Is Eternal Suffering Real? Part II

*(5-10) All those who take the mark of the beast will be tormented with fire and brimstone, and the smoke of their torment will ascend up for ever and ever, Revelation 14:9-11. This passage does not specifically call this the lake of fire, but the Lake of Fire will also burn with fire and brimstone, Revelation 21:8, which means that the place of the suffering described above probably IS the Lake of Fire itself, yet it is not so plainly stated that this passage can be considered proof of the eternality of the suffering of it’s occupants. I will note that just because the smoke of their torment ascends up forever and ever, does not necessarily mean that the ones being tormented live forever and ever. I believe that they will live on, otherwise from where does the smoke come? But we are looking for hard facts; and while this passage comes so close, in the end it is merely the strongest of evidences, but not definitive proof. One more thing to note, is that there are people in Sheol who did not take the mark of the beast, as that has not happened yet, but they have rejected Jesus’ salvation, and therefore, there seems to be a differentiation between common unbelievers, and those who take this mark. In other words, even though this is good evidence for eternal suffering, it only seems to apply to those with the mark.

(6) Tartaro’o

Tartaro’o (tar-ta-raw-oh) Strong’s Greek #5020: This Greek word only appears once in the New Testament in II Peter 2:4 “For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell [Tartaro’o], and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;” According to the Blue letter Bible site, this is the Greek equivalent of Gehenna [the lake of fire]. However, I believe that it is actually a Greek equivalent of Sheol [the pit, or prison], since Peter says the angels that sinned are being “reserved unto judgment” and the final judgment is the second death, which is the lake of fire. It wouldn’t make sense to say that they are in Gehenna reserved in chains of darkness until they are delivered to Gehenna. Strong’s concordance defines this as the deepest level of Hades/Sheol [the pit, or prison for disobedient souls].

(7) Arguments for Temporal Punishment

I heard a 7th day Adventist named Doug Bachelor, argue against the existence of eternal suffering in Hell this past Sunday [9/16/12] and he used a few passages to back this up.

(7-1) Psalm 37:10 & 20 written by king David, “10 For yet a little while, and the wicked shall not be: yea, thou shalt diligently consider his place, and it shall not be. 20 But the wicked shall perish, and the enemies of the LORD shall be as the fat of lambs: they shall consume; into smoke shall they consume away.”

His argument is that because the wicked will be consumed, then Hell is not an eternal suffering, but rather it’s occupants will quickly cease to exist. Well there’s another verse that mirrors this one: Psalm 104:35 “Let the sinners be consumed out of the earth, and let the wicked be no more. … ” In other words, David, in Psalm 37 was likely only referring to their disappearance from the earth, I don’t see proof or even decent evidence that David was suggesting that once departed from the earth, they would consume away in every aspect including the soul.

Also it is imperative to note his words “as the fat of lambs”. The author is using a simile, and therefore it cannot be taken too literally. These literary devices are often used to reveal an aspect of a thing that is less understood, by comparing it to a more familiar thing, but the analogy only goes so far. The real test is to compare these passages to other’s that describe the same thing in this case we should look at the fate of the wicked as described in other verses like Psalm 104:35. A simile cannot contradict the rest of Scripture, so we must now consider what the rest of Scripture has to say on this matter, before we presume to take this simile as a literal description. Also consider the possibility that this consuming away is a never-ending process, as evidenced in (5-8). It is entirely possible that this simile ceases to be literal in regards to the suffering on the other side of death, i.e. it is only referring to the death of the body, and not the death of the soul.

Also, note that in the Scripture given by Mr. Bachelour that David says, “as the fat of lambs: they shall consume; into smoke shall they consume away.” [Emphasis added], which parallels (5-8) that describes the smoke of their torment going up forever; further suggesting that the destruction that David describes is a perpetual one, and not temporal.

Finally, and most notably, David did not know of the lake of fire, which is where eternal suffering is said to take place, so he is simply referring to Sheol, where we know the spirit carries on [I Peter 3:18-20]. This is one of many examples of verses concerning Sheol, being used to discredit doctrine concerning the lake of fire.

(7-2) Matthew 10:28, “And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.” See also Luke 12:5. It does seem that using the physical death, and the death of the soul together could imply that both death’s are the same in all or many aspects, but this is still not explicitly stated, meaning that this evidence is only circumstantial and can at best only be used to supplement other evidences. Also consider that the first death is not permanent, the soul goes on (Psalm 16:10, II Corinthians 5:8, I Peter 3:18-20); because both the just and unjust will be raised from the dead to be judged, Acts 24:15. Therefore, if the spirit goes on after the first death, and both deaths are the same in that regard, this would actually be evidence of eternality after the second death as well.

(7-3) Isaiah 66:24, “And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh.” This verse is actually the single strongest evidence that I’ve seen that those who are cast into the lake of fire will perish for good, since God mentions their carcases, which means exactly what it sounds like; dead bodies. The word is H 6297 in Strong’s: Peh-gher. But still remember, the presence of dead flesh; that no longer lives, does not demand a spirit that also ceases to be. In other words this verse is one of the strongest evidences for temporal punishment, but it is still very far from proof. This verse only proves that the carcases of those men’s flesh will be dead, but proves nothing concerning the soul.

An Argument For Temporal Punishment That Doesn’t Work

Some might use Jesus’ parable from Matthew 18:23-35, where a servant is given a free pass on an extreme debt that he owed the King, but that same servant turned around and demanded a far less debt be paid to him from his fellow servant, and so the first servant ends up having to pay his original debt which was FAR greater than the one owed to him. Jesus makes it clear in the end that He is speaking of forgiveness. The amount due to the King, which represents God, is 10,000 talents. This is roughly 160,000 YEARS wages, while the debt owed to that servant is only about 4 months wages. The unjust servant ended up having to pay his debt in prison, because he did not extend the same forgiveness to his fellow servant.

The reason this could be used to argue for temporal punishment is that while the amount owed, 160,000 years wages, is a big number, it is nothing in comparison to eternity, which is never ending. One could conceivably argue that people will eventually be let out of this “prison” once their sins are paid for. The big problem with this argument goes back to the definitions for words translated as Hell. Sheol is the place called the prison, not the lake of fire, but the lake of fire is the place where punishment is supposed to be eternal. So this parable seems to be in reference to Sheol, not the lake of fire. Also, this punishment is presumably for believers since the subjects serve the King, and they have received forgiveness, while not extending the same; therefore, it doesn’t make much sense to believe that those who have outright rejected the forgiveness that is in Christ will qualify for this end. In other words, there is no logical reason to believe that this possibly-temporary punishment will apply to those who have never received forgiveness in the first place.

(8) More From Doug Bachelour

I went looking for his study on youtube, but I found another one from him on Hell instead. I could barely watch half of the video without becoming so angry at his slick and blatantly dishonest tactics that I just couldn’t take listening to him anymore. I’d like to address several things that he said in just the first half of this video, and show with Scripture why they are wrong. Some of these things he outright insisted, and others he mockingly insinuated.

(8-1) He said that teaching everlasting punishment is in direct violation to the Garden of Eden testimony, where God says that man shall not eat of the tree of life and live forever. He makes the argument that Satan was the one who said they would not die, thereby insinuating that it is a satanic doctrine to believe that sinners live forever, even in everlasting punishment. Again, we have seen WITH Scripture that the soul DOES go on, otherwise what should we make of passages like I Peter 3:18-20 that reveal there to be disobedient souls in prison? The argument that the eternality of the disobedient soul is a satanic doctrine is flat out contrary to Scripture.

To disprove this notion I want to show that the eternality forbidden by God in the garden must have been in regards to the flesh, not the soul. In other words God did not want the sin stained flesh to live forever, but Doug is insisting that we need to believe that God meant the soul as well. We know from I Peter 3:18-20 that the soul goes on for the disobedient, and thanks to II Corinthians 5:8 we know that obedient souls who are absent from the body are present with the Lord. Secondly, we know that there will be a bodily resurrection from the dead for both the just and the unjust Acts 24:15. Also, believers who have passed on will be resurrected; and they will be changed along with those believers who are still living and they will ascend just behind the dead in Christ [I Thessalonians 4:16-17, I Corinthians 15:52-53]. Furthermore, we know that Jesus was resurrected with a flesh body Luke 24:39. And finally, in Revelation 2:7 Jesus says that those who overcome the temptations will eat of the fruit of the Tree of Life. How can the soul eat something that is physical, and why would it eat something that would cause it to live since it already lives on as seen by previous verses? In other words, flesh and bone bodies will consume this fruit. The eternality kept from sinners in the garden is that of a flesh and bone eternal body, not the soul. The eternality of the soul is completely separate from the eternality of the flesh. Scripture states that the soul goes on regardless of its righteousness or unrighteousness, so the bodies that will eat of the Tree of Life will clearly be flesh bodies, meaning that God’s objection was to the eternality of the sin stained flesh, not to the eternality of the soul. What we have here is a purely Biblical doctrine being called satanic by a false teacher.

(8-2) Doug also insinuated that the doctrine of eternal torment, coupled with baptism salvation means that un-baptized babies will burn in Hell forever. First of all, I know of no verse that substantiates that claim. Secondly baptism is a token of true faith, or ”the answer of a good conscience toward God“ [I Peter 3:21] and it is done only after faith. Jesus says in Mark 16:16 “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.” Notice that Baptism is left out of the description of those that will be damned. In other words, faith is what saves, and baptism is one of many tokens of true faith, but baptism does not in itself save souls. See also Acts 8:12-13 & 18:8. Also consider the thief on the cross who had no time to be baptized; yet Jesus declared to him that he would be with Him in paradise.

(8-3) Doug also insinuated that those who believe in eternal suffering also believe that God loves to punish sinners, which is in direct violation with Ezekiel 33:11 and II Peter 3:9 which state emphatically that God takes no joy in the destruction of the wicked, and that He desires all to be saved. Here Doug has misrepresented the views that his opponent’s hold (eternal suffering), based on an attribute that they do not hold (God taking satisfaction in the death of the wicked). Mockery and mud slinging should ALWAYS be an automatic red flag.

(8-4) He also mocks the idea that Satan is in charge of Hell. He claims that this doctrine comes from paganism, when in fact it actually comes from Revelation 9:1-11 which describe the locusts and their king, which is the king over the bottomless pit [Sheol]. This king’s name is Abaddon in Hebrew, and Apollyon in Greek, which means the Destroyer in both languages. Who this destroyer actually is may or may not be clear, but the death angel of Exodus 12:23 is also called the destroyer, though the word Abaddon is not used. It is fairly understandable that so many assume Satan to be the king over this pit, but just because it is not 100% clear, does not mean that the idea came from paganism. As I have shown, the Bible gives fair reason to think the devil is the king over the bottomless pit. But in the end, no Christian is holding so tightly to this idea that it should be ammo for opponents to eternal suffering. Once again, the method reveals the motive and the motive reveals the man. He’s reaching far outside of the discussion at hand, which is supposed to be the doctrine of eternal suffering, to sling a little mud that is only related to the topic in that it deals with the place called Hell. This is an attempt to further cause his opponents views to seem childlike, and un-Biblical. Mockery is very often a tool used by people with little or nothing to back up their claims. Also notice that he is using facts about The Pit/Sheol/Hades that does have a king over it, in order to back up his claims about Gehenna/The Lake of Fire which has no king or leader mentioned and therefore no educated Bible believing Christian would argue that point. This is why we need to know the difference between the two places.

(8-5) Doug insinuated that the eternal suffering doctrine is only a tool of fear to get congregants to pay more money. That is a bold, dishonest, and misleading statement, seeing that most proponents can quote lots of Scripture to back up their claims, while Mr. Bachelour needs to do some serious spinning and even lying to convince people that his view is correct. He is saying that the very idea of eternal punishment was created to fatten the wallets of the church, as if there is no Scriptural basis for this idea, when there is actually FAR more for it than against it. The method reveals the motive, and the motive reveals the man.

(8-6) He also mocks the idea that Hell is under the earth. First of all, he is once again (I presume intentionally) blurring the line between Sheol and Gehenna. In (2-1) we learned not only that the location of Sheol is indeed below, but also we see that it is the most confirmed aspect of Sheol in that 6 different authors or witnesses, in 8 different passages proclaim it and two of those are quotes from our Lord Himself. But more importantly, Sheol is not the place where eternal suffering occurs; that occurs in the Lake of Fire, Gehenna. I am sure that a studied scholar such as Mr. Bachelour should be aware of the difference between these two destinations. If he is aware of the difference between the two places, then perhaps this was just a slip of the pen if you will, but if it was intentional, then this is so very devious, and so very telling. Only God and Mr. Bachelour know for sure.

I hope that these 6 points will show how slick and dishonest the methods of some men can be. If these simple things are so clearly wrong, and more importantly dishonest, then we should learn the lesson to be very careful in what we take in as truth, no matter who tells it; no matter how well they speak; how smart they sound; or what Scriptures they give as evidence. In the end the final word is the complete testimony of Scripture. Prove what is told to you, ALWAYS.

If someone uses mockery to describe their opposition, then you need to be as scrutinizing of their words as you possibly can, because people with weak arguments use this tactic. It is used to make their opposition look dumb, in order to build themselves false credibility with their audience. ALWAYS look out for this. Mockery does not necessarily mean that the person speaking is wrong, but it does indicate an un-Christian view of ones opposition, and as I said before, it is often intentionally used to create false credibility. This tactic, when used intentionally, is usually coupled with a twisting of Scripture by several means i.e. passages taken out of context, or bold lies that sound Biblical because they use quotes that are slightly altered to suit the doctrine being pushed.

(9) Arguments for Eternal Punishment

(9-1) II Thessalonians 1:8-9 “8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: 9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;”

One could argue that the wicked man’s destruction [or absence from life] is everlasting, but his suffering is not i.e. he is fully dead forever, but not suffering forever. I find these kinds of interpretations to be lacking in hard evidence, and they feel very forced given the fact that the passage seems to clearly reference an ongoing destruction, and especially in light of all the other Scriptures on the matter, but I’ll leave it for the reader to decide.

(9-2) Mark 9:43-45 “43 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: 44 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. 45 And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:”[Emphasis added]

Again I remind you that I do not believe that Jesus is suggesting literal mutilation, but rather a spiritual separation from unrepentant sinners within the body of Christ. But what should we make of the phrase “Where their worm dieth not”? For more on this passage see (4-4). Also ask yourself, if it is “better to go through life maimed than to be cast into Hell whole”, then how can one consider the suffering in Hell to be temporary? That notion seems illogical to me.

(9-3) Revelation 14:9-11 “9 And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, 10 The same shall drink (*A*) of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with (*B*) fire and brimstone [the lake of fire? Revelation 21:8] in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: 11 and the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and (*C*) they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.” [Emphasis added]

If the smoke ascends up for ever, then it seems very likely that they are being tormented forever and ever, otherwise from where would this smoke come?

It is important to note that the term “ever” can apparently mean “until the end of the age” which means that it may not indicate eternity, but simply the rest of the duration of a specific dispensation of time. This seems like a flawed interpretation for a couple of reasons: (A) because the word 'ever' is doubled “for ever and ever”, and (B) because these events happen at the end of an age, just before the millennial reign of Christ. Also, the word “ever” should not necessarily be translated “until the end of the age” it is simply a supposed possibility. I say “supposed” because I do not know enough about translating Hebrew to know if this possibility is truly valid. It is worth remembering that the doubling of something in Hebrew is a way to emphasize, meaning that this double use of the word ‘ever’ in “for ever and ever” likely means for eternity.

Also important to note is that (*A*) the wine of the Wrath of God that is poured out into a cup, may represent the cups of God’s Wrath that are poured out during the final destruction in Revelation, and this happens upon the earth; presumably not in the lake of fire. However, there is a Scriptural reason to believe that *the lake of fire may be on the earth, and that notion comes from Isaiah 34:6-10.