Interpretation of Rev. 20:10

[Smoky]

Revelation 20:10 (NRSV)
10 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.

Please give me some of your best interpretations of this verse.

 

[fozzy]

I am assuming you are referring to the last part where they are tormented day and night forever and ever. ECT or eternal conscious torment stems from the idea that the soul is immortal which is unbiblical. The bible teaches that man is mortal and to perpetuate immortality he had to eat from the tree of life which was removed from Adam and Eve after they sinned.

The belief in an immortal soul came to the Jewish mindset thru Egyptian and Babylonian sources and Greek philosophy. God forbade Ancient Israel to dabble into these occult practices such as necromancy or witchcraft or wizardry that supposedly communicated with the dead. In reality they were communicating with devils and demons such as the witch at Endor.

So to get back to the original question, those who experience the 2nd death and lake of fire will be tormented for a set period of time and then will be annihilated. Even the memory of them will perish. God will bring a complete end to sin. Affliction will not rise up a 2nd time.

 

[Smoky]

"So to get back to the original question, those who experience the 2nd death and lake of fire will be tormented for a set period of time and then will be annihilated"

I know, but if "tormented for a set period of time" is what it means, why isn't that what it says. Day and night forever and forever means both continual and endless in english. Do you think this is an incorrect translation. It's in about all of the bible translations.

 

[fozzy]

I have been in this debate many, many times and no one ever seems to win because there are many verses for and against (ECT). What it really boils down to is ones understanding of God and his character of love. Either God will torment people in hell for all eternity or he will torment them for set period of time and then mercifully put an end to their life of sin. Would a God of love burn people in hell forever?

God is just and his punishment for sin will always fit the crime. If someone rejects Christ their entire life of say 70 years how could an eternal punishment even be considered rational? As I said earlier there are just as many verses for as there are against so one needs to step back and look at everything the bible has to say on this and make an unimpassioned decision which is impossible for 99% of all Christians.

 

[Smoky]

God and his punishment for sin will always fit the crime. If someone rejects Christ their entire life of sayis just 70 years how could an eternal punishment even be considered rational? As I said earlier there are just as many verses for as there are against so one needs to step back and look at everything the bible has to say on this and make an unimpassioned decision which is impossible for 99% of all Christians.

I agree with every thing you said, but if Rev. 20:10 seems to contradict what you believe, there must be some explanation or some interpretation to put the matter at rest. I'm not debating it, I'm just seeking a rational interpretation, unless scripture contradicts itself. I don't believe that.

 

[fozzy]

I looked up for ever and ever in my Englishman's concordance and the word is 'aion' and is translated as 'ever' 71 times and 'world' 38 times so there is a broad range of meaning on this. The English word 'eon' is derived from this and means an indefinite or long period of time, age or era. None of which mean for ever and ever without end. We lose alot in translation.

'Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.' Matt 28:20

The word for world here is the same 'aion' as in Rev. 20:10 and Jesus says that it will have an end.

 

[Smoky]

Ok if aion can be translated as a period that can come to an end, what word in greek would be used to refer to endlessness without any doubt or ambiguity? Rev. 4:9 uses the word aion to refer to God Himself living "forever and ever". We wouldn't argue that God lives for just an age.

 

[fozzy]

I like Young's literal translation for some of these aion/eon verses.

And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever. KJV Rev. 20:10
and the Devil, who is leading them astray, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where [are] the beast and the false prophet, and they shall be tormented day and night -- to the ages of the ages. YLT Rev. 20:10

Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen. KJV Matt 28:20
teaching them to observe all, whatever I did command you,) and lo, I am with you all the days -- till the full end of the age. YLT Matt 28:20

Now all these things happened unto them for examples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come. KJV 1 Cor. 10:11
And all these things as types did happen to those persons, and they were written for our admonition, to whom the end of the ages did come, YLT 1 Cor. 10:11

And when those beasts give glory and honour and thanks to him that sat on the throne, who liveth for ever and ever, KJV Rev. 4:9
and when the living creatures do give glory, and honour, and thanks, to Him who is sitting upon the throne, who is living to the ages of the ages, YLT Rev. 4:9

 

[JojotheBeloved]

Disclaimer: I do not know exactly how this verse was originally intended to be interpreted. It is a difficult verse to interpret.

That being said, here are some ideas I have been taught that could help interpret it in a way where the Bible doesn't have to contradict itself and God doesn't have to be a heartless tormentor. I do not claim to know if this theory is absolutely correct, but it's what I've heard that could make sense.

The text in question is written in Greek but by a Jewish man. So although the text is written in the Greek language it may not necessarily completely convey Greek understandings alone. The Jewish influence is also there in context of who the author was and who the original audience was.

Smoky makes a valid point that the Greek word translated as forever and ever is correctly translated in other places to mean eternity without end. From the NET Bible Greek word search I found this definition: "1) for ever, an unbroken age, perpetuity of time, eternity 2) the worlds, universe 3) period of time, age Synonym" It seems that the word does intend to denote eternal or reoccurring action. I don't remember enough of my Greek classes to tell you for sure if it occurs in Rev. 20:10, but I know that there is a verb tense in biblical Greek called the Future Perfect Tense that indicates a future completed occurrence which has ongoing effects. It is used rarely in the New Testament, and I can't tell you if it's the case in this instance, but that could be one helpful thing to know to interpret the passage.

Greek understandings are in this passage as its immediate context mentions death and Hades being thrown into the lake of fire as well. Death is personified in Greek mythology and Hades is the Greek god of the underworld. But John, the author of Revelation, was Jewish. So how did that affect his understandings and his writing in this passage? Something that jumps out at me that seems broken if you were just to apply Greek mythology understandings is John's repetitive mentioning of "second death" for example - "The lake of fire is the second death." Rev. 20:14. Here is what I found when researching Jewish understandings of death.
Every reference I saw for "second death" referred me to belief regarding Gehenna - the Hebrew equivalent to Hades. Gehenna was actually the valley of the son of Hinnom which was geographically located south of Jerusalem. It was historically a place where child sacrifices were made to the god Moloch by way of fire. I have also been taught that this valley was used to burn trash even after the practice of child sacrifice had ceased (although I couldn't find a reference for it). Because of the child sacrifices, the valley was thought to be cursed, and smoke was eternally rising from the location (mythically speaking, it rose from the Gehenna under the earth's crust, but some have said that it actually rose from the trash that was always burning at the location).

These bits of information together have given some cause to come to the conclusion that Rev. 20:10 and the lake of fire which burns forever and ever is comparative to the actual valley of Gehenna in which things are destroyed but the smoke - the consequences or effects of destruction - continues into eternity. Thus, the Devil, the beast, the false prophet, death, and Hades are all destroyed with eternal consequences. This would be in harmony with the SDA view of death in general - that it is an unconsciousness in which the soul ceases to exist, except as a concept of the God who created it, and the body is destroyed. This theory however, doesn't deal with the context of the word "torment".

 

[JojotheBeloved]

Disclaimer: The following is a completely new idea for me that was brought to my mind during my previous Bible study in preparation to write my previous post on this subject. It is only as scholarly accurate as my own personal understandings. Please check it thoroughly yourself before jumping to either agree or disagree. That being said, I have explained it to several people who are close to me and they have told me that it isn't a completely unreasonable idea. So, I submit for your consideration, another possible interpretation for Rev. 20:10.

As far as I understand, the translation and interpretation of the words "forever and ever" in this verse are contingent on their immediate context - as Greek tends to do - especially relating to the word "torment" in the verse and the phrase "second death" mentioned in verses 6 and 14. So I researched these words (unfortunately I only have online tools and e-sword tools at my disposal right now, as all my books on theology and Greek and Hebrew etc. are being stored out of my reach currently). What I found surprised me and excited me. I still have no idea what to do with the word "torment" in verse 10. It doesn't at all mesh well with annihilation theory. But every case where I searched "second death" in Revelation, I was referred to the Jewish idea of Gehenna (a place of the dead that in legend burns, with smoke rising forever and ever, and is cursed). Gehenna would have been a part of Jewish understandings during the time of Jesus and John the Revelator would have been familiar with it.
I read the whole chapter, and especially re-read over and over the last few verses before and after verse 10. It seems to me as though both annihilation theory and a theory of eternal torment for all the wicked could potentially both be incorrect (from this passage and this passage only).

Here's the thought process... read the entire chapter Revelation 20 and follow along with my summaries and points.
Verses 1 & 2 (sum up): an angel captures and binds the Devil for 1,000 years.
Verses 4-6: those given authority to judge, the martyrs, and all those who did not follow the beast - aka the righteous - rise to life and reign with Christ for 1,000 years.
Verses 3 & 7-9: after 1,000 years, the Devil is released and gathers an army of the wicked to attack Christ and the righteous with Him.
Verse 9 (re-emphasized): fire comes down from heaven and consumes all the wicked army.
Verse 10: the Devil is thrown into the lake of fire, where the beast and the false prophet were already thrown, and they will be tormented forever and ever.
Verse 11-13: a court scene is set up. All the dead arise to life and are judged according to what is written in the books - including the book of life - and what they have done. Notice there is no pronouncement of judgment/outcome of judgment mentioned in these verses.
Verse 14: Death (personified) and Hades (Greek lord of the dead or place where the dead are kept) are thrown - remember they are empty of all human souls since in the previous verse all the dead were raised to life for judgment - into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is called the second death - which could be a reference to Gehenna.
Verse 15: Anyone whose name is not found in the book of life is also thrown into the lake of fire.

Some questions that came to me while reading and re-reading this chapter:
If the wicked are completely consumed by fire before the "courtroom" judgment scene takes place, and the righteous are reigning with Christ (and presumably judging with Christ), and all the dead are raised to life, and the book of life is opened and all are judged according to what is in it (and according to Paul, what is in the book of life is what Christ has done; which God judges all sinners by as though they were righteous - for all have sinned and fall short yet all are given the gift of eternal life through Christ); than who is left in this scenario to throw into the lake of fire other than those specifically and intentionally mentioned? i.e. the Devil, the false prophet, the beast, Death, and Hades - in other words all sources of evil, all places of death, all suffering and death, all lords of the dead etc. in every known culture of the ancient Mediterranean at the time of John the Revelator.
What if, God does not deal with sinners in the same way He deals with the source of sin? What if, God does not deal with the deceived in the same way He deals with the deceiver? If there is a place of eternal torment/punishment at all, what would it mean if human souls were not subjected to it? What if only the originator of evil is dealt with in such a manner, and even the most wicked of those deceived - the ones actively attacking Christ and His people - are not subjected to eternal torment/punishment but rather are mercifully destroyed/consumed even before their deeds are laid open before all? Could this portray in pictures how God can be both just/righteous judge and merciful/forgiving savior to all at the end of time? The only evidence I can see in this scenario (in Revelation 20) for any human souls/lives to be thrown into the lake of fire is the "tack-on" feeling sentence in verse 15 saying that anyone who is not written in the book of life is consigned to that fate. However, even that isn't very convincing evidence for me, since who is not written in the book of life other than those who set themselves against Christ, who were already consumed by fire in the previous verses? Could this be a reiteration of what already happened to the wicked in verse 9?

Just thoughts to submit for your consideration.

 

[Ubuntu]

@JojotheBeloved

First of all I'd like to commend you for being willing to put aside your personal preconceptions and ideas when studying the Bible. This is an attitude that will get you far, this is how we become susceptible to the voice of the Spirit.

A few thoughts that may or may not be relevant to your post:

The beast and the fallen prophet (religious/political entities) are cast into the lake of fire when Jesus returns to earth! In other words they are put there 1000 years before the judgment, a long time before the wicked are raised up again. (Rev 19:20) The beast and the fallen prophet are symbols of two large, blasphemous organizations that work against Jesus and his followers before Jesus return to Earth. The language here can be illustrated in the following way: If someone said that Nazi Germany or the Roman Empire “were thrown into hell”, we would understand that such language is a way of talking about the fall and the complete destruction of these empires.

When the Beast is cast into the lake it doesn't mean that any humans end up there, because it isn't fair to be punished before you get the chance to defend yourself in a trial, and the judgment is still far in the future at this point. In other words, these are abstract entities, and when they are thrown into the lake of fire it means that they are completely destroyed, these powers will never again deceive or threaten humans.

Because of this we see that the lake of fire is a symbolic description of a literal reality. Abstract concepts such as “death” and “hades” are thrown into the lake of fire, which means that these things will never occur again.

So, what about the fire and sulfur, the “everlasting torment” of the devil, the beast and the false prophet? Basically we need to understand the Biblical background of such a language.

Edom's streams will be turned into pitch
and her soil into brimstone;
her land will become burning pitch. Night and day it will burn;
its smoke will ascend continually.
Generation after generation it will be a wasteland and no one will ever pass through it again.
- Isaiah 34:9-10

Edom was the infidel neighbor of Israel, and it was prophesied that the nation would be destroyed. This graphic language echoes the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, but it is obviously symbolic. In the Hebrew way of thinking an eternal destruction is very tangible, in fact, Jude talks about Sodom as if the smoke from it still was rising up from the ruins:

“So also Sodom and Gomorrah and the neighboring towns, since they indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire in a way similar to these angels, are now displayed as an example by suffering the punishment of eternal fire.” - Jude 7

So basically, it's not the fire, the sulfur and the suffering that are eternal, it's the result of these things that is eternal.

(I do have one additional insight about this specific bit that I don't think is wise to discuss publicly. PM me if you're interested.)

Now, I'm not completely sure that I've understood your argument correctly, but I don't really think that it's possible to argue that the ungodly will be destroyed before the judgment scene in Rev 20:11-15. First of all, it's not fair if this really was the case. Here on earth the basis of the judicial system is that both sides, the accused and the accuser, get the chance to present their cases before a judge. Would God destroy the wicked without revealing himself, without showing them why they are unfitted for life in the new Jerusalem? Perhaps it would be okay for the redeemed and the Holy angels if he destroyed the ungodly without a judgment, but remember that each intelligent creature is ultimately a child of God. Everything God does is motivated by love, and God would never banish any of his creatures to the second death without letting them understand why he does so.

“For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may be paid back according to what he has done while in the body, whether good or evil.”
- 1 Corinthians 5:10

To sum it up, the lake of fire is a symbol of the second death; the complete and utter destruction of persons and organizations/abstract concepts.

 

[JojotheBeloved]

Ubuntu:
I hear what you're saying, and I understand where you seem to be coming from... Thank you, btw, for your use of textual references. You're one the few I've ever seen who cross-referenced biblical texts in a truly logical and true-to-the-text way. I applaud you on that! That can be difficult to do.

My preconceptions and upbringing creates a tendency for me to agree with your methods, conclusions and applications completely. However, my education in biblical study and study of ancient authors makes me hesitate to come to easy conclusions that are based in my preconceived notions (which is not to say btw that these notions are incorrect, but more just to try to take a step back and evaluate them critically). I wasn't really trying to argue definitively any particular application or conclusion, but more to open questions to consider from the text in question.

As to your premise based in judgment fairness, I have difficulty with that idea altogether and always have. It's true that the bible declares God is just and righteous and that there are many judgment and courtroom metaphors/analogies described in the New Testament as applied to God's acceptance of sinners. But if you make the text apply in all the ways that today's American courts operate the analogy starts to fail on several points. For example, it isn't fair no matter how you spin it for an innocent to take the place of the guilty. It isn't fair, and it doesn't matter that the innocent volunteered. It still isn't fair that the guilty get off the hook. Which I think is why people want so badly for there to be some sort of punishment for the wicked (as is evidenced in our theories of how long the wicked suffer in hell), because they realize in their innermost soul that it isn't fair. A biased judge is not a fair judge, and it's not fair that anyone get what they deserve if not everyone gets what they deserve. And I could continue, but I don't want to get too controversial (as I know from Sabbath School discussions it can get when I point out that the final judgment scenario is not fair no matter how you look at it). But I think God can be just and righteous, and NOT fair. I honestly think fairness is overrated.

Anyway, the point I'm trying to make is that such a premise seems to me to come more from our modern notions of what is or is not fair and acceptable in a court of law rather than what the ancient Scriptural text may be describing (and I fully admit I may be wrong, because I also am only human and everyone has to understand things from some experiential point of reference).

 

[Ubuntu]

@JojotheBeloved

Hi again, and sorry for the delay! I started writing a reply about three weeks ago, but sometimes it's a good idea to let our brains rest for a while before we revisit a difficult topic!

Okay, I understand that you wanted to discuss your ideas in an informal setting, and of course that's perfectly fine! That's how we learn and increase our knowledge, and we all need to be willing to examine the foundations of our faith. I also definitively agree with you that we should aim to understand the text in its cultural and literary context, and it's no good idea to read ancient texts through the lens of our modern ideas.

So, please regard the following as my contribution to this “brainstorming session”...

About fairness / the character of God / the courtroom analogy... Well, this is far from the only approach to this issue, (there's another much more direct way of explaining all of this) but I do nevertheless think this approach is valid and biblically sound, even if it is an indirect approach.

Anyways, I'll try to expand a little on this way of thinking, and I'll try to provide further evidence that the “justice approach” isn't merely our modern way of thinking superimposed onto the biblical text.

As you say, yes, the fairness and justice of God is in fact a reoccurring theme in the Bible, and Scripture abounds with stories about judgment.

To be honest I cannot imagine something more thoroughly biblical and genuinely ancient than the judgment theme: Man committed a crime, was approached by God, got the chance to explain his actions, was judged and sent into exile. It's all there in Genesis chapter three, the first trial ever recorded in the history of mankind... And then there's the “classic” twist: Adam had expected immediate punishment, death, but God exceeded his expectations; they were given a second chance and the plan of salvation was revealed... In other words I'd argue that the very concept of judgment isn't a human invention, but is in fact divine, and it's essential to the plan of salvation. It's not just modern people who are preoccupied with courtrooms and trials!

Now, the point in my previous post wasn't primarily that banishing people to death while not being present is wrong from a formal judicial point of view, as much as that it goes against what we know about the character of God. We have to ask ourselves what the purpose of this judgment scene is... Who is it for? First of all we should remember that there was another judgment preceding this scene, the saints have already spent 1000 years in a judicial process, the dead have already been judged before the courtroom scene in 20:11-15. (See Rev 11:18, 20:4). In other words, we can presume that at this point it is known why each and every one of the ungodly are unfitted for heaven. So, the purpose of this final courtroom scene is something different than establishing the guilt of the wicked, that has already been done during the 1000 years.

So, as I argued in my previous post I think that the final judgment scene is intended first and foremost (but not only) for the benefit of the wicked themselves. The ultimate reason for this is because God hates delusion with an intense passion. He hates it so much that he will remove all lies and all excuses from the minds of the wicked before they are put to rest, and this is what the final judgment scene is about:

The gospels, the book of Daniel and Revelation (Matt 26:64, Dan 12:2, Rev 1:7) itself is clear about the fact that God will resurrect the ones that were involved in the trial and crucifixion of Christ so that they will get a chance to witness the second coming of Jesus.

Why does God do this? These people are surely lost, so why did he disturb their sleep in order to let them witness his second coming? I think this is motivated by his love as well as his dislike of deception and darkness. These deluded souls wouldn't believe that Jesus was the Messiah, they were blinded by their sins and their preconceptions, their cherished idea that the Messiah would come as a great and mighty earthly conqueror. Even if these people are doomed, God is willing to raise them up from death in order to remove their misconceptions. Even if they still will refuse to love and worship Christ, their excuses will be taken away once and for all. So not only is God both loving and fair, in fact his fairness far exceeds our expectations. He is himself more than willing to go that extra mile, even for people who are lost.

- - -

About whether or not the gospel is fair, well, I understand what you're saying. It's not fair that the innocent had to die in place of the guilty, we agree about this! But this only got negative consequences for the Son of God; he bore the injustice himself. If we were bought free by the blood of fellow men, then I think the Devil rightly could protest, because then the “injustice of salvation” would have had negative consequences for other created beings. But since Jesus is the only one treated unfairly (in a negative way), the “unfairness” of what he experienced is mitigated by the fact a) that he is the infinite God who created us, b) that he did so out of a free will. As sinners we surely don't deserve salvation, this is something that demonstrates the love of God.

“For while we were still helpless, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. (For rarely will anyone die for a righteous person, though for a good person perhaps someone might possibly dare to die.) But God demonstrates his own love for us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.” - Romans 5:6-8

Just some thoughts for your consideration...

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

So, as I argued in my previous post I think that the final judgment scene is intended first and foremost (but not only) for the benefit of the wicked themselves. The ultimate reason for this is because God hates delusion with an intense passion. He hates it so much that he will remove all lies and all excuses from the minds of the wicked before they are put to rest, and this is what the final judgment scene is about:

That is true Divine Justice...

Brother, I am glad you clarified your previous assertion that the judgement wasn't until after the 1000 years. We know that when Christ comes for His people, that all have been judged, otherwise, how would He know who to take.

 

[JojotheBeloved]

Ubuntu: I hear ya. You make some good points.
I agree completely that the themes of judgment and God's justice are very biblical and not of human invention. Those are divine realities. However, to clarify, I make a personal distinction between justice and fairness. I do not think they mean the same thing. Therefore, in my own personal bible study and theology about the character of God I do not believe God is fair. I do believe God is just, though. But that's my personal opinion and understanding. I don't expect others to necessarily think the same way.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

Therefore, in my own personal bible study and theology about the character of God I do not believe God is fair. I do believe God is just, though. But that's my personal opinion and understanding. I don't expect others to necessarily think the same way.

It's poignant then that there is no mention of the word in the Bible in association with God's character of Justice.

To me, justice demands tough choices involving two diametrically opposed ideals and can only be trusted to One who is perfect in truth. Destroying all traces of sin by completely annihilating His fallen creation in the second death, is referred to as God's strange work... a side of Infinite Love that has never been until that time.

Our modern day definition and concept of fairness is an unrealistic concept that every one must win. It is of the devil.... communism is built on the concept of fairness. Fairness excludes individual responsibility and blurs light with darkness.

 

[JojotheBeloved]

It's poignant then that there is no mention of the word in the Bible in association with God's character of Justice...
Our modern day definition and concept of fairness is an unrealistic concept that every one must win. It is of the devil.... communism is built on the concept of fairness. Fairness excludes individual responsibility and blurs light with darkness.

Although I wouldn't go quite as far as you do, yes, that's basically the distinction that I make as well. The Bible says God is just and righteous - basically, He is always right and He always does right as is guided by His character of perfect Love. But our modern understanding of "fair" is that everyone gets the same treatment and every similar action requires the same consequence; or in the case of misbehavior, everyone deserves the same punishment. As you said, everyone must win or lose together and the same. I don't see that in the Bible's depiction of how God deals with Sin. I see God declaring sinners as though they were righteous because of Christ, and sinners not getting what they deserve. I see wickedness dealt with, as it is destroyed and completely gotten rid of, never more to harm God's children (the sinners saved). But even in dealing with the wicked portion of humanity who will not repent and who would never be able to accept or tolerate the Love of God, or even be in His presence (those who join Satan to come against Christ in the end), God does not punish them as they deserve either but fire devours them in an instant. In a sense, they are also shown mercy. So, to me, God deals with Sin as He must, but doesn't make a blanket judgment for all the same - as would be fair. He deals with Sin - as in the fallen condition of the world. He deals with the perpetrator of Sin - Satan and his allies. He deals with those who are utterly deceived and will not repent - the wicked of humanity at the end. And He deals with the sinners who desire to be saved - those who are raised and reign with Christ. But He deals with each differently, according to what is right by Love. That's not fair at all, to me, but it is righteous and it is a judgment process.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

 

[Ubuntu]

It's poignant then that there is no mention of the word in the Bible in association with God's character of Justice.

To me, justice demands tough choices involving two diametrically opposed ideals and can only be trusted to One who is perfect in truth. Destroying all traces of sin by completely annihilating His fallen creation in the second death, is referred to as God's strange work... a side of Infinite Love that has never been until that time.

Our modern day definition and concept of fairness is an unrealistic concept that every one must win. It is of the devil.... communism is built on the concept of fairness. Fairness excludes individual responsibility and blurs light with darkness.

A discussion about semantics is seldom fruitful, so please take the following with a grain of salt... And I hope we all agree that this is a little off-topic, it's not really that relevant to the issue at hand.

Anyways, okay, so you're saying that “fair” in everyday English has a meaning of “equality” rather than “right” or “just”? (English isn't my mother tongue, so I don't necessarily pick up such nuances...)

You mentioned that you don't find "fair" in your Bible, and I guess it's true that you don't find it in the KJV and bibles that follow the KJV tradition closely. (Other than instances where "fair" means "beautiful".) However, a modern, bleeding edge translation such as NET (2005) uses “fair” and “just” interchangeably. A few examples:

“As for the Rock, his work is perfect,
for all his ways are just.
He is a reliable God who is never unjust, he is fair and upright.”
- Deut 32:4

“The LORD's precepts are fair
and make one joyful.” - Psalms 19:8

“He judges the world fairly;
he makes just legal decisions for the nations.” - Psalms 9:8

“The LORD is merciful and fair;
our God is compassionate.” - Psalms 116:5

“You are just, O LORD,
and your judgments are fair.” - Psalms 119:137