How did we get here?
If the doctrine of eternal torment has such little support from Scripture, then why have so many people believed in the doctrine of eternal torment for so long? How did we get here?
First, I would like to point out that the question is only partially relevant. If the Bible teaches something clearly, then we are bound to embrace it, regardless of what others before us have believed. However, we should also treat tradition with respect and give sufficient attention to those that have studied and sought God before us. So, understanding the history of the issue becomes important.
The early fathers of the church had various views regarding the eternal fate of unbelievers. From their writings, it appears that some believed in eternal torment, some believed in annihilation, and some believed in the universal repentance of all men. There was no consensus on this topic. It wasn't until sometime after the 5th century that the belief in eternal torment came to be regarded as the traditional position of the church. This was largely due to the writing of St. Augustine, who is considered by many to be the most influential theologian of Christianity.
Why did St. Augustine promote this doctrine? The first critical piece to realize is that Saint Augustine had deeply embraced the teaching of Plato prior to becoming a Christian. One very crucial component of Plato's teaching was that the human soul was inherently immortal and could not be destroyed. Saint Augustine clung to this belief throughout his life, even after he became a Christian. In fact, he even wrote a treatise on the subject entitled On the Immortality of the Soul.
Given his deeply held conviction that the human soul was indestructible, what could he conclude after reading in the Bible that men were to be thrown into the lake of fire? No other conclusion is possible other than eternal torment. The logic behind this conclusion is undeniable, but that logic rests squarely upon the preconceived idea that the human soul is intrinsically immortal and cannot be destroyed. Is that an accurate position?
I think not. Many have written at length to demonstrate that the Bible teaches just the opposite - that human beings are not intrinsically immortal. I will not address that topic in detail, but will present this passage from Genesis:
From this passage, we can see that man was not created immortal. God took significant measures to prevent him from eating from the tree of life and becoming immortal. The passage explicitly states that God did not want man to live forever in his sinful state. (A second conclusion, which is extends beyond the question of immortality, is that God clearly expressed his desire to prevent man from living forever in a state of sin. To me, this passage states clearly that God did not want to allow that very condition which we describe as eternal torment.)
The other thing to keep in mind is that Saint Augustine read the Vetus Latina, the 'Old Latin' translation of Scripture. He relied upon a translation of Scripture that was already once removed from the original text. Not only that, but by his own admission he did not have a solid grasp of the Greek language. His first teacher in Greek was a brutal man who physically abused his students, so Augustine rebelled by vowing to never learn Greek. He later gained some knowledge of Greek, but never mastered it.
St. Augustine was held in high regard by the Catholic Church. They adopted his belief in eternal torment and established that belief as official church doctrine. From that point forward, the belief was largely unchallenged due to great emphasis placed upon tradition by the Catholic Church. For the 1100 years following the writings St. Augustine, the common people were generally uneducated and unable to read the Scriptures. Few copies of those Scriptures were available, and some priests of the church discouraged their congregations from investigating Scripture on their own. For these reasons, it is easy to understand how this doctrine might have remained embedded in the church and unchanged for hundreds of years.
I will add one other thought. In essentially every institution of man, there are those who are willing to use authority for their own gain. The doctrine of eternal torment gave those in authority a very heavy 'stick' which could be used to keep their followers in line. I am sure many priest did and do believe in eternal torment out of an honest desire to embrace the truth, but I also have little doubt that many others were only too glad to use this doctrine as means to inspire fear and to assert their dominance over their charges.
It wasn't until the Reformation that people once again started to reconsider the possibility that common men should have access to the Bible. From this point forward, tradition began to become less important in the church and Scripture became more important. But in the regards to the doctrine of eternal torment, the ideas were so deeply embedded that the changes were slow to come.
Eventually, thorough investigation of Scripture began to bring the topic to light. The traditional doctrine of eternal torment has been challenged with increasing vigor over the past 20 years and alternative doctrines have been gaining increasing levels of support.
This is not an exhaustive study by any means, but should give you some idea of why this doctrine of eternal torment was embedded in the church for so long and so deeply. Don't allow this tradition to prevent you from examining the Bible closely and from making your best effort to determine what the writers of Scripture, and God himself, were truly trying to express.
First, I would like to point out that the question is only partially relevant. If the Bible teaches something clearly, then we are bound to embrace it, regardless of what others before us have believed. However, we should also treat tradition with respect and give sufficient attention to those that have studied and sought God before us. So, understanding the history of the issue becomes important.
The early fathers of the church had various views regarding the eternal fate of unbelievers. From their writings, it appears that some believed in eternal torment, some believed in annihilation, and some believed in the universal repentance of all men. There was no consensus on this topic. It wasn't until sometime after the 5th century that the belief in eternal torment came to be regarded as the traditional position of the church. This was largely due to the writing of St. Augustine, who is considered by many to be the most influential theologian of Christianity.
Why did St. Augustine promote this doctrine? The first critical piece to realize is that Saint Augustine had deeply embraced the teaching of Plato prior to becoming a Christian. One very crucial component of Plato's teaching was that the human soul was inherently immortal and could not be destroyed. Saint Augustine clung to this belief throughout his life, even after he became a Christian. In fact, he even wrote a treatise on the subject entitled On the Immortality of the Soul.
Given his deeply held conviction that the human soul was indestructible, what could he conclude after reading in the Bible that men were to be thrown into the lake of fire? No other conclusion is possible other than eternal torment. The logic behind this conclusion is undeniable, but that logic rests squarely upon the preconceived idea that the human soul is intrinsically immortal and cannot be destroyed. Is that an accurate position?
I think not. Many have written at length to demonstrate that the Bible teaches just the opposite - that human beings are not intrinsically immortal. I will not address that topic in detail, but will present this passage from Genesis:
- Gen 3:22-24 Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever" therefore the LORD God sent him out from the garden of Eden, to cultivate the ground from which he was taken.So He drove the man out; and at the east of the garden of Eden He stationed the cherubim and the flaming sword which turned every direction to guard the way to the tree of life.
From this passage, we can see that man was not created immortal. God took significant measures to prevent him from eating from the tree of life and becoming immortal. The passage explicitly states that God did not want man to live forever in his sinful state. (A second conclusion, which is extends beyond the question of immortality, is that God clearly expressed his desire to prevent man from living forever in a state of sin. To me, this passage states clearly that God did not want to allow that very condition which we describe as eternal torment.)
The other thing to keep in mind is that Saint Augustine read the Vetus Latina, the 'Old Latin' translation of Scripture. He relied upon a translation of Scripture that was already once removed from the original text. Not only that, but by his own admission he did not have a solid grasp of the Greek language. His first teacher in Greek was a brutal man who physically abused his students, so Augustine rebelled by vowing to never learn Greek. He later gained some knowledge of Greek, but never mastered it.
St. Augustine was held in high regard by the Catholic Church. They adopted his belief in eternal torment and established that belief as official church doctrine. From that point forward, the belief was largely unchallenged due to great emphasis placed upon tradition by the Catholic Church. For the 1100 years following the writings St. Augustine, the common people were generally uneducated and unable to read the Scriptures. Few copies of those Scriptures were available, and some priests of the church discouraged their congregations from investigating Scripture on their own. For these reasons, it is easy to understand how this doctrine might have remained embedded in the church and unchanged for hundreds of years.
I will add one other thought. In essentially every institution of man, there are those who are willing to use authority for their own gain. The doctrine of eternal torment gave those in authority a very heavy 'stick' which could be used to keep their followers in line. I am sure many priest did and do believe in eternal torment out of an honest desire to embrace the truth, but I also have little doubt that many others were only too glad to use this doctrine as means to inspire fear and to assert their dominance over their charges.
It wasn't until the Reformation that people once again started to reconsider the possibility that common men should have access to the Bible. From this point forward, tradition began to become less important in the church and Scripture became more important. But in the regards to the doctrine of eternal torment, the ideas were so deeply embedded that the changes were slow to come.
Eventually, thorough investigation of Scripture began to bring the topic to light. The traditional doctrine of eternal torment has been challenged with increasing vigor over the past 20 years and alternative doctrines have been gaining increasing levels of support.
This is not an exhaustive study by any means, but should give you some idea of why this doctrine of eternal torment was embedded in the church for so long and so deeply. Don't allow this tradition to prevent you from examining the Bible closely and from making your best effort to determine what the writers of Scripture, and God himself, were truly trying to express.