The Cop-Out of Calling Eternal, Fiery Torture a “Caricature” of Eternal Conscious Hell

Some may wonder why I have such a bone to pick with what I sometimes call the modern, metaphorical view of eternal conscious hell. ¹ What I refer to as the modern, metaphorical view of eternal conscious hell is the general view of eternal conscious hell that denies literal fire of any sort, denies that God is actively torturing the wicked, and instead mainly sees hell as the natural, internal turmoil that occurs within the heart of a wicked person when they are cut off from God (who they hate anyway). Some variations, like what has become popular in Eastern Orthodox circles, say that the torment is from the opposite of separation from God, and is the internal turmoil of sinners who have to spend eternity in the loving (not wrathful) presence of the God they hate. For our purposes these views are substantially equivalent. After all, what is so bad about this view? Isn’t it a better view to hold than the actually-traditional view of hell as a divine torture chamber, where God burns the wicked alive forever and fills their bodies and souls with torment beyond measure out of his unending and untamable wrath? It certainly is much more philosophically and theologically justifiable, right?

Yes. And that is why I believe it is so important to nip this in the bud and refute this view from the start.

Or, at least that is half of why I am so emphatic about this. It is true that this version of eternal conscious hell is much more philosophically and theologically tolerable than the idea of God actively burning people alive (or some substantial equivalent) for ever and ever. ² There is much more to the modern, metaphorical view than just non-literal fire. I am not concerned with views that involve simply swapping out material flames with a manifestation of God’s wrath, or what have you, and still entail God causing the same overall experience of pain beyond pain for ever. But also, the biblical basis for this view is exceedingly weak, and it goes against most of church history (much moreso than annihilationism or universalism, from what I can tell).

The modern, metaphorical view makes the idea of eternal conscious hell much more palatable, but it does so at the cost of also being intellectually untenable within a biblical, Christian worldview. And it is this inconsistency that makes this view so insidious.

Now, it would be wrong to call it hypocrisy, because that implies intentional dishonesty. Like most doctrines among Christians, people tend to hold this view in good faith. But the glaring inconsistency that makes this view terrible also makes it appealing. This view allows its adherents to remain in the club, to be good Christians (not like those other Christians who “deny hell”), and to be able to sign all the statements of faith and keep their jobs as pastors and seminary professors because they keep a stiff upper lip and accept the hard truth about hell – all while getting to deny the actual hard truths about hell (if eternal conscious hell were actually true, that is).

As far as I am concerned, that is the only real reason why this view even exists. Christians believe that they have to affirm eternal conscious hell, then they struggle with it (for obvious reasons), and then they find the largely scripture-free musings of C.S. Lewis and some other apologists to be satisfying. When viewed more critically, as we have done here before (see notes below), the view becomes indefensible. When viewed more critically, Bible-believing Christians will find that they have only two real options: affirm the truly traditional view of the damned being burned alive (or worse) for ever and ever, or reject eternal conscious hell entirely.

The “Caricature” Canard

For those not familiar with the American county fair scene, a literal caricature is a drawing that an artist does of a person where they intentionally add very exaggerated features (like a giant head on a tiny body) for the sake of humor. Because a caricature takes what is true and then morphs it into something that is loosely related but pretty different, the term is often used metaphorically to describe when an idea is grossly misrepresented by taking a kernel of truth and twisting it.

For example, we see this language applied to hell by pastor and contemporary Christian musician Evan Wickham:

Hell as torture is a really bad caricature of the what the church has always taught about final judgment. Even the most die-hard proponents of Eternal Conscious Torment (which I’m not) make a clear distinction between torment (pain from within) and torment [sic] (pain from without). ³ Evan Wickham, “Hell as torture is a really bad caricature of the what the church has always taught about final judgment…” X, posted March 13, 2023, https://x.com/evanwickham/status/1635336967624998912 (accessed December 2, 2025).

The claim that hell as torture is a caricature of what the church has always taught is so obviously and demonstrably false that it at least borders on mind-blowing. But we will address that below.

Wickham then follows up with these additional thoughts:

The best proponents of hell as eternal conscious torment are quick to say it’s NOT torture at all. It’s more like the torment of a headache that comes from dehydration, and the sufferer is continuing to choose not to drink. ⁴ Evan Wickham, “The best proponents of hell as eternal conscious torment are quick to say it’s NOT torture at all…” X, posted March 13, 2023, https://x.com/evanwickham/status/1635337716341833729 (accessed December 2, 2025).

Similarly, caricature as a motif is ubiquitous throughout Joshua Ryan Butler’s book The Skeletons in God’s Closet, especially when hell comes up. Hell is not a place of God’s active wrath, conscious burning in fire, or the like. Rather:

This gospel story begins to give rise to some radical contrasts with the caricature…Hell is not a place God creates to torture people, but a power God excludes to protect the flourishing of the new creation (chapter 4). Its construction is not a chamber God locks from the outside, but a coffin we latch from the inside through our desire for freedom from God (chapters 5 and 6). ⁵ Joshua Ryan Butler, The Skeletons in God’s Closet: The Mercy of Hell, the Surprise of Judgment, the Hope of Holy War (Thomas Nelson, 2014), 16.

In another example, Mike Winger recently did a livestream on the topic where he used the term “caricature” to describe what happens when people describe hell as “torture”:

This is a dangerous method when you impugn God, when you use caricatures, like you describe hell as torture. So God will torture you for all eternity…⁶ Mike Winger, “The Hell Debate is Heating Up: 10 Qs with Mike Winger (Ep 67),” YouTube video [11:28], posted January 2, 2026, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdsbFb3SB58 (accessed January 2, 2026).

As the current Kirk Cameron controversy leads to increased interest in the topic of hell and annihilationism, I expect to see a lot more of this sort of thing.

Calling It A Caricature Implies that It Is Fringe and Unserious

To call a view a caricature not only implies that it is wrong, but also, it implies that it is fringe. It isn’t just wrong but it twists things in an extreme way that the typical, careful Christian would not consider believing in.

For example, when debating the three main views of the millennium in Revelation 20:1-6, you will rarely hear adherents of one view call either of the other two views a caricature of what the Bible teaches. It is understood that the other views, while ultimately incorrect, are within the mainstream of popular and historical acceptance within Christianity, and are also mainstream in the sense that a reasonable person could mistakenly come to believe them from reading the Bible.

To say that something is a caricature implies that there really is no way to even take the view seriously.

The Typical “Caricature” of Hell Is Just The Historical, Face Value Idea of Eternal Conscious Hell

The problem arises in that, when views of hell are called a “caricature” of the Bible, they usually lump fiction and satire about cartoon demons named Peaches and pineapples used for sexual torture with depictions of hell that have been generally well-accepted in church history. Crude comedy films and cinnamon candy boxes are not Christian. But most of what is rejected by the caricature crowd is from faithful Christian sources. That doesn’t make it correct – obviously I think none of it is – but it does mean that you can’t just write it off as absurd mocking of our faith by a bunch of losers.

And as common as the softer, modern metaphorical view has become, it still is quite normal to see Christians today refer to hell as eternal conscious burning, as eternal torture, and as a place of wrath and externally imposed pain and punishment. Many do not believe that it is simply a place where people have to stew in anguish about their choices and everlasting life without (or with) God.

Eternal, fiery torture is the normative Christian view. This has long been the normal view – notwithstanding those who have denied the doctrine of eternal conscious hell entirely. ⁷ For more on annihilationism and universalism being represented in the early church, see “The Doctrine of Eternal Torment Was Not Universal in the Early Church: Introduction to Evangelical Conditionalism“. Rethinking Hell also features a number of more in-depth treatments of specific figures, such as Irenaeus of Lyon. See Chris Date, “Deprived of Continuance: Irenaeus the Conditionalist” and William Tanksley, “Irenaeus and Continuance” Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3. Are we going to call the normal, historically dominant view a caricature? I certainly would not, despite believing that it is false.

Furthermore, beyond the normality of seeing hell as eternal torture in fire and God’s fury, another reason why calling it a caricature is so unwarranted is the fact that, if eternal conscious hell is true, then the Bible will inevitably lead to such a view of eternal conscious hell. More on this below, but suffice it to say, the very passages used to demonstrate eternal conscious hell itself are also the Achilles heel of the modern, metaphorical view.

The Normality of Eternal Torture Historically

It’s not a caricature to believe what the dominant majority of Christian theologians and teachers have tended to believe.

In a series of currently 5 parts, we have looked at how widespread and ubiquitous the traditional, “divine torture chamber” view of hell has been historically. ⁸ See “The Not-So-Traditional View: Does Your Particular Belief About Hell Really Have Church History On Its Side?” Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, and Part 5. Some descriptions were more over-the-top than others, but fundamentally, they all denied the modern, metaphorical view and affirmed that God and his agents would actively cause the wicked to suffer physical torture, beyond all imagining, for ever and ever.

We saw early church traditionalists like Marcus Minucius Felix write about the fire of hell burning and torturing flesh and then regenerating it to allow for endless suffering. Eastern monks burned themselves with fire to remember what could happen if they sinned. Hell was not just “torment” but openly referred to as torture by English speakers (e.g. Charles Spurgeon, John Gill). Puritans like Jonathan Edwards spoke of the exquisite torments of the damned, with Thomas Vincent even comparing God to the cruelest of torturers while simultaneously praising him! Still others like Tertullian longed for the day when they would see persecutors be subject to the same incredible abuses they put Christians through – this time not for a short time but for all eternity. And don’t even get me started on the canonized saints who saw visions that went beyond even this.

Even the more benign references to hell acknowledged that God would keep the bodies of the wicked alive forever to be engulfed in flames but never actually consumed (e.g Thomas Aquinas, John Wesley, R.A Torrey). And even when the fire was not necessarily material flame, the extreme pain in soul and body was as literal as ever (e.g. Matthew Henry). There may not be a cartoony man in a red devil suit involved, but the standard view still entailed God keeping the wicked alive just to subject them to the worst pain anyone can imagine (or worse), and to do it for ever and ever and ever and ever…

This isn’t a caricature of a much more sensible Christian belief. This is church history.

The Normality of Eternal Torture In Our Time

It isn’t just unbelievers who speak of hell as fire and fury and eternal torture. Nor was it just some medieval madmen. While the modern, metaphorical view is becoming very common, including among many otherwise biblically conservative evangelicals, there are still many adherents of the really-traditional view.

Contemporary Bible Translations Using “Torture”

I have previously pointed out how meaningless the whole “torment not torture” qualification made by some traditionalists is. ⁹ See “The Many and Varied Problems with the Modern, Metaphorical View of Eternal Conscious Hell“. See also “The Traditional View of Hell Is Rightly Called ‘Eternal Torture’ (at Least Traditionally)“. The fact that Bible translations render the word basanizó and similar words as “torment” doesn’t mean it isn’t torture. ¹⁰ For more on basanizó, see “928 Basanizó,” Bible Hub, n.d. https://biblehub.com/greek/928.htm (accessed December 2, 2025). Revelation 14:9-11 is about “tormenting” people physically with burning sulfur, after all. ¹¹ For more on the glaring inconsistency of this passage being used by adherents of the modern, metaphorical view, see “The Continued Softening of Hell by Traditionalists (Gavin Ortlund, Revelation 14:9-11, and More)“.

Except this canard is even more meaningless because even some major translations have no problem using the term “torture” to describe what God does to the wicked. To see this, one need only look up a verse that speaks of damnation and torment on a website like Biblehub.com. For example, see Revelation 14:10. ¹² “Revelation 14:10,” Bible Hub, n.d. https://biblehub.com/revelation/14-10.htm (accessed December 2, 2025). While the majority do use “torment,” a number use “torture.” Most notable is the New English Translation (NET) Bible, which is not remotely a fringe version of the English-language Bible.

Traditionalists of Recent Memory Affirming Fiery Torture In Literature

Among scholars and teachers, you do not have to go to ages past to see hell spoken of as torture. Consider the words of J.I. Packer:

Furthermore, the theory of annihilationism, in which unbelievers are not tortured but destroyed in hell, must be read into the Bible. It cannot be read out of it, since the fire of hell in the Bible is a picture not of destruction but of ongoing pain, as Luke 16:24 makes unambiguously clear. ¹³ J.I. Packer, “Does Everyone Go To Heaven?”, Is Hell For Real of Does Everyone Go to Heaven?, eds. Robert Peterson and Christopher Morgan (Zondervan, 2011), 67.

If Packer is denying a view that those in hell are “not tortured” – which was his choice of words (he could have just said “not tormented”) – then it follows that he is affirming the belief that they are tortured (as further evidenced by the fact that hell involves “ongoing pain”).

Similarly, Albert Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, makes the following statement about John Wenham while criticizing annihilationism:

Wenham leaned toward the annihilationist view that unbelievers might be destroyed rather than endlessly tortured in hell, but he warned that the traditional view should not be given up lightly. ¹⁴ Albert Mohler, “Is Hell for Real?”, Is Hell For Real of Does Everyone Go to Heaven?, eds. Robert Peterson and Christopher Morgan (Zondervan, 2011), 19.

And concerning literal fire – something that necessitates incredible physical torment (which most would call torture) – when Zondervan released the original edition of Four Views on Hell in 1996, they didn’t have to rely on Bob the opioid addict who lived in a cave to write the chapter advocating this literal view. They got John Walvoord, a widely respected teacher and the former president of Dallas Theological Seminary. ¹⁵ The second edition of Four Views on Hell from 2014 no longer has separate sections for the literal (i.e. literal fire) and the metaphorical versions of eternal conscious hell. This allowed universalism to be represented, which was not the case in the original 1996 edition.

Traditionalists Affirming Eternal Torture on Social Media

In 2021, Al Mohler continued to affirm that hell is eternal torture – in this case, a “torture chamber” – while replying to a tweet by the infamous atheist Richard Dawkins.

Here is Dawkins’s post for context:

Imagine what it must be like to really believe there’s a place called Hell, red hot and real, a post-mortem torture chamber of unspeakable horror where you will certainly, without any doubt, spend all eternity if you don’t accept Jesus (Books do Furnish a Life, P296). ¹⁶ Richard Dawkins, “Imagine what it must be like to really believe…” X, posted May 30, 2021, https://x.com/RichardDawkins/status/1399245647174246403 (accessed January 2, 2026).

Here is Mohler’s response:

But the more pressing issue is this: Imagine that it is true. The Bible clearly reveals the reality of hell and divine judgment—and the power of Christ to rescue sinners from hell. Jesus saves. ¹⁷ Albert Mohler, “The best proponents of hell as eternal conscious torment are quick to say it’s NOT torture at all…” X, posted May 30, 2021, https://x.com/albertmohler/status/1399248729073504256 (accessed January 2, 2026).

Keep in mind that Mohler re-tweeted Dawkins’s post when he made that comment. This wasn’t an off-the-cuff, in-person reply. Mohler’s response was intentional and prepared for a public audience. And yet, while intentionally highlighting and emphasizing what Dawkins said, he affirmed it and never denied that hell is, as Dawkins put it, “red hot” and a “torture chamber.”

And for a very recent example, consider this snippet from a lengthy post by a Christian influencer named Traci Coston (with over 2 million Facebook followers) in response to Kirk Cameron’s tentative acceptance of annihilationism:

The devil has a doctrine of demons he has been really trying to popularize since the 20th century. It’s called “annihilationism”. It’s this idea that the wicked aren’t ACTUALLY tortured forever…they just cease to exist after the final judgment…¹⁸ Traci Coston, “The devil has a doctrine of demons…”, Facebook, posted December 9, 2025, https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=pfbid02niysqB75CWEwn2bYEgmZuJdtdpCcYNyRSGH9kYj3tiZ25kue8ebyWhNPuNT2wXmdl&id=100090398382151 (accessed January 1, 2026) – emphasis hers.

The obvious implication, of course, is that the wicked are tortured forever.

Many now run from such language regarding hell, but it still is well within the mainstream of Christian thought.

A Brief Look At The Scriptures And The Options They Give

Perhaps one might say that what the Bible says has been so widely and frequently twisted that this currently common and historically dominant view of eternal conscious hell is still a caricature of the scriptures. Maybe the Bible clearly teaches the modern, metaphorical view, despite popular consensus.

Except there is little basis (if any) for the modern, metaphorical view in scripture. Not even a shallow reading of the relevant hell texts would result in such a view. When push comes to shove, if annihilationism is false and everyone lives forever in one of two places/states of being, then the result for the damned will be the very “caricature” that adherents of more air-conditioned forms of eternal conscious hell want to write off.

Ultimately, this is because the whole biblical basis of eternal conscious hell (for all intents and purposes) is made up of passages that also speak of physical pain, fire, God’s wrath, etc. If you are going to use Revelation 14:11 to show that the wicked suffer for eternity in hell, then how can you separate that from the fact that their suffering is physically burning alive, at the behest of God in his unmixed wrath? ¹⁹ For more on why Revelation 14:9-11 doesn’t actually prove eternal conscious hell, see “A Primer on Revelation 14:9-11“. If hell being “eternal fire” means that hell is eternal (and conscious), then why does it also not entail that it is fire? ²⁰ For more on “eternal fire,” see “What the Bible Actually Says about ‘Eternal Fire'” Part 1 and Part 2. And why would the “eternal punishment” that supposedly proves that hell is an eternal conscious experience not also mean that the eternity in that fire is meant to actively punish the wicked, not just quarantine them and give them what they really want anyway? ²¹ For more on Matthew 25:46, see “Matthew 25:46 Does Not Prove Eternal Torment”, Part 1 and Part 2. ²² Punishment can, of course, be corrective and not retributive. It can be for the benefit of the one being punished. But this is not so if the punishment goes on for ever and ever, which is the case in this scenario.

If the parable of the rich man and Lazarus does show us what the afterlife is really like, then why would everything about it be literal except the part about the rich man being tortured with fire? ²³ For more on why this parable does not prove eternal torment, see “Introduction to Evangelical Conditionalism: Luke 16:19-31 (The Rich Man and Lazarus)“. See also Chris Loewen, “Hypocrisy, Not Hell: The Polemic Parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man“, and see “A Place for Torment: Reading The Rich Man and Lazarus Literally” by guest contributor Roger Harper for a different perceptive with the same final conclusion. ²⁴For more on why this is a parable, see “The Case For Luke 16:19-31 As a Parable (Even Though Annihilationism Doesn’t Require It)“.  It’s not a caricature to think that Mark 9:48 and its reference to worms and fire would mean that, if hell is eternal and conscious, then there are worms and fire tormenting people. ²⁵ For more on Mark 9:48, see “Introduction to Evangelical Conditionalism – Mark 9:48“. Rethinking Hell also features multiple in-depth treatments on this passage, along with Isaiah 66:24 (which it directly quotes), including “¿Qué Qal? Revisitando el Fuego Inextinguible” by Glenn Peoples and “El Fuego que No se Apaga: Aniquilación en Marcos 9:48 (Parte 2)” by Chris Date. If you’re going to appeal to Isaiah 33:14 about everlasting burnings to show everlasting conscious duration, then you can’t call it a caricature to say that it also means burning that goes on everlastingly. ²⁶ For more on Isaiah 33:14, see “Isaiah 33:14 – A Lesser Known Prooftext“. You can’t appeal to 2 Thessalonians 1:9 and then consider it a caricature that Jesus would come in fire and fury to actively deal retribution to the lost (vv.7-8). ²⁷For an introduction to 2 Thessalonians 1:9, see “Introduction To Evangelical Conditionalism: 2 Thessalonians 1:9“. For an in-depth look, see “Annihilation in 2 Thessalonians 1:9” Part 1 (by Peter Grice) and Part 2 (by William Tanksley, Jr. and Ronnie Demler).

And we could go on because this applies to basically every eternal torment prooftext.

It is not a caricature of Christianity to take hell passages at face value.

Granted, annihilationists also do not take these passages at face value (at least not entirely). No one takes all passages of scripture at face value. Traditionalists must themselves take most of the Bible’s passages about God’s judgment in a manner that is contrary to face value. ²⁸For more on this, see “Traditionalism and Annihilationism in Light of the ‘Face Value’ Meaning of Scripture“. See also “A Face-Value Introduction To The Biblical Case For Evangelical Conditionalism” for an affirmative, face-value biblical case for evangelical conditionalism. The difference between annihilationists and adherents of the modern, metaphorical view of eternal conscious hell is that annihilationists show why the above texts do not teach eternal torment – and in many cases, are actually evidence in favor of annihilationism – by means of thorough study and exegesis of the texts. Adherents of the modern, metaphorical view come to their view of these texts because darkness and fire can’t co-exist (even though they totally can) and because their already-developed systematic theology of hell requires it. ²⁹ For more on how fire and darkness can co-exist, and how Christians have been well aware of these issue for millennia and have answers, see Ronnie Demler, “Yes, Fire and Darkness and Co-Exist,” Consuming Fire [blog], posted July 11, 2016, https://conditionalism.net/blog/2016/07/11/yes-fire-and-darkness-can-coexist/ (accessed December 2, 2025).  

I know that that is a very harsh assessment, and I do not use such harsh language flippantly. The modern, metaphorical view of eternal conscious hell just really is that terrible.

Conclusión

Exactly what a given person may mean by the term “caricature” may vary, and some may use it in a very specific, narrow sense that may be accurate (or at least consistent with their view of hell). But the main point here isn’t about the word but the underlying idea.

The idea of eternal conscious hell as a place of physical torture and burning is written off as though it is some fringe idea that shouldn’t even be taken seriously as what the Bible teaches. But those who treat it as a caricature just end up adopting a view with even less biblical warrant and with far less historical acceptance in Christendom. They treat the far more normalized view, the one that, while still unbiblical, at least takes hell verses more at face value, as being what is fringe. This is quite ironic, albeit in a very unentertaining way.

Liked it? Take a second to support Rethinking Hell on Patreon!