Also: Then THEY shall go forth and look on the corpses of
the men who have transgressed against Me for their worm shall not die, and their fire shall not be quenched: and they shall be an abhorrence to all mankind" (Isaiah 66)
Using this non didactic passage to formulate a doctine of hell is a good illustration of a contravention of one of the fundamental principles of hermeneutics which states:
1. We must derive normative theological doctrine from didactic passages that deal with a particular doctrine explicitly.
A. We must never use implicit teaching to contradict explicit teaching.
B. We must never use implications from hortatory or historical passages to contradict explicit teachings from didactic or doctrinal passages.
The passage in Isaiah is not a didactic passage but more in line with typological prophecy. The passage in Mark where Jesus quotes a part of this is didactic. Paul's passages on hell are didactic. The passages in Revelation are didactic. The passage in Daniel is didactic.
That aside and quite ironically, the Isaiah passage which you allude to which has been said to be the "key" to conditionalism by one of conditionalism's own proponents, was itself interpreted to refer to the torments of eternal punishment both in rabbinical sources and in the Jewish apocryphal works like Judith.
But we need not even go that far. Rather we can safely conclude that Isaiah is simply emphasizing the ultimate triumph of God over His enemies and that Jesus when teaching on hell, uses a few phrases Isaiah uses to convey the horrible reality of it. He uses enough of it to get His point across without quoting the entire passage. He leaves out what is impertinent and quotes the pertinent. This coupled with the fact that Jesus speaks of the damned as having a "whole body" with which they are cast into hell with indicates He here is not envisioning some annihilationesque demise, for there would be no point in resurrecting someone with a body if it were just going to be annihilated and cease to be, but rather, and in accordance with the other numerous didactic passages on hell, a state wherein people are living separated from the light and love of God.
But it does not say they will forever be consciously in torment, rather that others will forever have shame and contempt for them.
The Isaiah passage is not a didactic passage on hell and I agree, we cannot conclude from it alone that those in hell suffer eternally.
In addition, it is incorrect to say that the righteous will have shame for the damned. Shame is not something one possesses for someone else, contempt maybe, but not shame. Shame is something that someone posseses for themselves, not someone else.
And it is the shame, contempt and abhorrence that is everlasting not the person.
But if you take the didactic passages on hell which are numerous and interpret Isaiah 66 in light of them instead of vice versa, you will find Jesus and the apostles always referring to persons as experiencing shame and contempt.
How does "everlasting contempt" become "everlasting torment"?
I don't think we have to say that it does. Rather, taking into account that divine revelation is progressive, we would rather say that the didactic passages on hell expound upon the notion of everlasting contempt and bring what Isaiah envisioned into clearer focus.
Upvote
0