What is annihilationism / conditional immortality? - GotQuestions.org Podcast Episode 39

What is annihilationism / conditional immortality / conditionalism? Is annihilationism a biblically plausible viewpoint? What are the core issues that separate eternal suffering from conditional immortality? An interview with Chris Date from RethinkingHell.com.
Chris Date - rethinkinghell.com/author/chr...
Rethinking Hell - rethinkinghell.com/
Statement on Evangelical Conditionalism - rethinkinghell.com/statement/
---
podcast.gotquestions.org
GotQuestions.org Podcast subscription options:
Apple - podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
Google - podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0...
Spotify - open.spotify.com/show/3lVjgxU...
Amazon - music.amazon.com/podcasts/ab8...
IHeartRadio - iheart.com/podcast/81148901/
Stitcher - www.stitcher.com/show/gotques...
Disclaimer: The views expressed by guests on our podcast do not necessarily reflect the views of Got Questions Ministries. Us having a guest on our podcast should not be interpreted as an endorsement of everything the individual says on the show or has ever said elsewhere. Please use biblically-informed discernment in evaluating what is said on our podcast.

[@denvercheddie]

It's really good to see Got Questions being open and non-divisive over this issue. I wish other churches could follow suit.

[@Acta_Non_Verba]

"For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality” 1 Corinth. 15:49

[@danbreeden8738]

He's a great man of God

[@cryptojihadi265]

Reb 20:10 is easy to explain for a few reasons, first it only refers to Satan, the Beast and the False Prophet. So, to apply their fate to all of the wicked is beyond a stretch, especially in light of the rest of the Bible contradicting such an assumption. Second, forever and ever is NOT a translation, it's a flagrant paraphrase, and they HAD to do it to push their doctrine into the text. Possible options for direct translation of eis ho aion ho aion would be: Unto the age of the ages Unto the ages and the ages. For the forever and the forever Unto the forever and the forever. The first one is the one that makes most grammatical sense, and also fits perfectly with the rest of scripture, that clearly states to God ALONE belongs immortality, only SOME will be worthy to attain to that age(the final and eternal one - Luke 20:35-36), the fate of the wicked being destroyed, dead, perished, consumed, burned up, no more, etc. None of which indicate eternal existence. So, when translating and there are options for words to translate to, you have to go with the one that doesn't contradict other clearly stated scripture. Only the first two options work, but the first one fitting better grammatically and from a scriptural context. But even IF we allowed the use of forever instead of age or ages, forever is almost NEVER used literally for eternity, either in the Bible or modern usage. Ie, It took forever to get through that line, or I haven't seen you in forever. Or the kitten was placed in it's forever home. Hannah, said Samuel would server before the Lord Forever, but later says, all the days of his life. Again, both in modern usage and in biblical usage it's easy to determine if forever is literal or figurative based on the context. But the verse also mentions the torment going on night and day. Well night will no longer exist in the new age. When the new heaven and earth are created it says there is no more night. So obviously you can't suffer torment night and day for all eternity IF there is no more night in the new, eternal age. But it gets even better. Jesus specifically mentions in response to the Sadducees claiming there is no resurrection in Luke 20:35 - 36 "But those who are considered WORTHY to ATTAIN to THAT Age and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage; for they cannot die anymore, because they are like the angels and are sons of God being Sons of the Resurrection." This makes it very clear, not everyone even makes it to THAT age, regardless of what kind of existence it will be. It also makes perfect sense that if God is going to create a New Heaven and Earth, He's not going to repopulate it with the wicked dead and all their evil suffering. Wouldn't be a NEW heaven or earth then. But again, it's only those considered worthy to attain to this age will live forever and be unable to die. So, in light of that scripture alone, "unto the age of the ages" is a perfect fit. What better way to identify or describe the eternal new age of the new heaven and earth that is eternal, than to call it the age of the ages. So, their torment goes UNTO or UNTIL that age of the ages. The nice thing about using a direct translation for that ONE verse and the one in Rev 14:10 is that it then doesn't require you to reinterpret ALLLL the other verses from Genesis through Revelation that state, dead, perish, burned up consumer, destroyed, no more, vanished, to mean everlasting existence in pain.

[@michaelnewzealand1888]

Excellent points you make

[@GTMGunTotinMinnesotan]

Great discussion.

[@michaelnewzealand1888]

Great discussion and questions by the questioner here very well done. I will note though that from an annihilationist perspective it's often very difficult to persuade people because we are dealing with the few verses that the eternal torment people come up with to justify their view. If this wasn't the traditional entrenched and almost unchallengeable view then the fair thing to assess two options would be to lay out the verses favorable ti one view and lay out the verses in favor of another view and compare the number and the quality and see if they can be harmonized under one particular view. However many times it's almost like you have to prove every single proof text of the opposing view of ECT does not support their view in order for some people to accept another view. This is one reason why I'm so strongly in favor of annihilationism because the number of verses supporting it is so many and the Resistance to it is so great that it's so hard to even get to that view. Once you get there and throw away tradition and popular opinion and just look at the wealth of verses that support it then I think it's so obvious. But the strongholds of support for the opposing view are the main barrier not that there are any good exegetical reasons for ECT in my opinion. I saw this in a presentation by Preston sprinkle at a Rethinking Hell conference where he listed a bunch of verses on either side of the spectrum and despite the overwhelming majority supporting annihilationism he still was holding on to the traditional view based on just two or three verses for such a long time.

[@gingrai00]

Regarding weeping and gnashing of teeth. The scriptures do not assert that such a state of affairs will endure indefinitely, they assert that such a state of affairs will obtain. The idea that such a state of affairs affirms or supports the idea of everlasting conscious torment (ECT) is not a well grounded idea. When a person takes an objective look at these scriptures, without viewing them through the lens of ECT, they will find it very easy to imagine that such a condition could obtain at the prospect of exclusion or at the prospect of execution or as a response to seeing what some have gained and what they, themselves have lost. Some backflips and silly harmonization needs to occur, however, when weeping and gnashing is a result of the agonies the damned experience everlastingly on the ECT view… the severity of the torment inflicted as punishment would need to vary allowing for a person to slide between the sort of pain felt from burning (which would allow for only cries of agony and not defiance or sorrow), to anger (gnashing), to sorrow (weeping). Once a person stops “reading in” ECT into every reference to Hades, Sheol, and Gehenna and when they read scriptures speaking about the end of the wicked objectively and not through the lens of ECT, it becomes easy to affirm Conditional Immortality and very hard to support ECT.

[@taylornovia8911]

Good information

[@jacquevanlopeznoroff8827]

His comments on Rev 20:10 went a different route than I expected. “The devil, who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone where the beast and the false prophet are. And they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.” It seems clear that these supernatural beings will be tormented forever. v15 though: “And anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire.” This verse doesn’t say human beings would be tormented forever. Btw, Jesus’s comments seem to suggest there will be differences in severity of punishment. Mark 9:42: “But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea.” Why say this if the “good” unbeliever suffers the same severity of punishment as Hitler? This also implies there is not likely to be instantaneous death.

[@danielkim672]

From my understanding the False Prophet is a human correct? Not a demon?

[@sandygiacobbe3675]

Lazarus and the Rich man is a Kingdom Parable . The Rich man represents the kingdom of Judah hence the 5 brethren from the same mother Leah and Lazarus represents the scattered tribes of Israel .

[@michaelnewzealand1888]

Yes it is definitely a parable which is astounding that most people miss. Mind you a lot of Bibles have a heading on the previous story and Luke 16 that says parable and this one doesn't. Misleading Direction by the editors of the Bible I would suggest. It is a parable for 4 reasons number one it is in the middle chapters of Luke which contain parable after parable. Number 2 it is told in the style of a Parable. Number 3 it is very much related to the earlier story and Luke 16 which also has two characters one of which is a rich person. Number 4 it starts off with the same words as the previous parable " there was a rich man".

[@jose9153]

Chris, what do you make if Paul's use of a different Greek word for death in Rom. 6:23 versus that used in Rom. 7:2-3?

[@TKK0812]

One is a verb, that other is a noun

[@cryptojihadi265]

I hear him comment all the time that we don't believe the wicked cease to exist. How can he say that? We believe they are burned up, no more, vanished, dead, etc. None of that in some metaphysical or symbolic way, so yeah, we do believe the cease to exsit.

[@Matthew-307]

I want to listen to this but your audio is so fuzzy I just can’t: please fix that.

[@schmeemahlee]

I just don’t get it. If someone presents me with the gospel I can just be like “no thanks I’d rather be annihilated and just not be conscious after death.” What’s the point of the gospel then ??

[@Mals2244]

There are many who have told me that that don’t care if they are tormented forever and they’d like it. Doesn’t mean the gospel isn’t necessary Also, people shouldn’t be fearmongered into believing. They should believe so that they are joyously serving God and in communion with Him. Not believing for fear of hell.

[@PGBigRed]

Getting out of hell shouldn't be your primary motivator to serve the Lord. If it is, then you're actually serving your fear, and that's idolatry.

[@montyburnsgaming3609]

Christ died to give us immortality. “But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel:” 2 Timothy 1:10 “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” John 3:16 “For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” Romans 6:23 This is the gospel in a nutshell. Those who accept the gospel with gain everlasting life, in other words, immortality. Those who reject the gospel will perish. And they probably won’t just cease to exist immediately either. They will be punished in hades (the intermediate state) before being judged at the great white throne and being cast into the lake of fire and annihilated.

[@tomvondra2632]

Mt 25:46 employs the term "kolasin" for etetnal punishment that literally means to be cut off. "Basalmos"means to torment.

[@ModernMozart1104]

Can you explain what you mean by this?

[@driger888]

for those who are wicked will be destroyed, but those who hope in the lord will inherit the land.

[@cherylwilliams4738]

What kind of people will be annihilated? Just the really wicked!? or the ones who didn't receive Jesus or?

[@driger888]

@@cherylwilliams4738 "For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."

[@danielkim672]

@@cherylwilliams4738anyone whose name is not in the book of life

[@gingrai00]

When a person takes the time to read through the COPIUS scriptures that speak to the end of the wicked and when they do so without redefining them into a model of everlasting conscious torment (ECT), they find a few things to be the case: 1) there is no shortage of content to review and this content is found throughout the OT and the NT. 2) there is no ambiguity to the forecast for what will happen to the damned… the scriptures use every image imaginable to get the point across that the damned will be killed and never live again. 3) the 3 scriptures used by proponents of ECT are easily reconciled with the views of Conditional Immortality and none of these scriptures teach or assert ECT (in this way they are under-determinative). The hosts approach is the right one, however, when he (and Chris) propose that Christians should not divide over their views on this matter. It is a tertiary matter and there is more than enough agreement to coherence with one another.

[@neatchip123]

I struggle with why an exception to Satan and his followers doesn't exist from the plain reading of the scripture. Satan, anti-christ, demons, are not human and seem to be punished differently. His false prophets seem to be included in this torment due to their clear choice to be against God. From the way I see it Rev 20:10, as opposed to other plain readings of hell that mention destruction and second death, seems to clearly state that the devil and the followers will suffer eternal torment, but the rest of humans will be destroyed, not eternally punished. Mr. Date's explanation as to the symbolism present throughout revelations is a valid one, but this statement was very clear and very distinctive from any other scripture on hell. Maybe I misunderstood his point and can't quite grasp it.

[@JosiahFickinger]

What about the verses that say Satan will be brought to ashes?

[@churchvicor3281]

@@JosiahFickinger Are those verses in Daniel and Ezekiel I think I have read them.

[@taylornovia8911]

Both fates are horrific, yes, but the difference is one is eternal and the other isn't. There's no fearful torment after annihilation. But I agree that life being the ultimate value, both those fates should be avoided.

[@a123zmoma]

They are both of eternal consequence.

[@taylornovia8911]

@@a123zmoma Yes, the main and huge difference is one ends and the other never ends.

[@jacksonrelaxin3425]

@@taylornovia8911 it says they will be “rewarded according to their works.” Does burning for trillions of years sound like they’re being rewarded according to their works?

[@Anteater23]

@@jacksonrelaxin3425 Neither is a reward. Isn’t that verse for the believers?

[@jacksonrelaxin3425]

@@Anteater23 reward just means something that’s presented after you do something. A reward can be good or bad

[@truthtransistorradio6716]

I believe Conditional Immorality. However, I do think Lazerus and the rich man talks about a literal waiting place of the souls. They are there until the righteous are in the first resurrection, and the unrighteousness in the 2nd resurrection. After the 2nd resurrection is the final judgement. Those whose names are not found in the book of life are cast in the lake of fire where both body and soul are destroyed. I am convinced of this because the thief on the cross was told by Jesus that he would be with him in paradise today!

[@owensterry29]

The problem with interpreting the parable of the rich man and Lazarus is that neither Abraham's bosom nor hades are mentioned one time in the Old Testament. There are 300 verses in the entire Bible that clearly teaches that the dead are asleep. The dead literally do not exist anymore anywhere and our only hope for life after death rest solely on the resurrection

[@truthtransistorradio6716]

@@owensterry29 Hades is the Greek equivalent of Sheol. I am open to soul sleep, but leaning towards a soul that either has eternal life or will die in the lake of fire.

[@danielkim672]

@@owensterry29the non believers are judged at the end times correct? So they are not gone until then

[@HG-ic8ks]

“Soul sleep” (I loathe that term) is the crazy idea that, in order to be resurrected from the dead, one must be, uh, dead.

[@truthtransistorradio6716]

@HG-ic8ks Here is what I think makes the most sense using all of scripture. Conditional Immorality, but like this: 1. The body is the easiest. We all agree that we are born into a body that will die (unless one is alive when Christ returns). This is the first death. 2. The soul. I believe that the soul remains in a conscious state until the final judgement. The bible has little to say on this, I admit. But I take Lazerus and the rich man as a literal story. Those who have faith go to Abraham's bosom/paradise (until they are given new bodies). The lost will be in a prison (possibly Tartarus as described in 2 Peter 2:4. Just as the angels are kept there 'until' the judgement. So I also believe thus isn't the eternal location, but souls are conscious there. Jesus said, "Do not fear man who can kill the body. But fear God who can kill both body and soul in Gahenna (a physical plain in Jerusalem used as an example of the final lake of fire). Note, that in Revelation 20, it never says the rest of the dead are given new bodies. Instead, it says they stand before the throne to see if their names are written in the lambs book of life. I believe many of them will. Anyone saved after Christ returns and the first resurrection occurred. Those saved during the millennium. 3. The Spirit. I believe we are born Spiritual dead. Only those born in the Spirit will have eternal life. Otherwise, God will kill both body and soul in the lake of fire.

[@billywalker21]

Isho DID NOT die! How you think He who told us we never had to die died.

[@user-zs2ly5qu3f]

ECT is Morally Indefensible...Our God is Holy, Just and True...

[@Lftt447]

S

[@pjdelucala]

You cannot be annihilated. Time is a property of physical reality. It is an illusion. Physical reality is an illusion. It is not real. It is not real because physical reality decays and dies. Your body will decay and die. Therefore, your body is not real. What is real in physical reality is your experience. That you take with you when you die. Your soul is eternal and timeless. Why is it timeless? It is timeless because time is not structurally real. Here is an example of what I mean. You can hold a movie on a DVD in your hand. The complete movie exists NOW. It is all there. You can then play it in your DVD player and experience it on a timeline. You can get emotionally drawn into the movie and you may at some times in the movie think the movie is real. But the movie is just an illusion. Physical reality that you are experiencing is just like that movie. It is a dream in a sense. The real you which is your soul is here and NOW experiencing your movie. So, your soul is eternal. It exists OUTSIDE of time which is a property of physical reality. Therefore, if your soul exists, then you cannot NOT exist.

[@michaelnewzealand1888]

What about Matthew 10:28 which talks about the destruction of soul and body?

[@pjdelucala]

@lnewzealand1888 It is not to be taken literally. Jesus also said that it is better to pluck your eye out if your eye causes you to sin. Are you going to do that? The real idea behind it is this: "Fear of the Lord is the beginning of Wisdom." The word Lord should be translated as LAW. The word fear means RESPECT. So it should be translated as: "RESPECT for the LAW is the beginning of wisdom." The Law is what you sow you reap. The word for "Fear" in the Bible is not translated correctly. It really means Respect. The idea really is that there are consequences in life and it is important to RESPECT God much the same way you would respect deep water when swimming in it or when you are climbing a mountain or when you are perhaps cooking on a hot stove. Life is Karmic with causes and effects. There are no punishments. What is the value of punishing? None. But what you sow you reap is a life learning concept. It happened to the Prodigal Son. FEAR contradicts everything else Jesus taught about God and forgiveness. Also be aware that the Bible was edited by those in authority at that time. Fear controls people and the writers knew that. Focus on Jesus' two great commandments instead and really focus on the very last sentence.

[@walterhelm8186]

You are teaching a form of Gnosticism, which is outside the parameters of Christianity.

[@pjdelucala]

@@walterhelm8186 Fine. I am not a Christian. I believe in the teachings of Jesus which was unconditional love and karma. "Judge not lest ye be judged." I do not subscribe to ideas like judgment, punishment, blood sacrifice, demons, and hell. God does not judge and punish. People judge and punish.

[@billywalker21]

The Scriptures support "annihilationism". But not conditional immortality.

[@montyburnsgaming3609]

I thought it was the same thing.

[@billywalker21]

Ya know, I think they may be. I became aware of the term annihilationism months before I heard the phrase conditional immortality. I also learned that apparently I'm an annihilationist to those that would categorize me. When I first studied, not extensively, conditional immortality I understood them to be the same. BUT THEN! I read something relating to c/i that asserted immortality would follow a time spent in hell atoning for/being punished for sins. Though it's been a while since studying this stuff I seem to remember reading of a few other minor differences. If they are the same, or basically the same, then one is like a knockoff of the other. It seems to me that the basic belief of Annihilationism is exactly conditional immortality. Belief, faith/works, obedience, whether or not you're Satan or his bunch, whether or not you've taken the mark, whether or not you're a false prophet, or whether or not your name appears in The Book of Life all relate to your condition when you depart that vessel, and all seem to be expressed in The Scriptures as conditions set forth from The Father and Isho by which we will be judged. The Scriptures mention the second death a few times. But that second death DOES NOT apply to Satan and his bunch, those who take the mark, nor the false prophets. Those are the only entities that will be cast into the lake of fire, along with "hell", to be contained and punished forever...as God and the angels look on. The rest are either brought to Heaven or simply destroyed(I assume in the lake of fire. Keep in mind Isho actually never referenced a place called hell. The word Hades is more accurately translated as the grave. And "Gehenna", a word translated as hell, WAS NOT/IS NOT hell. To my knowledge Isho never taught eternal torment, with the exception of previously mentioned exceptions. I also believe several of the parables teach annihilationism.

[@Mike-qt7jp]

Revelation 14:9-11 says, "If anyone worships the beast and its image and receives a mark on his forehead or on his hand, he also will drink the wine of God’s wrath...and he will be tormented with fire and sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever, and they have NO REST, day or night." If they were annihilated out of existence, then the statement no rest day or night makes no sense. Revelation 20:10 says, "And the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be TORMENTED day and night FOREVER and ever. . .Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. And if ANYONE"S name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire." By the way, the word torment is translated from the Greek word Basanismos, and it means to torture. It absolutely does NOT mean to annihilate and put out of existence. Luke 16:22-24 “The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried. 23 In Hades, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. 24 So he called to him, ‘Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.” Notice the rich man is NOT annihilated but rather in torment in flames.

[@ABC123jd]

We have to be careful when interpreting Revelation because of its high use of symbolic imagery. You see the same language of drinking wrath, torment, and smoke rising forever and ever used in Revelation 18-19, which an angel tells us symbolises the destruction of Babylon. Language of day and night and smoke rising forever and ever is used in Isaiah 34:10 to describe the destruction of Edom. Babylon and Edom are not eternally burning on fire, but are completely and utterly destroyed i.e. annihilated. Will death and Hades continue to exist forever or will death be destroyed as 1 Cor 15 says? If death is destroyed, then being tormented in the lake of fire can't symbolise eternally existing in hell. The very same verse that says death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire says that the imagery represents the second death i.e. dying a second time. Luke 16:22-24 is most likely a parable, but even if it's a literal, historical event, it has nothing to do with the final judgement. The rich man's family was still on earth and still had the chance to repent, but the final judgement doesn't happen until all the dead are resurrected. So even if taken literally, this narrative refers to the intermediate state between death and resurrection, not the final judgement.

[@Anteater23]

So Hitler won’t receive eternal torment?

[@ororinator5596]

If the answer is no, what is your conclusion?

[@ThemCoversMB]

He wont be abe to sin anymore if hes snuffed out of existence.

[@danielb.1567]

nope. he will experience a horrible death in hell, for however long God determines to carry it out, but eventually will be burned up and exist no more.

[@christiantompkins6423]

Torture for ever? If this doctrine is true then no, he will experience an excruciating demise.

[@BugsyBunny1980]

“There is a little bit of Hitler in everyone”- Jordan Peterson

[@BEKenna]

Annihilationism is a false teaching/concept. No the Scripture does not teach it about as clearly as it teaches anything. One must bend and twist meanings to get the view that Scripture clearly teaches it.

[@edwardhorton7779]

That is funny. Annihilationism supporters make the same clam. Only for the truth, not eternal torment. when we die we sleep. Death is described as sleep over 50 time in scripture.

[@schmeemahlee]

To me it just sounds like “the gospel is helpful but not necessary”.

[@samozeal9466]

How so? In both views, people are forever separated from God without the gospel. The eternal conscious torment view is horrific and hard to stomach. Imagine the person you love most who doesn't accept Jesus burning alive continuously for an hour... miserable. A week? Unbelievable. A million years? Terrible. Eternity? Unimaginable. But if that's what the Bible says, then that's the way it is. Except that's not what the Bible says! The Bible strongly teaches eternal death for sinners. The eternal conscious torment view is hard to reconcile with a loving and good and just God. Annihilationism reconciles God's love AND justice. He won't force anyone to do anything, and those who reject Him can choose to cease existing. As the Bible calls it "the second death".

[@danielkim672]

Did you come from a universalism video?

[@niander.wallace]

“And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.” -Matthew 25:46 “They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might,” -2 Thessalonians 1:9 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.” -Matthew 25:41 “and the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.” -Revelation 20:10

[@alexandruserban473]

eternal punishment ...not eternal punishing...the consequences are eternal.....you suffer, you burn,....for long...ant then you die ,forever, never to be called by God again to existence

[@escapethematrix40]

@@alexandruserban473 What does Rev 20:10 mean ''and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever? sounds kinda like eternal punishing.. [serious question]

[@marylamb6063]

@@escapethematrix40 The Old Testament doesn't mention an eternal fire for the lost. However, we can find it in the Apocryphal books, written during the intertestamental period, books like 1-4 Enoch, the Wisdom of Solomon, Judith, etc. Many Jews in Christ's time believed in an eternal hell. But is it literal? Isaiah 34:10 speaks of Edom's punishment "This judgment on Edom will never end; the smoke of its burning will rise forever. The land will lie deserted from generation to generation." But Edom's smoke is not rising forever and ever. The passage refers to the Babylonian invasion of Edom using very symbolic language. In Revelation, we take a lot of the book as symbolic, but when it comes to the lake for fire we take it literally. Throughout the Bible, eternal fire is symbolic of destruction.

[@Quaifen]

@@escapethematrix40 I was wondering about this verse as well until I read Rev 21 that said "Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away.

[@Jleesan24245]

Exactly, it's so clear that this is a continuous punishment. I think people want to believe its not because it makes them feel better about Gods judgement.