Support via Patreon | Subscribe

Welcome to Part Two of my study and examination of Conditional Immortality (aka Annihilationism). If you missed part one, you can read that one here.

As with part one, this will be a long post as there is still much ground to cover before we can really grasp the bigger picture about what Scripture teaches. So with that said, I’ll pick right up where we left off. In part one, I covered a lot of New Testament texts, a few Old Testament passages, plus a look at what some of the earliest church leaders also wrote on the topic to the early church. In this one, we will be looking at a few more Old Testament examples and how they relate to the imagery used in Revelation, amongst other things.

Unquenchable Fire and Undying Worms

What of unquenchable fire and undying worms? Do these phrases really mean that the fuel of the fire and the worms must last forever and ever? We have a few references to shed some light on the meaning of these phrases which we can examine below:

Ezekiel 20:46–48
Mortal, set your face toward the south, preach against the south, and prophesy against the forest land in the Negeb; say to the forest of the Negeb, Hear the word of the Lord: Thus says the Lord God, I will kindle a fire in you, and it shall devour every green tree in you and every dry tree; the blazing flame shall not be quenched, and all faces from south to north shall be scorched by it. All flesh shall see that I the Lord have kindled it; it shall not be quenched.

So, in our first example, Ezekiel was obviously not prophesying that the forests of Negeb would burn forever and never go out. Instead, fire that “shall not be quenched” is used to mean fire that cannot be interrupted or stopped in its destructive purpose. No one is able to stop a fire like this until it has run its course, or it is stopped by something greater, which is what the word “quench” actually means. It is an action performed by something external which stops the flames — what it doesn’t mean is a fire burning out naturally once it consumes its fuel. The fire will continue regardless.

Jeremiah 17:27
But if you do not listen to me, to keep the sabbath day holy, and to carry in no burden through the gates of Jerusalem on the sabbath day, then I will kindle a fire in its gates; it shall devour the palaces of Jerusalem and shall not be quenched.

Here is another reference to an unquenchable fire consuming something and not being stopped even after the object of destruction has been “devour[ed]”. The image is one of a fire which rages on and on, even after everything in it is burnt up and destroyed.

Now let’s move onto the “undying worms” and see how that phrase is used. In the New Testament we see this phrase used in Mark 9:47–48, which originally comes from Isaiah, and also a similar theme in Jeremiah.

Isaiah 66:24
And they shall go out and look at the dead bodies of the people who have rebelled against me; for their worm shall not die, their fire shall not be quenched, and they shall be an abhorrence to all flesh.

A little earlier in Isaiah 66 (v.16) we see that God executes judgement with fire and “by his sword, on all flesh”, and that the dead will be many, ending the chapter with the verse quoted above. Jeremiah picks up on a similar theme of God’s judgement, people being killed to such an extent there won’t be room to bury them. This is also where we find a reference to Gehenna, or the valley of the son of Hinnom, as its name means (also called Topheth), in chapters 7 and 19. The concept of Gehenna as a place of punishment is then picked up by Jesus in Matthew 10:28, which he uses in a more eschatological sense.

Jeremiah 7:32–33
Therefore, the days are surely coming, says the Lord, when it will no more be called Topheth, or the valley of the son of Hinnom, but the valley of Slaughter: for they will bury in Topheth until there is no more room. The corpses of this people will be food for the birds of the air, and for the animals of the earth; and no one will frighten them away.

In Isaiah, the worms and the unquenchable fire are consuming corpses — not living people. It’s not said that these things will burn forever, but even if they did, they are there to serve as a sign to others. Nor is it inferred that the bodies are alive, that is assumed into the text by proponents of Eternal Conscious Torment (ECT). Then in Jeremiah we have a reference to unstoppable scavengers eating corpses that “no one will frighten them away”. We don’t (or shouldn’t) assume that this means wild beasts will be eating the bodies of the dead forever and ever, just that they simply shall not be stopped until the process of destruction is completed, similar to the fire and worms.

Malachi makes this point and the fate of the wicked even more explicit. Keeping with the fire imagery, he speaks of “all evildoers” being burned up to “stubble” and “ashes” under the feet of the righteous; that “neither root nor branch” will be left of them. If we are going to go by a “plain reading of Scripture”, as some people like to say, then it doesn’t get much more plain than this here:

Malachi 4:1–3
See, the day is coming, burning like an oven, when all the arrogant and all evildoers will be stubble; the day that comes shall burn them up, says the Lord of hosts, so that it will leave them neither root nor branch. But for you who revere my name the sun of righteousness shall rise, with healing in its wings. You shall go out leaping like calves from the stall. And you shall tread down the wicked, for they will be ashes under the soles of your feet, on the day when I act, says the Lord of hosts.

The Book of Revelation

Let’s now move to the New Testament and take a look at some of the more difficult passages in Revelation which are often used as “proof texts” against Annihilationism and in favour of ECT. Here’s two of the more well-known passages of Scripture:

Revelation 14:9–11
Then another angel, a third, followed them, crying with a loud voice, “Those who worship the beast and its image, and receive a mark on their foreheads or on their hands, they will also drink the wine of God’s wrath, poured unmixed into the cup of his anger, and they will be tormented with fire and sulphur 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. There is no rest day or night for those who worship the beast and its image and for anyone who receives the mark of its name.”
Revelation 20:10–15
And the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulphur, where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

Then I saw a great white throne and the one who sat on it; the earth and the heaven fled from his presence, and no place was found for them. And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Also another book was opened, the book of life. And the dead were judged according to their works, as recorded in the books. And the sea gave up the dead that were in it, Death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and all were judged according to what they had done. Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire; and anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.

There’s a lot packed into these two passages, so let’s break them down and look at the imagery and phrases used one by one.


First, “their smoke will go up forever”. This reference points back to the destruction of the land of Edom in Isaiah 34 which uses the same phrase, and can act as an archetype of God’s everlasting judgement on something. Let’s look at the passage:

Isaiah 34:9–10
And the streams of Edom shall be turned into pitch, and her soil into sulphur; her land shall become burning pitch. Night and day it shall not be quenched; its smoke shall go up forever. From generation to generation it shall lie waste; no one shall pass through it forever and ever.

We are told that the smoke goes up forever and that it will not be quenched day or night — but this is speaking about the temporal destruction of a land, and we are told a few verses later that the wild beasts and other animals will come to live in the land. Clearly this is not picturing a fire that burns its fuel forever and ever, even though the text sounds like this is what it implies at first glance. We can visit the land where Edom used to be today, and we won’t find plumes of smoke or fire there, just desolate desert. This is the backdrop of the passage in Revelation 14: they are utterly destroyed and they have no rest anymore because they are dead and destroyed completely, or an alternative view is that the restlessness is during the outpouring of God’s wrath as it will be unrelenting (“unquenchable”) until it is complete, and then the smoke rises signifying the result of the judgement for all to see.

Christopher Date explains the latter view well in his book, Rethinking Hell: Readings in Evangelical Conditionalism:

The background to Rev 14:11 is to be found in this picture of Sodom’s destruction and to the oracle of Edom’s destruction in Isa 34:10ff. “Isaiah says ‘its smoke will rise forever,’ telling us that Edom’s destruction is not only certain (not quenched) and complete (smoke rising) but also irreversible. The desolation will be unending.” The torment experienced in the presence of the angels and of the Lamb refers to the moment of judgment, not to the eternal state. What continues after their tormenting judgment and destruction is the sign of their extinction — the rising smoke; this is the same picture that is found in Genesis 19 and Isaiah 34.


It is the literary structure of Rev 14:9–11 that provides the explanation of the meaning of the judgment and its elements. The crucial key to understanding phrases or sentences is found by matching them with their corresponding items in the whole structure. The introverted parallelism of Rev 14:9–11 shows us that the final element in the depiction of judgment is the smoke rising after the judgment has been completed, as is the case in Isa 34:9, 10. The climactic element is in the central position in this structure — the tormenting judgment that destroys utterly. The other two elements in the inversion refer to the intense experience of the judgment as it happens; it’s a full strength outpouring of God’s wrath that leaves no rest or break while it is unfolding. We can see that the phrase “no rest, day or night” is logically prior to the rising smoke. The meaning can be seen by observing the corresponding member of the inverted parallelism. “No rest day or night” is another way of saying that God’s wrath is poured out in full strength when the judgment is operating; it is quenchless, unremitting and overwhelming. In modern warfare terms, it is the equivalent of intense, day and night, bombing; there is no break until it obliterates the enemy. The meaning of Rev 14:11 is in harmony with the passage in Isaiah 34 that lies behind it. (pp. 141–142; 145)

To address the second passage (Rev 20:10–15), we need to take a look at how the symbol of torment is used in Revelation, and exactly what gets cast into the Lake of Fire.


The book of Revelation is an apocalyptic book, which is a specific genre of writing, full of symbols and typology, and we are often relying on the angel who is with John to speak up and clarify some points of the vision. Similar to Joseph’s interpretation of Pharaoh’s dream where he helps to unravel the symbolism (Gen 41:26), or in Daniel 7 where the angel explains the meaning of the vision, the angel with John does the same thing.

Revelation 17:15
And he said to me, “The waters that you saw, where the whore is seated, are peoples and multitudes and nations and languages.”

Obviously from this, we don’t say that the peoples and nations are actually water, just like the whore isn’t an actual woman, but a city. It’s representative of something else; of an earthly reality veiled with symbolic, poetic imagery. We must remember that just because Revelation is highly allegorical and symbolic in its nature, that doesn’t mean it isn’t speaking to real and actual events. It’s just not describing them literally.

Let’s stay with the “whore” for a moment, as what happens to her will help us with understanding some of the events in Revelation chapters 14 and 20.

The kings of earth “weep and wail” over her torment, and watch her destruction with fire from a distance:

Revelation 18:9–10
And the kings of the earth, who committed fornication and lived in luxury with her, will weep and wail over her when they see the smoke of her burning; they will stand far off, in fear of her torment, and say, “Alas, alas, the great city, Babylon, the mighty city! For in one hour your judgment has come.”

More judgement is written against this “whore” (or Babylon) and what will become of her:

Revelation 18:21
Then a mighty angel took up a stone like a great millstone and threw it into the sea, saying, “With such violence Babylon the great city will be thrown down, and will be found no more;

Then we see what happens to finalise the judgement in chapter 19:

Revelation 19:1–3
“Hallelujah! Salvation and glory and power to our God, for his judgments are true and just; he has judged the great whore who corrupted the earth with her fornication, and he has avenged on her the blood of his servants.” 

Once more they said, “Hallelujah! The smoke goes up from her forever and ever.”

Once more, we see the “smoke goes up from her forever and ever” imagery, and the harlot is depicted as burning. But this does not represent the eternal torment of a literal, human woman. Instead, the torment of the harlot symbolizes the destruction of what she represents: the “great city” and the depraved culture and society within. If we go to Jeremiah, we will also see where the reference to the millstone comes from in Revelation 18:

Jeremiah 51:63–64
When you finish reading this scroll, tie a stone to it, and throw it into the middle of the Euphrates, and say, ‘Thus shall Babylon sink, to rise no more, because of the disasters that I am bringing on her.’”

The “whore”/Babylon is destroyed and her torment, fire and smoke represents that; it is interpreted for us within the text itself.


Now let’s go back to Revelation 20 and the Lake of Fire.

(v.10) And the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulphur, where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.
(v.14,15) Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire; and anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.

Let’s see what is cast into the lake of fire: the devil, the beast, the false prophet (plus all those who follow them) and, finally, death and Hades. Even if you are a complete futurist and see the beast and the false prophet as representing real, literal people, death and Hades are certainly not people and aren’t tormented forever in the lake of fire; they are destroyed (see 2 Timothy 1:10 and 1 Corinthians 15:26 to confirm this).

Now, personally, I see the beast as representing Rome primarily and historically (as per the visions in Daniel 7 where we get this beast imagery from), but also it could be repetitive of any nation who goes against God; and the false prophet representing false religion, either historically about Judaism — and some say the High Priest, specifically, at the end of the first century — that rejected the Church, or the wider pagan beliefs of the Roman Empire. But again, if we take Revelation as a “template” of what can be a cyclical set of events throughout history, this could refer to any and all other religions which draw people away from the truth of Christ.

With this in mind, not everything going into the Lake of Fire lasts forever, even in the Eternal Conscious Torment (ECT) view, as the objects aren’t necessarily always physical people (like death). What does John call the Lake of Fire, so that we understand what he is witnessing: “the second death”. In that same verse, John juxtaposed the “book of life” with “the second death”, which gives us that stark contrast and helps us to see what exactly the Lake of Fire is:

Revelation 20:14–15
… This is the second death, the lake of fire; and anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire. (emphasis mine)

If you don’t have life, then the only other option is death. And considering at this point in the narrative, we are looking at a scene in the spiritual realm, anyone who is present and human must have already physically died, hence the need for a second death (see also Revelation 21:8).

To Conclude

We saw in my first post that Gehenna, or the unquenchable fire, is said to be the reduction of the wicked to ashes and their total destruction — both body and soul. If, as I have shown, it is possible to interpret Revelation 20 in a way that still works under the conditionalism framework of interpretation, then, apart from keeping Scripture internally consistent, it is also a major blow to ECT as the answer to nearly every Bible verse quoted about the destruction of the wicked is met with some reference to Revelation 20. This is a very feeble and weak branch to stand upon. Typically, the rules of interpreting the more obscure and unique parts of Scripture, is to use the clearer parts to define the less clear, not the other way around! Or shall we take a passage in apocalyptic literature and use it to reinterpret everything else the Bible says about the fate of the wicked in much clearer, less symbolic language?

Agree, disagree? Let me know your thoughts in the comments, and please share this if you found it edifying.

To Be Continued…

That’s all for this one, I hope it has been informative and maybe eye-opening for you. I’m trying not to make these posts too long, but when dealing with this topic, there needs to be an untangling of many presuppositions to properly examine the various images used throughout the Bible before it all comes together.


I originally said that this would be a two part series, but there will be a final Part 3 now, where I’ll look briefly at the Tree of Life motif in reference to eternal life and conditionalism, and summarise these last two posts to bring it all together as a (hopefully) cohesive whole.



Further Reading/Sources

Contribute on Patreon

Enjoying this? Consider contributing regular gifts for this content on Patreon.
* Patreon is a way to join your favorite creator's community and pay them for making the stuff you love. You can simply pay a few pounds per month or per post that a creator makes, and in return receive some perks!

Subscribe to Updates
Order my new book today from Amazon or

Subscribe to:

Have something to say? Leave a comment below.

Leave a comment   Like   Back to Top   Seen 296 times   Liked 0 times

Subscribe to Updates

If you enjoyed this, why not subscribe to free email updates and join over 214 subscribers today!

Order my new book today from Amazon or

Subscribe to Blog updates

Enter your email address to be notified of new posts:

Subscribe to:

Alternatively, you can subscribe via RSS RSS

‹ Return to Blog

All email subscriptions must be confirmed to comply with GDPR.

I've already subscribed / don't show me this again

Recent Posts

The Relationship Between Jesus and Sophia

| 22nd July 2021 | Christology

The Relationship Between Jesus and Sophia

Now you may be wondering about the title, or thinking “who the heck is Sophia??” — well, bear with me, and all will be revealed. It’s not as sinister or weird as it may first appear. I saw a post on my Instagram feed the other day that just got me a little riled up. I’ll admit it, I can be a little short-tempered at times, especially around the subject of Jesus and seeing him/the Christian faith misrepresented to such a degree that it could mislead others down the wrong path. I don’t normally write responses to things like this, but I felt this one deserved it, mainly just to add some clarity to a somewhat confusing topic, and so there’s a place I (or you, if you fancy sharing my posts!) can point people to if this type of ideology is going to spread. Here’s the Instagram post in question, but it’s the caption below it that got to me. I’ll quote the caption below, too, in case the embedded post doesn't work (here’s a direct link too). View this post on Instagram A post shared by Adam Ericksen (@adamericksen)   Jesus had two moms.Their names areMary and Sophia.You’ve heard about Mary, but do you know about Sophia?Sophia is the Greek word for God’s Wisdom.And God’s Wisdom is a Woman. Her name is Sophia.Sophia was there at the beginning of creation. She birthed the world into existence.Deuteronomy 32 says that God gave birth to the people. That was Sophia.Christians began to associate Sophia with the Holy Spirit. The Spirit is Sophia. She is the divine feminine who is the Third Person of the Trinity.Sophia is our divine Mother.God is She who loves you.❤️❤️❤️ — via @adamericksen A lot of the comments under that post seemed to find it quite affirming in some ways, others were confused as they’d never heard this before (and rightly so) but were keen to look into it. There were also a lot of references to a single author, and book, called, She Who Is, by Elizabeth A. Johnson, where this idea seemed to have originated in some form. In fact, the majority of the comments were wanting to explore this idea in more depth. So, I think maybe there’s something to be said there for the lack of female representation in the Church if it garnered this type of response, but I also thought if people are this taken by the idea, I wanted to write something to offer some Biblical and historical views on this “Sophia”, as she isn’t a new concept at all. The caption under the Instagram post sounds nice, but it’s ever so slightly off-kilter that it misrepresents everything. Let’s look at the claims line by line: Jesus had two moms.Their names areMary and Sophia. Well, not much to say here yet, but… nope. You’ve heard about Mary, but do you know about Sophia? Well, yes, I do. Maybe you, dear reader, know as well. But I began to question whether the author of the caption did. Sophia is the Greek word for God’s Wisdom. OK, finally. Getting to some facts and less conjecture. Although I would clarify that “sophia” (σοφία) is simply the Greek word for “wisdom”, not specifically “God’s wisdom” (or a name), per se. It’s a minor point though, I’m just nit-picking now. Sophia was there at the beginning of creation. She birthed the world into existence. Right, so here’s where it gets a little “squiffy”. It’s true that Wisdom, or “Sophia”, was there at the very beginning before anything was created, and that she stood beside God during creation. We can see all of this in the book of Proverbs, and it’s all very interesting. I’m sure you’ll notice parallels with John 1. But was this Sophia a separate entity from who we normally think of as being there in the beginning? Who created everything — the Word or the Holy Spirit? Proverbs 8:22–31The Lord created me at the beginning of his work,the first of his acts of long ago.Ages ago I was set up...

Does Easter Have Pagan Origins?

| 22nd March 2021 | Easter

Does Easter Have Pagan Origins?

Much like any major Christian holiday, there are the usual arguments and accusations about how it’s all just pagan festivities with a “Christian mask”. Easter is no different, and usually gets hit the hardest over its so-called “pagan roots”, or in the month or so preceding it, Lent being some “invention of the Catholic Church”. Table of Contents The Lenten Fast The Easter controversy and why we celebrate it when we do Is the Name “Easter” really the Anglo-Saxon goddess Eostre? Chocolate eggs and bunnies? Concluding Thoughts Further Reading and Sources I like to try and observe Lent, as it is one of the most ancient customs in the Church, which led me to researching its origins, along with the Easter celebration, to see where they have their basis. Unsurprisingly, it turns out that much of the accusations against Easter and Lent as “pagan” are either fabricated or is just misinformation. So let’s examine the different aspects of Easter to see how we got from Passover to resurrection, to little bunnies and chocolate eggs! The Lenten Fast A forty day fast prior to Easter has been a long established practice within the Church dating back to possibly within the first century. This is well established from ancient letters we still have available, such as from Irenaeus in the second century: For some consider themselves bound to fast one day, others two days, others still more. In fact, others fast forty days … And this variety among observers [of the fasts] did not have its origin in our time, but long before in that of our predecessors.–Irenaeus (c.180) Notice here that Irenaeus mentions that this was a practice passed onto them by their “predecessors”, a term often used in conjunction with the Apostles themselves, or those who immediately came after them, putting the origins of this Lenten fast much earlier than when Irenaeus wrote in 180, and also possibly having Apostolic origin. The Easter controversy and why we celebrate it when we do Back in the days of the early church, there arose a controversy around the celebration of Easter (or “pascha” as it was known then). But no, before your imagination runs wild, it wasn’t quite as exciting as it sounds and still had nothing to do with “paganism”. The dispute was over which day to hold the festival! Yep, the controversy really is as mundane as that. In fact, it was one of the issues raised at the council of Nicea to be discussed and hopefully settled, and is officially known as the Quartodeciman (lit. Fourteenth) controversy/dispute. It’s called this due to the issue being over whether the Easter celebration should follow the Jewish pattern of Passover on the 14 Nisan or not and simply follow the days of the week (Friday and Sunday). It became a bigger issue when the not only the Jewish community of believers wanted to follow this method, but when the Gentile Asian communities also claimed that their Quartodeciman practice was of Apostolic origin! It was a disciple of John the Apostle, and bishop of Smyrna, called Polycarp (c.69–c.155) who followed this practice in one of the seven churches of Asia as well as Melito, bishop of Sardis (died c.180). Irenaeus tells us that, in his old age, Polycarp visited the bishop of Rome to discuss this matter with him as the Roman church had diverged from the Quartodeciman custom and celebrated the resurrection according to the day Jesus rose instead: Sunday (the first day of the week). We gain an important glimpse about this whole dispute from Irenaeus though, when he tells us of the meeting between Polycarp and Anicetus: Neither could Anicetus persuade Polycarp not to observe what he had always observed with John the disciple of our Lord, and the other apostles with whom he had associated; neither could Polycarp persuade Anicetus to observe it, as he said that he ought to follow the customs of the presbyters that had preceded him. … And they parted from each...

BOOK REVIEW: Four Views on Hell 2nd edition

| 17th March 2021 | Book Review

BOOK REVIEW: Four Views on Hell 2nd edition

This is a guest post by David Jakubovic. The views are that of the author and don't necessarily reflect the views of That Ancient Faith. A 20 year update of the 1996 book by the same name, this slim volume (211 pages) is a helpful cross-section of current evangelical thought on Final Punishment, sampling Denny Burk on Eternal Conscious Torment (ECT hereafter), John Stackhouse Jr on Conditional immortality (CI hereafter), Robin Parry on Christian Universalism (CU hereafter) and Jerry Walls on (a Protestant) Purgatory. Preston Sprinkle pens both Introduction and Conclusion, plus there are Scripture, Author and Subject indices. The Introduction sets the scene, listing the 3 historically available views along with speculation about post-mortem purgatorial sanctification, before clarifying that it is not the existence of hell that is here in doubt: “They agree that hell exists, but they differ on what this hell is like.” (11) Sprinkle lists verses used by all 4 views, then introduces the academic background of the 4 essayists. He finally issues a substantial challenge to the reader: “You, of course, will probably agree with only one of the following essays and disagree with the other three. But keep in mind: disagreement is not refutation. We must be able to refute the evidence of the views that we disagree with and then provide more compelling biblical evidence for the view that we uphold.” (15) Burk kicks off Chapter One (‘Eternal Conscious Torment’) with a startling parable. He visualizes a man torturing creatures in increasing order of complexity and dignity: first torturing a grasshopper, a frog, a bird, a puppy and finally a human baby. Burk states: “In each of the scenarios above, the ‘sin’ is the same – pulling the legs off. The only difference in each of these scenarios is the one sinned against…The seriousness of the sin is not measured merely by the sin itself (pulling off the legs) but by the value and the worth of the one being sinned against.” (19, italics his) This macabre thought-experiment is of course a gruesome version of Anselm’s ‘Status Principle’, namely that to sin against an infinitely good God merits infinite or eternal punishment. But fellow pro-ECT essayist Walls squashes this analogy: “There is profound disanalogy in the parable that undermines the central point he wants to establish. This resides in the fact that we do not have the power to do anything to God that is remotely analogous to the harm the character in the parable inflicts on helpless creatures ranging from grasshoppers to human infants. Indeed, God is so far above us in power, glory, and moral perfection that we are utterly incapable of harming him.”1 Burk even ventures that ECT “will ultimately become a source of joy and praise for the saints as they witness the infinite goodness and justice of God.” (20) Yet it is grossly incongruous to place ECT side by side with notions of ‘joy’, ‘goodness’ or ‘justice’ as these are universally understood. The very philosophical logic behind the ‘Status Principle’ is itself highly suspect, as Kronen points out when dismantling the ‘Classical Doctrine of Hell’ (CDH): “It is by no means obvious that an offense against an infinite being must be punished by the sorts of torments envisioned by CDH. One might sin more or less gravely against such a being, and in that case it does not seem that just any sin against an infinite being would merit eternal, continuous, and excruciating pain.”2 Spiegel adds that “human guilt is at most maximally great, not infinitely great”3, meaning that human guilt is still finite: “Finite guilt, however great, presumably does not warrant endless punishment in the form of ECT.” (Spiegel, op. cit. 41) He adds that, under the ‘Status Principle’, even the first sin you commit as a child is enough to incur ‘infinite guilt’, but this does not allow for the vast spectrum of p...

What does the word "Catholic" mean?

| 08th March 2021 | Etymology

What does the word "Catholic" mean?

  For many people today, non-Christians and (low church) Christians alike, when they hear the word “Catholic”, certain images spring to mind: the Pope, the rosery, Catholic school, big old churches buildings, choirboys, maybe monks or statues of Mary even; and sadly more recently, sex abuse scandals. But, generally speaking, all of these are actually aspects of Roman Catholicism — a particular branch of Christianity, and not what the word “catholic” truly means as we’ll see when examining how the early church used the word and what the original Greek word means. καθολικός (katholikos) The Greek word where we get the English word “catholic” from is καθολικός (katholikos) meaning “universal”, which comes from the Greek phrase καθόλου (katholou), meaning “on the whole”, “according to the whole” or “in general” (catholicus in Latin). In non-ecclesiastical use, it still retained its root meaning in English in some literature from the 1800s, though that usage has fallen out of common use in modern times. The first Biblical[1] reference to the word is found in Acts 9:31 when speaking about “the church throughout [all] Judea, Galilee, and Samaria…”. The words “throughout” and “all” are καθ (κατά) and ὅλης (ὅλος) respectively in Greek, which together come to form the word καθολικός. The earliest historical use of the word, in the context of the Church, is found in one of the letters of Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans, written around A.D. 107, where he writes: Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. From here on we begin to see that the word “catholic” was used in reference to mean “orthodoxy” (the word “orthodox” means “right belief”) as opposed to the non-orthodox heretics who were then by definition not catholic as they were not ‘according to the whole’ which was, as Jude wrote, “the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 1:3). The Catholic Church, in its original and Apostolic sense, would have meant the entirety of the Body of Christ across the world, i.e., all the believers wherever they may be, rather than it being “universal” in the physical sense that the institution of “church” should be all encompassing (like as an official, global institution that all must attend). The difference may be subtle, but it’s an important one. The development of doctrine about Jesus after Paul’s death, with all its commonalities and unifying features, is seen as an early form of “Catholicism” by modern scholars, which really begins in Ignatius (outside of the New Testament) and continues to grow and spread as time goes on, with the definition becoming more refined. Historical Use of the Term As we saw above, Ignatius was the earliest Christian writer we have who applied the word katholikos to the Church. Some people object to using Ignatius as evidence of this, as some of the letters attributed to him are considered spurious (not authentic), though scholarly opinion on this is fairly universal in which are genuine letters, as neither Eusebius nor Jerome makes any reference to the eight spurious epistles. Justo L. Gonzalez explains in his book, The Story of Christianity: Volume 1: The Early Church to the Reformation, Volume One: The original meaning of Catholic church referred to this episcopal collegiality, as well as with the multiform witness to the gospel in several canonical gospels. … It was the church “according to the whole,” that is, according to the total witness of all the apostles and all the evangelists. The various Gnostic groups were not “Catholic” because they could not claim this broad foundation. … Only the Church Catholic, the church “according to the whole,” could lay claim to the entire apostolic witness. (pp.81,82). ...