Introduction:
G.K. Beale is renowned for his scholarship in the area of NT exegesis, especially his work on Revelation. I regularly consult his literature on the NT when investigating the finer points of NT Greek. In his commentary on the Thessalonian letters, Beale gives some space to discuss the meaning of 2 Thessalonians 1:9. Much of his discussion is aimed at answering the question of whether Paul meant to convey that unbelievers will be ‘annihilated at the final judgement’ or suffer an ‘everlasting, conscious suffering’.1G.K. Beale, 1–2 Thessalonians, (InterVarsity Press: 2003), 187. Beale concludes Paul was teaching the separation view of ECT (eternal conscious torment) in this verse. This article aims to evaluate his reasons for that conclusion.
The meaning of ὄλεθρος (olethros):
Interestingly, Beale finds that Paul’s use of ὄλεθρος in other passages is not determinative for understanding the use of the noun in 2 Thessalonians 1:9.21 Cor 5:5; 1 Thess 5:3; 1 Tim 6:9 He mentions that ὄλεθρος can refer to physical death,3LXX 1 Kings 13:34; Ezek 14:16–18; 3 Macc 6:30, 34 and the defeat of one nation by another.4Jer 48:3; 51:55; Obad 1:13 He gives more attention to the use of the phrase ὄλεθρον αἰώνιον (‘eternal destruction’) in 4 Maccabees 10:15:
By the blessed death of my brothers and the eternal destruction of the tyrant (τὸν αἰώνιον τοῦ τυράννου ὄλεθρον) and the praiseworthy life of piety, I will not renounce my noble brotherhood.5Unless otherwise indicated quotations from the LXX will be from The Lexham English Septuagint.
Beale appeals to other statements in 4 Maccabees to show that ὄλεθρον αἰώνιον (‘eternal destruction’) ‘is defined by the context not as annihilation but as unending suffering.’6Beale, 1–2 Thessalonians, 188. To support this claim, he highlights that Antiochus is said to ‘endure, by divine justice, eternal torture by fire’ (4 Macc 9:9),7Unless otherwise indicated, the English translation of the LXX will be from LES. and ‘perpetually endure tortures’ (4 Macc 10:11). The tyrant is told that God has ‘reserved divine justice for you, constant and eternal fire and tortures’ (4 Macc 12:12).8Beale, 1–2 Thessalonians, 188.
Rethinking Hell contributor, James Harding, has published an article on 4 Maccabees here. Harding presents a case for the perspective that 4 Maccabees does not offer support for traditionalism. This is a challenge to Beale’s position. A full evaluation of Harding’s work is beyond the scope of this article so I will leave it to the reader to evaluate Harding’s work. For the purposes of this article I would like to focus on Beale’s methodology employed in his commentary on 2 Thessalonians. Ironically, his appeal to the context of 4 Maccabees 10:15 to clarify the meaning of ‘eternal destruction’ is a tacit admission that the phrase itself is ambiguous. That is, Beale knew he could not simply assert that the mere use of the phrase ‘eternal destruction’ justifies a traditionalist reading of 4 Maccabees 10:15. He knew that he had to cite other statements made by the same author to establish the meaning of that phrase. The problem is Paul does not use similar language anywhere in his literature. So, even if the reader remains unconvinced by James Harding’s article on 4 Maccabees, Beale still has a burden to show that Paul used ὄλεθρον αἰώνιον (‘eternal destruction’) in the same way as the author of 4 Maccabee.
Beale is also mistaken that 4 Maccabees 10:15 is the only relevant example that could illustrate what Paul meant by ὄλεθρον αἰώνιον (‘eternal destruction’). He overlooks a key entry in BDAG, which lists Testament of Reuben as a text using a combination of these words in the larger phrase ὄλεθρον Βελίαρ καὶ ὄνειδος αἰώνιον (‘the eternal destruction of Beliar and an eternal disgrace’).9BGAD, s.v. “ὄλεθρος.” For the critical-text that has this variant see Robert Henry Chalrles, The Greek Versions of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, (Oxford University Press: 1960), 12. BDAG juxtaposes the citation to the Testament of Reuben 6:3 with 2 Thessalonians 1:9. The gloss given is ‘eternal death’. Αἰώνιος (aiōnios) is taken to modify ὄλεθρος even though it falls at the end of the sentence. The phrase can be taken as an example of the two words being used to refer to eternal destruction. The Testament of Reuben is part of the larger body of work called the Twelve Testaments of the Patriarchs. The authorship of the Testaments is debated. The corpus itself contains interpolations from Christians and (like the Bible) there are more than one versions of the Greek text of the Testaments. Nevertheless, it is possible to obtain a general understanding of what is meant by ‘eternal destruction’.
Whereas 4 Maccabees contains language that does prima facie refer to eternal torture, the same is not the case with the Twelves Tetaments. The only verse that comes close is Testament of Asher 5:6, which refers to souls being harassed after people have died. The Greek word used here is βασανίζω, which can refer to torture; however, the text lacks an explicit statement regarding the duration of this harassment. In contrast, there are statements that the righteous will enter into eternal life (Testament of Asher 5:6). Obtaining eternal life is how ‘one wards off death’ (Testament of Asher 5:2). Meanwhile, the people of Sodom are said to have ‘perished forever’ (Testament of Asher 7:1). The verb here is ἀπόλλυμι (apollumi), which is used throughout the testaments to refer to the killing of people. Finally, Treatment of Benjamin 7 describes the fate of Cain after he slew his brother Abel. Cain is punished with 7 punishments, the last of which is being ‘deprived of life’ (7:4). In the Testaments the righteous obtain eternal life so forever ward of death, while the unrighteous are deprived of life.
Beale may not have been aware of the use of ὄλεθρον αἰώνιον in the Testament of Reuben when he wrote his commentary on the Thessalonian letters, but it was not at all difficult to locate, given BDAG explicitly refers to it in its entry on ὄλεθρος. Beale could have located this text with a basic search of the lexica available to him. His failure to acknowledge this text mirrors his tendency elsewhere in his commentary on 2 Thessalonians 1:9 to gravitate towards evidence that supports a traditionalist reading of that verse.
In order to support his reading of 2 Thessalonians 1:9, Beale discusses a connection to LXX Isaiah 66.
This understanding of everlasting destruction is supported also by noting that Paul derives the phrase “in a blazing fire, giving vengeance” (en pyri phlogos didontos ekdikēsin; in blazing fire.… He will punish in NIV) from Isaiah 66:15: “the Lord will render his vengeance … in a flame of fire” (apodounai … ekdikēsin … en phlogi pyros), the only place in the Old Testament where this combination of terms is found. This is noteworthy because only nine verses later comes the well-known depiction of those who have been judged—“their worm will not die, nor will their fire be quenched” (Is 66:24)—a clear reference to an unending punishment of conscious beings.10Beale, 1–2 Thessalonians, 189.
While Beale correctly notes that LXX Isaiah 66:15 is a relevant OT source text for the language of 2 Thessalonians 1:8, he fails to mention that the context of the source text explicitly has to do with the death of God’s enemies. To illustrate this, we can follow Beale’s method when discussing LXX 4 Maccabees 10:15 and read LXX Isaiah 66:15 in its immediate context of LXX Isaiah 66:15-17, 23-24:
For look, the Lord will come like a fire, and his chariots will come like a storm, to render his vengeance in wrath and his utter rejection in a flame of fire. For the whole earth will be judged by the fire of the Lord, and all flesh will be judged by his sword; there will be many casualties by the Lord. “Those who cleanse and purify themselves for the gardens and who eat swine’s flesh and abominable things and the mouse in the doorways will be destroyed all at once,” said the Lord.
And this will happen: All flesh will come to bow down before me month after month and Sabbath after Sabbath in Jerusalem,” said the Lord. “And they will go out and see the corpses of the humans who transgressed against me, for their worm does not die, and their fire will not be quenched, and they will become a spectacle for all flesh.”
Note the emphasis on the casualties. They are slain. Their corpses are left unburied, and open the elements. This is not a context in which the survival of those being punished is in view. Yet Beale ignores this completely. His assertion that the statement ‘their worm will not die, nor will their fire be quenched’ is ‘a clear reference to an unending punishment of conscious beings’ flies in the face of the evidence. Beale is inconsistent in how he appeals to the literary context of LXX 4 Maccabees 10:15 to clarify its meaning while ignoring entirely the literary context of LXX Isaiah 55:15 and 24. He follows sound exegetical practice when discussing a verse that can be seen as support for ECT but fails to apply the same process when discussing passages that do not support his view of hell.
Punishment as separation?
Beale thinks that 2 Thessalonians 1:9 teaches the final punishment of unbelievers is their eternal separation from God.
In 1:9 Paul defines this ongoing punishment as being separated from close relationship with God, “destruction in the sense of deprivation of the Lord’s presence” (Williams 1992:116). Unbelievers do not cease to exist because of God’s final judgment, but they are banned from ever existing in his presence (Richard 1995:308 rightly observes that the double use of from highlights not extinction of existence but a “ruin” that is defined as continued existence separate from Christ and lasting forever). If Paul had intended to convey a notion of annihilation, he could have merely said, they will be punished with everlasting destruction, without mentioning that those judged would be excluded from God’s presence. Thus, the punishment “fits the crime,” in that those who refuse to know God (1:8) and want to be separate from him in this life will be punished by being separated from God in the next life.11Beale, 1–2 Thessalonians, 188–189.
Ὄλεθρος does not mean ‘separation’ or ‘deprivation’ in any other context in ancient Greek literature.12I have consulted the major lexica I own, including BGAD, s.v. “ὄλεθρος.”; BrillDAG, s.v. “ὄλεθρος.”; Louw-Nida, s.v. “ὄλεθρος.”; LSJ, s.v. “ὄλεθρος.”; and, CGL, s.v. “ὄλεθρος.” The noun certainly does not take this meaning in the three other instances Paul uses it, and it does not take on this meaning in the LXX. If Paul were to have used ὄλεθρος to denote a sense of destruction as separation or deprivation, then it would be a sui generis use of the word. This would demand the provision of indisputable evidence that Paul used this noun in a novel way.
Beale quotes David Williams and Earle Richard as support for his assertion. Neither of them offer a compelling reason to support Beale’s position. Their position that exclusion is in view is based on several lines of arguments. Williams points to Ephesians 2:12 (‘remember that you were at that time separated from Christ’) as evidence of a theme of separation from Christ in Paul’s theology. However, that is a different context entirely. It does not follow that since Paul described people as being separated from Christ before their salvation that he used ὄλεθρον αἰώνιον (‘eternal destruction’) to refer to the eternal separation of those suffering the final punishment. Besides, in Ephesians 2:12 Paul uses the word χωρίς (chōris), a word that usually denotes the notion of separation . This word is not used in either of the Thessalonian epistles. Instead, the preposition ἀπό (apo) does all the work for the traditionalist reading of 2 Thessalonians 1:9.
Williams also uncritically appeals to ἀπό as if it can only possibly mean ‘away from’ in this context and approvingly of the NIVs unjustifiable rendering of ἀπό as ‘shut out from’. Richard does cite Isaiah 2:10, which is commonly thought to be an OT source text for Paul’s language in 2 Thessalonians 1:9. Isaiah 2:10 reads as,
Enter into the rock and hide in the dust from before the terror of the Lord, and from the splendor of his majesty.
Richard fails to explain how Isaiah 2:10 supports a separation version of ECT. The implied argument is since the people are told to hide into caves then the idea of being in a place that is entirely removed from God justifies NIV’s rendering of ἀπό as ‘shut out from’ and the separation interpretation of 2 Thessalonians 1:9 generally. The LXX renders Isaiah 2:10 as ἀπὸ προσώπου τοῦ φόβου κυρίου (‘from the presence of the fear of the Lord’). To be sure, the preposition ἀπό is well capably of denoting the notion of separation of a person from another person. Yet, all of the major translations of the LXX refrain from rendering LXX Isaiah 2:10 in a way that comports with the notion of ‘shut out from’.
LEH
And now, enter into the rocks and hide in the earth from the face of the fear of the Lord and from the glory of his strength, when he rises to shatter the earth.
NETS
And now enter into the rocks, and hide in the earth, from before the fear of the Lord and from the glory of his strength, when he rises to crush the earth.
Brenton
Now therefore enter ye into the rocks, and hide yourselves in the earth, for fear of the Lord, and by reason of the glory of his might, when he shall arise to strike terribly the earth.
Rethinking Hell contributors Ronnie Demler and William Tanksley have discussed Paul’s use of ἀπό in an article here. They have shown how traditionalists misread Isaiah 2:10 by pointing out that people depicted there ‘are not hiding in a place separated away from their terror; they are hiding because of the presence of their terror.’ Demler and Tanksley are not alone in recognizing this.13See Graham S. Ogden and Jan Sterk, A Handbook on Isaiah, (United Bible Societies: 2011), 95; Gary V. Smith, Isaiah 1–39, (B & H Publishing Group: 2007), 139; Geoffrey W. Grogan, “Isaiah,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, (Zondervan Publishing House: 1986), 37.
Finally, it is worth noting Richard Ottley’s comments on the meaning of ἀπὸ προσώπου:
ἀπὸ προσώπου] A literal rendering of Heb. מפני, which is used almost as a simple preposition, sometimes meaning little more than ‘because of’: here the original meaning is hardly lost.14Richard R. Ottley, The Book of Isaiah according to the Septuagint, (Cambridge University Press: 1906), 113.
This supports Demler and Tanksley’s reading of Isaiah 2:10. The focus is on hiding because of fear of God’s punishment. One cannot be separated from their own emotions in a locative way. This being so, the mere fact that Isaiah 2:10 is the source for Paul’s language in 2 Thessalonians 1:9 is insufficient grounds for concluding that his use of ἀπὸ there should be regarded as denoting separation.
Beale’s favorable quotations of Williams and Richard without critical discussion suggests a willingness to only gather evidence that support the separative ECT reading of 2 Thessalonians 1:9. An example of this is seen in how Beale states that:
Richard … rightly observes that the double use of from highlights not extinction of existence but a “ruin” that is defined as continued existence separate from Christ and lasting forever.15Beale, 1–2 Thessalonians, 188–189.
Neither Beale nor Richard explain why the double use of ἀπὸ denotes a ‘continued existence separate from Christ’. There is no provision of examples from undisputed texts showing how the dual use of ἀπὸ was a typical way separation was expressed using that preposition. It is merely asserted. This is not a compelling reason to adopt Beale’s reading of 2 Thessalonians 1:9. I contend that he cites this argument because of his intention to show that the ECT reading of this verse has merit. That Beale can state ‘Isaiah’s phrase underscores that idolaters will be forced to separate themselves from God’s presence at the time of judgment’16Beale, 1–2 Thessalonians, 189. just after discussing Isaiah 66 where the corpses of God’s slain enemies speak to a mindset of an intention to marshal only the evidence that supports his view of hell.
Conclusion:
The case has been made that Beale does not follow the evidence when interpreting a verse like 2 Thessalonians 1:9. He is a traditionalist who wears his ECT lens when discussing this verse. It shows through in the way he omits even discussing aspects of Isaiah 66 that clearly mitigates against his view of hell. It shows through even as he uncritically cites other authors who share his view of hell. Beale has earned his reputation as a top NT scholar. Unfortunately, when it comes to a hell proof text like 2 Thessalonians 1:9, his ECT glasses lead him into eisegesis of that verse.
| ￪1 | G.K. Beale, 1–2 Thessalonians, (InterVarsity Press: 2003), 187. |
|---|---|
| ￪2 | 1 Cor 5:5; 1 Thess 5:3; 1 Tim 6:9 |
| ￪3 | LXX 1 Kings 13:34; Ezek 14:16–18; 3 Macc 6:30, 34 |
| ￪4 | Jer 48:3; 51:55; Obad 1:13 |
| ￪5 | Unless otherwise indicated quotations from the LXX will be from The Lexham English Septuagint. |
| ￪6 | Beale, 1–2 Thessalonians, 188. |
| ￪7 | Unless otherwise indicated, the English translation of the LXX will be from LES. |
| ￪8 | Beale, 1–2 Thessalonians, 188. |
| ￪9 | BGAD, s.v. “ὄλεθρος.” For the critical-text that has this variant see Robert Henry Chalrles, The Greek Versions of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, (Oxford University Press: 1960), 12. |
| ￪10 | Beale, 1–2 Thessalonians, 189. |
| ￪11 | Beale, 1–2 Thessalonians, 188–189. |
| ￪12 | I have consulted the major lexica I own, including BGAD, s.v. “ὄλεθρος.”; BrillDAG, s.v. “ὄλεθρος.”; Louw-Nida, s.v. “ὄλεθρος.”; LSJ, s.v. “ὄλεθρος.”; and, CGL, s.v. “ὄλεθρος.” The noun certainly does not take this meaning in the three other instances Paul uses it, and it does not take on this meaning in the LXX. |
| ￪13 | See Graham S. Ogden and Jan Sterk, A Handbook on Isaiah, (United Bible Societies: 2011), 95; Gary V. Smith, Isaiah 1–39, (B & H Publishing Group: 2007), 139; Geoffrey W. Grogan, “Isaiah,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, (Zondervan Publishing House: 1986), 37. |
| ￪14 | Richard R. Ottley, The Book of Isaiah according to the Septuagint, (Cambridge University Press: 1906), 113. |
| ￪15 | Beale, 1–2 Thessalonians, 188–189. |
| ￪16 | Beale, 1–2 Thessalonians, 189. |