Closing Argument: The Good Writer

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, is God a good writer?  

Your answer to that question will answer this one: Is endless torment true?  

Does the Bible teach such a thing? Our question is not, do Christians believe such a thing? We know they do. Our question is not, are there texts in the Bible that could be taken to mean such a thing. We know there are.

But does the Bible actually say that the final fate of unbelievers will be eternal conscious torment? Could such a horrible thing be true? I’m confident that if you have thoughtfully considered the evidence presented, you have more than a little reasonable doubt. 

For many years I accepted and taught that endless torment was true. Content that the Bible is authoritative, and being familiar with certain texts that seemed clear enough, I didn’t entertain any doubt at all.

My closing argument is this: God is a good writer. That’s why I became convinced the Bible does not teach endless torment. If endless torment is true, God could not be a good writer. This is why you must side in favor of ultimate destruction over ongoing agony. God is a good writer. And that’s exactly why endless torment can’t be true. I’ll explain. 

When twenty year old Jim Bridger discovered the Great Salt Lake, he was by himself. On a wager, curious and courageous, he set off through the Bear River Canyon in a rawhide boat. Upon tasting the salty water into which his vessel emptied, Bridger first assumed he was in the ocean, which was actually another five hundred miles away. I could imagine the legendary trailblazer being ridiculed when he claimed there was an inland salt sea so far from the Pacific. Other trappers and traders would eventually see for themselves what they would have found hard to believe from the lone witness of adventurous Jim. 

The reason anyone holds to endless torment to begin with is because they think it is found in the pages of the Bible. Persuaded that “holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost” (2 Peter 1:19-21), and that “all scripture is given by inspiration of God” (2 Timothy 3:16), Bible-believing Christians agree that the sixty-six books composed by forty penmen are indeed one book with one Author. That’s why we call it “the Word of God.”

So is God a good writer? Did the Creator of Language and Author of the Bible use His creation and write His book to clearly communicate? I’m positive He did, and that He did it well, and did not contradict Himself. Christians, obviously, have understood some of His words to mean the wicked will indeed be perpetually tortured, as ghastly as that is. But it should be just as obvious that words like perish, destruction, death, burn up, consume, and devour spell a miserable end, not endless misery.

So how do we reconcile this seeming discrepancy? We do so by being assured that God is indeed a good writer. The case was made at the beginning of this book that the Bible was written to be read, and must be read to be understood. The built-in dictionary defines its own words by usage (context, contrast, comparison). Comprehensive Coherency (what all the relevant texts consistently teach) is the key to knowing for sure the truth of Scripture. All of these principles rely on a good writer.

These are the characteristics of a good writer:  

A good writer carefully communicates so that readers readily understand.  

A good writer thoughtfully chooses words that clearly convey the intended meaning.  

A good writer consistently uses those words so that the whole is in harmony with its parts.  

I’ve tried ever so diligently to be a good writer, and I can appreciate why written projects are called a “work.” Even with such marvelous tools as an online dictionary and “power” thesaurus, it has been time consuming and labor intensive for me to pick just the right word. You could call me, uh, let’s see… no, not that… hmm, close, but no… yes, that’s it… persnickety! I love that word. And I love finding the right word. I strive to be engaging and even entertaining, but nothing pleases me more than to hear that a certain point was “clear” and “persuasive.” 

I fancy myself a good writer, or at least a decent one. Whatever you may think of my position, there’s no mistaking what it is. You may not agree, but you know where I stand. I’ve communicated that clearly enough. The jury is still out on my composition skills, but I am adjuring you to rule in favor of God’s. There is no doubt He is a good writer! As a title of the author of scripture, I will henceforth capitalize the Good Writer, and try to summarize in one chapter the content of the previous forty.  

Jim Bridger knew what he saw, a Great Salt Lake. It was there to see. But that doesn’t mean everyone believed it. I see Conditional Immortality, the Great Life Gift. But no need to take my word for it. You can see it for yourself in the words of the Good Writer. There is no doubt it’s there to see.

The Good Writer employed the unbreakable threefold cord of plain words, clear pictures, and a perfect example to express a definite end. Why would He have done that if endless torment is true? Why would He have written that the wicked will ultimately and utterly perish? Why would He have insisted again and again that the final punishment is destruction? Why would He have said so many times that the fiery indignation to come will burn up, consume, and devour the wicked? He wouldn’t have if He’s a good writer. He is a good writer. Endless torment is not true.

The Good Writer is an expert word artist, with a vast gallery of vivid paintings that picture destruction by fire. Why would He have done that if endless torment is true? Why would He have chosen the most flammable material imaginable like chaff, stubble, tares, thorns, and briers for His illustrations? He could have chosen silver or gold. Why would He have drawn such combustible items in an eternal, everlasting, unquenchable fire? Why would He have always said those objects in that fire will burn up, be consumed, devoured, and turned to ashes? He wouldn’t have if He’s a good writer. He is a good writer. Endless torment is not true.

The Good Writer knew just the right story, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, to use as the perfect example of what will happen at the last judgment. Why would He have done that if endless torment is true? Why would He have selected an account of absolute obliteration so well known to the Hebrews? Why would He have picked an event of extermination in which eternal fire turned the cities to ashes, destroyed all the people as in a moment, and no hands stayed on her? Why would He have specified that this particular occurrence which left Sodom a perpetual desolation is the ideal illustration of what will happen to the wicked? He wouldn’t have if He’s a good writer. He is a good writer. The italicized words are the very words of the Good Writer. Endless torment cannot be true.

The Good Writer was especially emphatic in saying over and over and over again that life- eternal, everlasting, endless life- is only to be found in Christ, and without Him, and without it, you will finally perish and die. He was insistent: eternal life is conditional on believing. He was consistent: eternal life is contrasted to death, perish, and destruction. He was persistent: the lost would be punished with everlasting destruction and die the second death. Why would He have gone to such lengths to express this difference if everyone lives forever? Why would He have done that if endless torment is true? He wouldn’t have. He’s a good writer, and clearly communicated that the ultimate options are everlasting life or perish, eternal life or death, endless life or an end of life, life or no life.  

Champions of ceaseless suffering will object with the contention that the Good Writer said the lost will be eternally tormented. But did He? And where? The Scriptures overrule that objection. The Good Writer never said such a thing.  

Traditionalists only think such a thing because of their absorbed assumptions. The satirical parable of the rich man and Lazarus says nothing about the duration of the final punishment. It is the smoke of the torment of mark-receiving beast worshipers that continues on and on, not the torment itself. Smoke is evidence of consumption, and Sodom, Idumea, and Babylon are express examples of ever ascending smoke testifying to complete destruction. The lake of fire, or being cast into it, is undeniably defined as death. The their of “their worm” and “their fire” irrefutably refers to dead bodies, not undying souls. The weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth unmistakably takes place on the day of judgment, not afterward. “Who among us shall dwell with everlasting burnings? He that walketh righteously” (Isaiah 33:14, 15). Read it for yourself. It’s there to see, and that’s what it says.

I’ve said this before, and I’ll emphasize it now. We were sure we already knew what it meant before we actually read to find out what it said. Creed overpowered read. The engrafted imagery of our presumed ideology overwhelmed what the Good Writer wrote. Apocalyptic pictures and parabolic figures, like ghosts and gods of Greek mythology, superimposed what the preacher said onto God’s words. Isolated phrases and creedal cliches such as “everlasting burnings,” “fire and brimstone” and “undying souls” seared our cerebrums with the endless creed. Wholly smoke!

There is no better example of this phenomenon of clear words being clearly misread than “unquenchable fire.” Here is proof positive of dogma derangement. John the Baptist said Christ “will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire” (Matthew 3:12). How could it be any plainer? Chaff- thin, dry, and fragile- represents the wicked. Such highly incendiary wheat waste could not possibly endure a powerful unquenchable fire? In a fire that can’t be put out, chaff will most certainly burn up. That’s how it is, and that’s what it says. That’s the plain words. That’s the clear picture. And yet endless defenders weirdly insist that fire that can’t be put out is proof positive of people who won’t burn up.

The good news is that once you see it, you can’t unsee it. Like Jim Bridger, after you’ve stood in and tasted of the salty lake, you know it’s there. My rawhide boat ride to Conditional Immortality began when I first realized that “suffering the vengeance of eternal fire” (Jude 1:7) turned Sodom to “ashes” (2 Peter 2:6), and “destroyed them all” (Luke 17:29). It was eternal fire, not eternal Sodom. The very next thing that opened my eyes was this very fact that it is unquenchable fire, not unquenchable chaff. It makes all the difference. 

The Good Writer clearly said eternal fire turned Sodom to ashes and unquenchable fire will burn up chaff, but that doesn’t faze diehard Traditionalists. Like a pet store full of parrots, they still repeat “Unquenchable fire! Unquenchable Fire!” “Eternal fire! Eternal fire!” It’s a very bad case of dogma derangement. It’s wholly smoke!

Dogma derangement causes reasonable people to adamantly assert things the Bible doesn’t say, and deny things it says so plainly. Traditionalists insist the soul is immortal even though the Good Writer said again and again, at least twenty times, that the soul can and will be destroyed and die. Traditionalists say torment is eternal even though the Good Writer persistently said the wicked will utterly perish, burn up, be devoured by fiery indignation, punished with everlasting destruction, and experience the second death. Traditionalists say everyone lives forever though the Good Writer repeatedly said that only believers receive the gift of eternal life, live for ever, never perish and never die, and that unbelievers have not life, have no life, shall lose life, and not see life.  

The Good Writer precisely articulated the divine jurisprudence of the sentence of death, a miserable end to life, not endless life in misery. Why would He have done that if endless torment is true? Why would He have written that the promised consequence in the garden was death, a return to dust, not affliction of the soul? Why would He have specified in the Old Testament that the required propitiation of sacrifices and the severest penalty for transgression was death, not imprisonment or torture? Why would He have elaborated throughout the New Testament that the penalty required of man, paid by Christ, and suffered by the lost is death, not ongoing agony? He wouldn’t have if He’s a good writer. It would have been crazy to have done so if endless torment is true. He is a good writer. Endless torment is not true.

The Good Writer employed the word hell fifty-four times, but not one of those texts express or even imply endless torment. Not a single one. And only one, in the parable of the buried rich man, is it connected to torment at all. The last occurrence of the word is when “death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death” (Revelation 20:14). It’s an odd error that the preacher says “you’ll live forever in heaven or hell,” when hell itself is cast into the lake of fire after giving up its dead. And if endless torment is true, isn’t it even odder that the Good Writer didn’t stress that paramount characteristic of hell, but rather didn’t even allude to it? He would have if He is a good writer. He is a good writer. Endless torment is not true.

The Good Writer used the word Sheol sixty-five times, and not once did it describe a netherworld of conscious pain? Not one time. Why would that be the case if endless torment is true? It wouldn’t! Why would only one of the thirty-one times Sheol is translated “hell” even mention fire, and it’s a consuming fire that devours and destroys (Deuteronomy 32:22-24)? Why would only one of the thirty-four times Sheol is translated “grave” or “pit” mention fire, and it’s a fire that “consumed” Korah’s gang, and “they perished” (Numbers 16:30-35)? Surely you would agree that if torment in hell, especially if infinite, were true, a good writer would have often described it as such among so many references. But He didn’t, not even once. The Good Writer didn’t because it isn’t.

The Good Writer is our good God. Some have asked why I am so motivated about this subject. Think of it. If endless torment is false, and I’m convinced by Scripture that it is, it is the gravest error in the history of Christianity. It has permeated the vast majority of faith families from worldwide denominations to hundreds of diverse sects. Whatever else may distinguish these groups, perpetual pain is one doctrine most hold in common. And if untrue, it is the most heinous vilification of our gracious Father’s merciful character. That’s why I’m so motivated. Our God is not a monster.

He is the Good Writer. Can we not take Him at His word, and His words? “Go and proclaim these words,” He says, “I am merciful, saith the LORD, and I will not keep anger for ever” (Jeremiah 3:12). The Good Writer promises “I will not contend for ever, neither will I be always wroth: for the spirit should fail before me, and the souls which I have made” (Isaiah 57:16).T

his Good Writer is the good God Who “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). And that brings us full circle. Our vessel empties into the Great Life Gift. The noble Bereans, like daring Jim Bridger, searched to see. It’s right there! Do you see it?

The Creator of Language and Author of Scripture didn’t use His creation and write His book to confuse, but to clearly communicate that immortality is conditional upon being in Christ: “that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”

He is a Good Writer. The myth of endless torment is wholly smoke!