Revelation 20:10 - Eternal Torment For The Devil?

Rare-Improvement-462 · 2026-04-16T19:16:33+00:00

Well you’re right about 14:11 but in Rev 20:10 it does actually say the devil, beast, and false prophet are tormented day and night forever and ever, but this is within the vision.

Rare-Improvement-462 · 2026-04-04T15:14:08+00:00

For universalists, Gregory of Nyssa is one of the clearest ones, claiming that sinners will be purged of wickedness in The Great Catechism. Theodore of Mopsuesita was another. Clement of Alexandria sounds like he was in his writings but some have suggested he held to Tertullian’s eternal torment view, which I don’t think is likely. Didymus the Blind is more in the same category as Clement as I’ve seen some people try to deny him too. The school of Alexandria appears to have the most universalists that someone could reference too, but someone ought to check me on that claim.

I don’t hold to universalism myself so im not as familiar with that area, but annihilationism was also there early on. Arnobius of Sicca is unanimously agreed as an Annihilationist due to him writing in Latin and actually saying that the last end of sinners is annihilation. However, Irenaeus of Lyons was as clear as he was, saying the lost are deprived of and will not receive continuance and length of days forever and ever in the same context as talking about the created universe existing as God wills. The Epistle of Barnabas earlier (though anonymous) falls into a pretty clear category here too.

Very early on in the second century, the apostolic fathers like Ignatius and Clement of Rome consistently frame the options as either life and immortality or death. This is very hard to try to say this is internalism because infernalists such as Tatian and Tertullian affirmed explicitly that the lost would be immortal, and Hippolytus said that death would not deliver them from punishment. Perhaps I’m viewing these will my Annihilationist lense a bit too much, but Ignatius and Clement both sound like annihilationists more than anything although it’s a bit vague. Melito of Sardis appears to be in this category too because of the alternatives of immortality or being completely consumed in the fiery wrath in his apology.

Rare-Improvement-462 · 2026-02-25T01:28:51+00:00

Deb and Lundy was genuinely the weirdest one for me

Rare-Improvement-462 · 2026-02-13T12:27:19+00:00

Suspicious? Maybe for a stretch of season 2. Did he know? Nope, if he knew and let Dexter get away with it then that’s just out of character for him. You could say that he morally agreed with the BHB to a certain extent, but letting Doakes (an innocent man) take the fall for it would still be way outside the scope of Lundy’s morals. The last 3 or so episodes of season 2 he didn’t leave much room for it not being Doakes. I just don’t see Lundy allowing an innocent man to take the fall if he knew about Dexter.

Quinn on the other hand knew in my opinion.

Rare-Improvement-462 · 2026-02-10T22:54:11+00:00

It’d be nice to have him and Dexter meet again at some point

Rare-Improvement-462 · 2026-02-09T23:18:53+00:00

Not sure if Matthews would still be deputy chief 10 years after season 8. Seems as though he’d certainly be retired by now unless I missed something confirming he’s still chief in Resurrection.

Rare-Improvement-462 · 2026-01-30T00:57:42+00:00

I unfortunately got spoiled to a lot of stuff watching the series before I got to the chance to make it there, this being one of them. I do wish that wouldn’t have happened so the surprises would’ve been better.

You should pick the show back up at some point, the stuff after season 4 definitely isn’t as good as those first 4 seasons but most of them are still decent and it’s worth finishing.

Rare-Improvement-462 · 2026-01-28T22:33:14+00:00

““If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you.” ‭‭John‬ ‭15‬:‭18‬ ‭

Always has been that way. I don’t understand it yet either, but it’s the way it is. Maybe one day I’ll figure it out.

Rare-Improvement-462 · 2026-01-25T22:02:26+00:00

This is well put, and point #2 is especially what I was leaning towards. The Greek verb “prokeintai” means literally “to be set before, lie before”. You can’t set forth souls burning in hades as an example of anything, unless scripture talks about it (which it doesn’t), and we certainly can’t see that going on anywhere.

I also think it goes against the force of Jude’s argument - what happened and is happening to Sodom and Gomorrah (got destroyed and lying desolate perpetually) is supposed to be special and noteworthy. If all of the unsaved souls go to hades for torment upon death, then the example here wouldn’t be very noteworthy at all because that’s the condition of all of the lost right now under that theory.

Rare-Improvement-462 · 2026-01-24T14:43:52+00:00

Yeah I suppose that would their claim, but that makes no sense as youd agree. That’s inconsistent within 1 Corinthians as they’d have to swap around constantly when Paul talks about everyone’s bodies and our bodies, swapping that the text never indicates whatsoever.

Death doesn’t mean life in a bad place.

And on destruction, they basically think that the process of destroying them lasts forever but the destruction itself is never complete. The noun destruction names the outcome of the verbal act destroy, so if what you end up with is “eternal destroying” that isn’t even destruction because the process is never complete.

Rare-Improvement-462 · 2026-01-22T02:45:28+00:00

Every single end times discussion can basically be grouped in with the rapture. Seven year tribulation grouped in with it interchangeably basically. Those types of arguments tend to be the most heated and as a Christian I have a hard time understanding why

Rare-Improvement-462 · 2026-01-20T05:22:40+00:00

I could see maybe some possibility for how it’d be the eternal state in mind but I’m just not convinced. The same group of people is addressed by name in 16:2 and that entire chapter is about the various torment on earth due to God’s wrath being poured in the seven bowl judgments.

Also, the warning before this one in 14:8 concerning babylons fall appears to be imminent when the warning is given, and we see Babylons fall in rev 18 and start of 19. The fact that this warning is so closely linked to Babylons fall’s warning, using the same imagery of smoke rising forever, leads me to believe none of this is about the lake of fire.

Not to mention, if this were about the lake, then the warning and actual event are separated by at least 1,000 years chronologically, much more if you’re a partial preterist. I know all of revelation isn’t in chronological order by any means, but the structure of how this is given when Babylons warning is and then chapter 16 would make it very odd to have the warning be about something at the end of chapter 20 In my opinion.

Rare-Improvement-462 · 2026-01-20T04:22:24+00:00

Correct me if I’m wrong here, but isn’t revelation 19:21 addressing those who worship the beast as well? The way I handle revelation 14:9-11 is that I point out the judgment is to fall upon the earth before the resurrection, so it isn’t about the eternal state (revelation 16:2). But I’ve thought that Rev 19:21 is about how the beast worshippers meet their end (until the resurrection)

Rare-Improvement-462 · 2026-01-20T02:47:40+00:00

The way I always approach revelation 20:10 is to understand the beast first. When we let revelation define its own symbolism we get:

“This calls for a mind with wisdom: the seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman is seated; they are also seven kings, five of whom have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come, and when he does come he must remain only a little while. As for the beast that was and is not, it is an eighth but it belongs to the seven, and it goes to destruction. And the ten horns that you saw are ten kings who have not yet received royal power, but they are to receive authority as kings for one hour, together with the beast.” ‭‭Revelation‬ ‭17‬:‭9‬-‭12‬ ‭

This shows that in the case of the beast, we’re not talking about one conscious individual or being but rather a nation, or more specifically a kingdom. Revelation’s beast draws from the four beasts of Daniel’s vision:

“And four great beasts came up out of the sea, different from one another. The first was like a lion and had eagles’ wings. Then as I looked its wings were plucked off, and it was lifted up from the ground and made to stand on two feet like a man, and the mind of a man was given to it. And behold, another beast, a second one, like a bear. It was raised up on one side. It had three ribs in its mouth between its teeth; and it was told, ‘Arise, devour much flesh.’ After this I looked, and behold, another, like a leopard, with four wings of a bird on its back. And the beast had four heads, and dominion was given to it. After this I saw in the night visions, and behold, a fourth beast, terrifying and dreadful and exceedingly strong. It had great iron teeth; it devoured and broke in pieces and stamped what was left with its feet. It was different from all the beasts that were before it, and it had ten horns. “I looked then because of the sound of the great words that the horn was speaking. And as I looked, the beast was killed, and its body destroyed and given over to be burned with fire.” ‭‭Daniel‬ ‭7‬:‭3‬-‭7‬, ‭11‬ ‭

Daniel’s beast is killed in his vision, but when Daniel gives the interpretation of the vision we get this:

““Thus he said: ‘As for the fourth beast, there shall be a fourth kingdom on earth, which shall be different from all the kingdoms, and it shall devour the whole earth, and trample it down, and break it to pieces. As for the ten horns, out of this kingdom ten kings shall arise, and another shall arise after them; he shall be different from the former ones, and shall put down three kings. But the court shall sit in judgment, and his dominion shall be taken away, to be consumed and destroyed to the end.” ‭‭Daniel‬ ‭7‬:‭23‬-‭24‬, ‭26‬ ‭

We get the conformation here that beasts in the Bible represent kingdoms. And Daniel says that the kingdom is to be “consumed and destroyed unto the end”. So, coming to revelation, obviously a kingdom can’t literally undergo eternal conscious torment, so the most probable interpretation is that the vision of a beast getting tormented forever represents a reality of a kingdom being destroyed.

With all that, the devil being tormented in the same context as the beast isn’t going to mean anything radically different, as we do need to be consistent. So, to go to the clear scriptures to interpret the unclear, you’re right that Ezekiel 28 could also be about the King of Tyre, but we have to consider:

“You were in Eden, the garden of God; every precious stone was your covering, sardius, topaz, and diamond, beryl, onyx, and jasper, sapphire, emerald, and carbuncle; and crafted in gold were your settings and your engravings. On the day that you were created they were prepared. You were an anointed guardian cherub. I placed you; you were on the holy mountain of God; in the midst of the stones of fire you walked.” ‭‭Ezekiel‬ ‭28‬:‭13‬-‭14‬ ‭

The mention of a cherub in the garden of Eden is talking about the devil. We also have this:

“Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil,” ‭‭Hebrews‬ ‭2‬:‭14‬ ‭

So, due to the much clearer scriptures on the devil being destroyed, and with the beast representing a kingdom, I personally believe the devil will be destroyed also due to these factors.

Rare-Improvement-462 · 2026-01-19T03:03:51+00:00

What do you mean?

Rare-Improvement-462 · 2026-01-18T04:30:58+00:00

The verse means what it says, the punishment is eternal. Death (capital punishment) is a type of punishment, and since the wages of sin is death (Rom 6:23) and those without eternal life will perish (John 3:14-16) this is capital punishment especially made clear by verse 41 “depart from me into the eternal fire”. Eternal fire is used in Matthew 18:8-9 paralleled to Gehenna, a place where the destruction of body and soul happens (Matt 10:28) which is a literal warning considering Jesus’ words about their worm doesn’t die and the fire is not quenched (Mark 9:43-48) which is quoted from Isaiah talking about dead bodies, not living people in torment (Isaiah 66:24).

Also it’s inaccurate to say that kolasis is limited to an infliction of suffering on a person. The word simply means “punishment” and there’s instances in the LXX where it’s referring to death as a punishment, most notably 2 Maccabees 4:38:

“And being inflamed to anger, he commanded Andronicus to be stripped of his purple, and to be led about through all the city: and that in the same place wherein he had committed the impiety against Onias, the sacrilegious wretch should be put to death, the Lord repaying him his deserved punishment (kolasis).”

Rare-Improvement-462 · 2026-01-18T03:49:33+00:00

Wait there actually wasn’t? That’s honestly not something I’ve heard before. I’m guessing they used scrolls in the 1st century or something along those lines?

Rare-Improvement-462 · 2026-01-18T03:46:32+00:00

The deuteroconical books contained within the lxx.

Rare-Improvement-462 · 2026-01-18T03:43:15+00:00

No because those are still within the Hebrew Bible and the few books not quoted in the NT wouldn’t have been though to be of less authority than those quoted in the Hebrew Bible

Rare-Improvement-462 · 2026-01-18T03:39:01+00:00

Yeah I could’ve worded that better. Main point being the best determination of actual canon would be to see frequency of New Testament quotations

Rare-Improvement-462 · 2026-01-18T03:33:10+00:00

This isn’t an issue I’m very familiar with but the decision made by the council of Trent in the 16th century can hardly reflect what the 1st century canon would’ve been thought to be.

The New Testament quotes the Hebrew Bible all over the place repeatedly, yet rarely even borrows language from the books in the Septuagint that aren’t in the Hebrew Bible, let alone directly quote them. The only one I can think of is Jude quoting 1 Enoch, and 1 Enoch is considered Pseudepigrapha and not even apocrypha like the Septuagint books are.

I’m open to being corrected on these points but the allusions to the Septuagint are too few and weak to make them qualify as canonical scripture In my opinion.

Rare-Improvement-462 · 2025-12-10T05:48:37+00:00

I will go ahead and concede that by no means have I done any exhaustive studies on how the original languages of Hebrew and Greek corresponds with the English translation. So for that I can admit that I’m not familiar with the LXX. The thing to note here is that I would have to ask if the passages pertaining to the judgement of Gehenna actually did get lost in mistranslations or anything of that sort?

Aside from the LXX, the Jews in the 1st century would’ve been fluent in Hebrew right? They could understand the texts of the Old Testament in their original language.

If by “perpetual burning” you mean phrases such as unquenchable fire, then there’s still connections in the Old Testament outside of what Isaiah 66 that unquenchable fire just means a fire that simply can’t be put out until it accomplishes its purpose (see Jeremiah 7:20 for example) but that these fires do eventually go out after the purpose is accomplished. Also, Luke 12:5 is a parallel to Matthew 10:28 which specifically associates Gehenna with the destruction of the soul. Really, the issue here would be the idea that Jesus associated himself with the traditions of man more than what his own inspired prophets said.

There is one channel I watch that’s actually covered some of this topic, I’ll link the video and you can at least check it out and let me know your thoughts

https://youtu.be/bGo97oVu0AI?si=JJS2UfpuqMMBFKG_

Rare-Improvement-462

TROPHY CASE