,
possibly, the 'no more crying or pain' in Revelation
(15) might even apply to Satan. In
fact, most of the argument in the 'No More Tears' section
(16) could also apply to Satan. The 'day and night'
argument below would certainly apply. So maybe, even for him,
'for ever' means 'until it is finished'.
Finally, in passing, I would like to note how easy it is for
John to tell us about eternal torment. "They will be tormented day
and night for ever and ever." It is not complicated or difficult.
Please bear this in mind when we look at the following passage.
7b. Smoke of torment
A third angel followed them and said in a loud voice:
"If anyone worships the beast and his image and receives his mark
on the forehead or on the hand, he, too, will drink of the wine of
God's fury, which has been poured full strength into the cup of
his wrath. He will be tormented with burning sulphur in the
presence of the holy angels and of the Lamb. And the smoke of
their torment rises for ever and ever. There is no rest day or
night for those who worship the beast and his image, or for anyone
who receives the mark of his name."
(17)
I should say at the outset that this is the ONLY passage in the
entire Bible that seems to teach us about humans suffering
eternal torment. If you want to believe in it, and if you want a
Biblical foundation for that belief, this passage is all you have.
And even this passage does not talk about eternal torment.
It does clearly talk about torment. "He will be tormented with
burning sulphur" seems clear enough. As I have noted before, the
eternal fate of the wicked may be destruction, but this does not
mean that no suffering is involved.
But even this passage does not explicitly say that the torment
is eternal. It talks about: (a) drinking the wine of God's
fury; (b) being tormented with burning sulphur; (c) the smoke of
the torment rising for ever; and (d) lack of rest day or night.
7c. Eternal smoke
The language here is quite fascinating. It would have been very
easy for John to say something like, "He will be tormented for
ever with burning sulphur," but even here he avoids any reference
to eternal torment. The only 'for ever' is the smoke going up -
the consequence of the torment can be seen for ever.
The natural way of reading this passage is that these people
will be tormented. The torment will produce smoke. The torment
will cease, but the smoke produced will continue to rise for ever.
Eternal smoke does not mean eternal torment, whatever people who
are desperate to 'prove' their beliefs may claim.
If you are still not sure about this point, then a quick look
at Revelation chapters 18 and 19 might help. In Revelation 18:1-8, we read about the fall of
Babylon the Great. It will probably not be a surprise to discover
that she will be 'consumed by fire' (18).
When the kings of the earth who
committed adultery with her and shared her luxury see the smoke of
her burning, they will weep and mourn over her.
(19)
The point of the smoke is that people will see it, and
understand what has happened. The point is made again in verses
17-18.
And every shipmaster and
every passenger and sailor, and as many as make their living by
the sea, stood at a distance, and were crying out as they saw the
smoke of her burning, saying, "What city is like the great city?"
(20)
The response in Heaven is a great
multitude shouting praise to God (21).
And again they shouted:
"Hallelujah! The smoke from her goes up for ever and ever."
(22)
The point should be clear enough: smoke is going up for ever,
but there is no suggestion that the burning goes on for ever. The
smoke tells people what has happened: it goes up for ever because
they need to remember.
7d. Day and night
And this only leaves the final phrase. There is just one small
phrase in the entire Bible on which you can attempt to build a
doctrine of eternal torment.
John tells us, "There is no rest day or night" for these
people. Now, God is quite capable of being clear when there is
something He wants us to know, understand and believe, and
whatever this means, it is not a clear statement of the doctrine
of eternal torment.
You can interpret 'no rest day or night' as referring to
eternal torment. But that is your interpretation: the doctrine is
not in the text.
People claim that this statement (that some people will be
tormented day and night) proves the reality of eternal torment
because the Bible fails to say that this day and night torment
will come to and end, but this rather stretches the principles of
sound Biblical interpretation. The argument being used is very
simple: "I am going to believe that the torment is eternal,
because the Bible does not explicitly say that it is not."
If you start down the road of believing things on the basis
that the Bible does not explicitly deny them, I can only say that
we part company here. I would rather worry about believing the
things that the Bible does explicitly teach.
What John seems to be saying is that the torment continues day
and night, which is why there is no rest. But 'day and night' is
not forever. Even if this is the right interpretation, it does not
establish the doctrine of eternal torment: it only says that the
torment, while it is taking place, continues without a
break.
If a person is tormented day and night, we would normally
expect this to go on for days or weeks. There is no reason (no
reason in the Bible, that is!) to suppose that 'day and night' is
actually intended to convey the idea of eternity.
Moreover, in the context of the book of Revelation, the phrase
'day and night' is almost proof that the lack of rest is not
eternal: by the time we reach
chapters 21 and 22
(23),
there is no more night.
7e. No rest
But even if we put all these considerations to one side, it is
still a very odd choice of words. If you want to convey the idea
of continual torment, it is very easy to say something like, "He
will be tormented day and night with burning sulphur" - but John
avoids saying it clearly.
Instead, the words John uses suggest a very low level of
suffering. Having 'no rest' makes it sound more like they are
worrying about something. It certainly does not suggest that they
are suffering unspeakable torment.
The phrase 'no rest' suggests that the discomfort is mental
rather than physical. I could keep you awake for a long time by
continually inflicting pain, but would you describe this process
as being given 'no rest'? I think not.
On the other hand, if you have done something dreadful, if you
have let down and hurt someone you loved or someone who deserved
a much better response from you, then remorse, guilt and regret
may give you no rest. And this makes perfect sense in the context
of the passage: these people have chosen to worship the beast, and
now they know the full extent of their folly.
If it is the regret which produces no rest day or night, then
the most natural way to read the "tormented with burning sulphur"
bit is as a symbolic representation of the internal torment these
people inflict on themselves.
I know this suggestion is a bit
radical. I have been accused sometimes of 'distorting the Bible'
by suggesting that a reference to burning sulphur in the book of
Revelation might best be interpreted symbolically. But if you read
the book very carefully, you might find a few other places where
John slips in references to other things which might be intended
to be interpreted symbolically.
So the reading of this passage which makes the most sense in
context is that these people are tormented - they torment
themselves for their own folly.
In any case, the passage does not say that they will be
eternally drinking the wine of God's fury, that they will be
eternally tormented, or that they will have no rest for ever.
So the only passage in the entire Bible which can possibly be
taken as the basis for a belief in the eternal torment of
unbelieving people still does not teach - still does not even
mention - eternal torment.
7f. For ever
We have already noted that terms like 'eternal' and
'everlasting' are generally used in the Bible to refer to purpose,
not duration. That is still the case here.
We have already noted that a few chapters later, the
smoke from Babylon ('the great prostitute') is described as going
up 'for ever and ever' (24) without
any hint of eternal torment.
And, shortly afterwards, we see 'a new heaven and a new earth,
for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away'
(25). Are we expected to imagine the
smoke from these suffering souls and from Babylon drifting up
somewhere in the new heaven or the new earth? I honestly can't
imagine that this is what John is describing.
All of which is to say, that in the Bible generally, and even
more so in the context of this part of Revelation, I would not
rely too much on the words 'for ever' meaning 'time without end'.
As in many other passages, the obvious, simple and consistent
understanding is that it refers to purpose, not duration.
7g. Reliable exegesis
Perhaps I don't need to say this, but just in case... It is a
well-established principle of exegesis that you do not attempt to
establish doctrine on the basis of a single text. Another
well-established principle says that you do not use obscure
passages to establish doctrine which contradicts other clearer
passages.
Both these principles caution us against using the only passage
in the Bible which suggests there may be eternal torment as a
simple 'proof text' for the doctrine.
It is, moreover, my personal opinion that anyone who tries to
establish a doctrine on the sole basis of finding it in a single
passage in the book of Revelation needs their heads examined.
Pardon me for being blunt here, but if you believe are the one
person in the world who can accurately distinguish between what
parts of the book of Revelation should be taken literally and what
parts should be understood symbolically... please do not get in
touch with me. I have spent enough time talking with such people
to last me a lifetime.
7h. Nobody yet
I have just one final point to close off this section: even if
we are supposed to interpret this passage literally, even if it
does talk about eternal conscious torment, it is still (as yet)
an academic issue. Nobody who has yet died has suffered this fate
- not according to the passage being quoted.
This passage does not currently allow you to say anything to
anyone about the possibility of them suffering eternal torment.
Remember the context: if you do decide, against all sound
theological advice, to base your belief in this one passage, you
cannot apply it to anyone until after the angel flying in
mid air has proclaimed the gospel to everyone living on the earth,
and after Babylon the Great has fallen
(26), and even then you can only
promise this dreadful fate to people with the mark of the beast on
their foreheads or their hands.
7i. Summary
There are many passages in the Bible, both Old and New
Testament, that clearly teach the wicked will perish, die, or be
destroyed.
In contrast, there is not a single passage that teaches the
wicked will suffer eternal torment. What we have are a number of
passages which might refer to eternal torment, if that was what
the Bible taught elsewhere, but which clearly do not teach or even
suggest the idea of eternal torment themselves.
There is only one passage
(27) which might possibly teach
that a few specific wicked people will be tormented for ever - but
even that passage does not explicitly state this doctrine, and is
more likely to be talking about a limited period of intense regret
for personal sin.
The only clear reference to eternal torment in the Bible
(28) is
not about people, but about the devil, and this one passage
needs to be balanced against other passages which suggest the
torment will not be for ever, and even Satan will one day be
turned to ashes and the fire be allowed to go out.
As I said at the outset, it is possible to hold to a
belief in eternal torment for the wicked. But in the light of all
the Biblical evidence on this subject, is it not much more likely
that the wicked will be destroyed?
Footnotes: