One of the main reasons that Christians believe in the doctrine of
eternal conscious torment is that they
read two passages in Revelation as having a plain, literal meaning. This common
error was illustrated in a recent Stand to Reason podcast by Greg Koukl. With respect to the two
passages in question, Greg referred to:
“the plain language of the text” (12:30)
“the plain straightforward common sense of Revelation” (18:10)
“the natural and obvious understanding of what I just read”
(21:05)
The two
passages
The two passages being referred to are Revelation 14:9-11 and
Revelation 20:10-15. Each of these passages contain a verse where the literal
meaning either implies or directly refers to eternal torment:
CSB17 Revelation 14:11 and the smoke
of their torment will go up forever and ever. There is no rest day or night for
those who worship the beast and its image, or anyone who receives the mark of
its name.
CSB17 Revelation 20:10 The devil who
deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and
the false prophet are, and they will be tormented day and night forever and
ever.
These are the ONLY two verses in the Bible which either strongly
imply (Revelation 14:11) or explicitly mention (Revelation 20:10) eternal torment.
Since every verse in the Bible is true, why shouldn’t we all embrace eternal
torment based on a simple, literal reading of these verses?
Three
problems with basing our view of hell on a literal reading of two verses in
Revelation
1. The
verses occur in symbolic visions.
In a sense, I do believe Revelation 14:11 and Revelation 20:10 are
literal. I believe these verses record things that John actually saw and heard
in his visions. But these visions do not, in general, work like a video sent
back from the future. Rather, they use symbols and images to communicate truth.
Some of the imagery is bizarre and shocking. For example:
* A dragon stood in front of a woman about to give birth because it wanted to eat her child (Revelation 12:4). Do I believe something like that literally did or will happen? No. In his vision, John saw a literal dragon wanting to eat a baby, but in real life there is not a literal dragon (the dragon is a symbol for Satan).
* A dragon stood in front of a woman about to give birth because it wanted to eat her child (Revelation 12:4). Do I believe something like that literally did or will happen? No. In his vision, John saw a literal dragon wanting to eat a baby, but in real life there is not a literal dragon (the dragon is a symbol for Satan).
* A prostitute who was drunk from drinking the blood of Christians
was seen riding on top of a beast with seven heads. Do I believe anyone will
ever literally see this in real life? No. In his vision, John did see a literal
drunk-with-blood prostitute on a literal seven headed monster. But the
prostitute and the beast she was riding are symbols. They are shocking and
bizarre symbols.
* Likewise, John sees scenes where smoke is rising forever from
torment and where the devil, the beast, and the false prophet are tormented
forever in a lake of fire. In his vision, he literally sees these things. That
doesn’t mean these things will literally happen in real life. They are
shocking, bizarre symbols.
Evangelical scholars recognize that the book of Revelation is a
book that uses symbols to communicate truth. Here are quotes from two of the
top evangelical commentaries on Revelation:
Robert Mounce wrote:
This should warn the reader not to expect a
literal presentation of future history, but a symbolic portrayal of that which
must yet take place. It is important for
an adequate understanding of Revelation to remember that God is communicating
his message by means of visions that are symbolic rather than literal. (Mounce,
The Book of Revelation, Revised Edition,
1997, pg. 42).
G. K. Beale wrote:
In this light the dictum of the popular
approach to Revelation – “interpret literally unless you are forced to
interpret symbolically” – should be turned on its head. Instead, the programmatic statement about the
book’s precise mode of communication in 1:1 is that the warp and woof of it is
symbolic, so that the preceding dictum should be reversed to say “interpret
symbolically unless you are forced to interpret literally.” Better put, the reader is to expect that the
main means of divine revelation in this book is symbolic. (Beale, Revelation, A Shorter Commentary, 2015,
pg. 12).
Thus, when a well-intentioned Bible teacher like Greg Koukl
appeals to “the plain straightforward common sense of Revelation,” we should
realize that his method of interpreting Revelation may be fundamentally flawed.
Much of the Bible can and should be read in a plain straightforward common
sense way. Revelation is not like that.
2.
Revelation itself provides a plain, literal interpretation of the lake of fire
and that interpretation is consistent with annihilationism.
The complexity of Revelation and its apocalyptic symbols can be
seen by how many different interpretations there are for many of the symbols.
However, there are several symbols where everyone pretty much agrees on the
interpretation. How does that happen? That happens when John is given, and then
passes on to us, the literal meaning of something he sees in one of his visions.
For example, John sees bowls filled with incense. Everyone knows that the
incense is a symbol for the prayers of God’s people. We know this because John
wrote, “Each one had a harp and golden bowls filled
with incense, which are the prayers of the saints” (Rev. 5:8 CSB17).
Imagine how crazy it would be if some sincere
but misguided Bible teacher got the symbolism of the incense and prayer backwards.
The confused teacher thought that John was telling us through the book of
Revelation that prayer was actually incense. Revelation is the final book of
the Bible and so that settles it. Whenever the rest of the Bible talks about
prayer, it actually is talking about burning incense. So when Paul instructs us
to, “Devote yourselves to prayer” (Colossians 4:2) he means we should all be
devoted to burning incense in bowls. If a Bible teacher tried to teach us that,
we would rightly dismiss him as confused. Tragically, something very similar to
this is happening with the lake of fire.
Twice John tells us what the lake of fire,
which he sees in his symbol-filled apocalyptic visions, refers to. He tells us what it literally means:
“This is the second death, the lake of fire”(Rev. 20:14b CSB17).
“. . . their share will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur,
which is the second death” (Rev. 21:8 CSB17).
Now, it’s time to talk about “the plain
language of the text.” The lake of fire is a symbol (like the golden bowls of
incense). What it really means is that the unrighteous will die a second time. Dead
people can’t continue to experience torment. They’re dead. It is wrong to take
the scene of eternal torment from John’s symbol-filled visions and then use it
to reinterpret “death” in passages like Romans 6:23. The existence of Romans
6:23 and other verses brings us to the third problem.
3. The
plain, literal meaning of other passages supports annihilation.
Traditionalists (those who believe in eternal torment) should
apply their principle of accepting the “the plain straightforward common sense”
interpretation to other passages in the Bible outside of Revelation. If they
did, they should quickly see that annihilation is taught. Here are just a few
examples:
Verse:
The LORD God said, "Since the man has
become like one of us, knowing good and evil, he must not reach out, take from
the tree of life, eat, and live forever." (Gen. 3:22 CSB17)
Common Sense:
God does not want, and will not allow, people
to live forever in a fallen state. This rules out eternal torment!
Verse:
Don't fear those who kill the body but are not able to
kill the soul; rather, fear him who is able to destroy both soul and body in
hell. (Matthew 10:28 CSB17)
Common Sense:
Destroying both the body and soul in hell sounds a lot more like
annihilation than eternal torment.
Verse:
. . . he reduced the cities of Sodom and
Gomorrah to ashes and condemned them to extinction, making them an example of
what is coming to the ungodly (2 Pet. 2:6b CSB17)
Common
Sense:
The unrighteous will eventually be reduced to ashes. Ashes can’t
be tortured.
Verse:
For God loved the world in this way: He gave
his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but
have eternal life. (John 3:16 CSB17)
Common Sense:
Only those who believe in Jesus will live forever. Immortality is
conditional on faith in Christ. Other people are not immortal, and so, of
course, they will perish. If someone’s uncle was captured by ISIS in a war and
was imprisoned and being tortured, we would not say, “He has perished.” If the
same uncle was turned to ashes by a powerful IED, then we would say, “He has
perished.” It’s common sense. This common sense meaning becomes even more clear
when we realize that “perish” in Greek was one of the words that Greek authors
used to refer to the complete and total end of all parts of a person. In other
words, the Greek word for perish, which is apollumi,
was used to mean annihilation.
To some extent, whether we believe the Bible teaches annihilation
or eternal torment depends on which set of verses we think should be
interpreted with a literal, common sense meaning and which should be interpreted
as having symbolic meaning.
Conclusion
and Further Study
Yes, if you take Revelation 14:11 and 20:10 out of their literary
context and read them with their plain, ordinary meaning, they would point to
eternal torment. There are many verses in the Bible where, even in isolation,
reading them with their plain, common sense meaning yields the best
interpretation. But this does not apply to the highly symbolic visions of
Revelation. Reading these two verse as literal yields meanings which are
contrary to what John himself tells us the lake of fire is and which is also
contrary to the plain, common sense interpretation of other passages which are
found in settings where literal meanings are expected to be found.
This short blog post has just scratched the surface of this topic.
Here are some resources for more in depth study:
1. Your Bible, along with Bible study tools. Look for and study in
context passages discussing the final fate of the unrighteous. Don’t just look
up the word “hell” (that word is not even in the book of Revelation, for
example). Look up words and phrases like “perish,” “destroy/destruction,” “burn
up,” “ashes,” and “die/death.” If you have the tools to do it, do a Greek word
study on apollumi and the related
noun apoleia.
2. To some extent, this blog post is a condensed version of a much
more in depth 7-part blog series I wrote on the question: What is the 2nd Death? Many people have found that series helpful.
3. The Rethinking Hell Website is as stuffed
full of great articles and podcasts on the conditional immortality vs. eternal
torment vs. universal reconciliation debate as the apocalyptic visions in
Revelation are stuffed full of symbols! If you want to interact with others on
this topic, consider joining the Rethinking Hell Facebook Group (you don’t have to agree with annihilationism to join,
you just have to want to discuss it in a mutually respectful way). If, like me,
you grew up believing in eternal torment, remember this proverb: “The first to state his case seems right until another comes and
cross-examines him” (Prov. 18:17 CSB17).
4. I have a list of my own blog posts and
also a few YouTube videos on the topic of Hell. You may find that list here: Mark’s Resources on Hell.
5. There’s more to Revelation than the lake
of fire and the second death. Despite its complexity, I love the book of
Revelation. Some truths in it are crystal clear. Here are some posts on this
wonderful part of the Bible:
May God lead us all into His truth and may His
Spirit guard our unity where we disagree on the interpretation of important,
but secondary, issues like the nature of hell.
Hebrews 13:16 And do not forget to do good and to share with others . . .
