“Then another angel, a third one, followed them, saying with a loud voice, “If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives a mark on his forehead or on his hand, 10 he also will drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is mixed in full strength in the cup of His anger; and he will be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. 11 And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever; they have no rest day and night, those who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name, ”  (Revelation 14:9–11)

The summary of Revelation 14:9-11 is that those who receive the Mark of the Beast (v. 9) will suffer the wrath of God by being tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the Lamb (v. 10). The smoke of their torment will ascend forever, and ever and they will have no rest, day or night (v. 11).

These verses are strong support for eternal conscious torment (ECT). However, conditionalists typically submit these verses to Isaiah 34:9-10 to undermine any support for ECT and then interpret Revelation in light of Isaiah.

“Its streams will be turned into pitch, and its loose earth into brimstone, and its land will become burning pitch. 10 It will not be quenched night or day. Its smoke will go up forever. From generation to generation it will be desolate. None will pass through it forever and ever,” (Isaiah 34:9-10).

The conditionalist logic is as follows. 1) Revelation is referring to Isaiah, or at the very least, the phraseology is similar enough between the two to warrant a comparison. 2) Isaiah says that the burning will not be quenched (vv. 9-10) and that its smoke goes up forever (v. 10), yet the burning was quenched and the smoke did not go up forever. 3) Revelation’s statement that “the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever; they have no rest day and night,” should be understood in the same way as Isaiah. 4) Therefore, Rev. 14:9-11 does not necessarily support eternal conscious torment.

Revelation 14:9-11 and Isaiah 34:9-10

There are obvious similarities between the two sets of scriptures. Brimstone is mentioned in both (Isa. 34:9 and Rev. 14:10). The smoke that goes up forever is also mentioned (Isa. 34:10 and Rev. 14:11). But, there are also differences. The torment of persons with fire and brimstone is only in Revelation.

Furthermore, this torment occurs “in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb,” which also is only in Revelation. Fire is mention in Rev. 14:11, but not Isaiah 33:9-10. Also, Isaiah says “night and day,” where Revelation says, “day and night.” There is a reversal of the words. If Revelation is referring to Isaiah, why the switch? I don’t know if this reordering of the two words is significant, but it is noteworthy. Nevertheless, I have produced a table below to present the similarities and differences between the two pericopes better.  Similarities are in green and differences are in brown

Isaiah 34:9-10	Revelation 14:9-11
	“Then another angel, a third one, followed them, saying with a loud voice, “If anyone worships (present) the beast and his image, and receives (present) a mark on his forehead or on his hand, 10 he also will drink (future) of the wine of the wrath of God, which is mixed in full strength in the cup of His anger;
“Its streams will be turned into pitch,
and its loose earth into brimstone,	and he will be tormented (future) with fire and brimstone
	in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb.
and its land will become burning pitch.
10 It will not be quenched night or day.	they have no rest (present) day and night,  [Note: the order the “smoke” and “day and night” are reversed in Rev. 11]
Its smoke will go up forever.	11 And the smoke of their torment
From generation to generation it will be desolate. None will pass through it forever and ever.”	goes up (present) forever and ever; they have no rest (present) day and night,
	those who worship (present participle) the beast and his image, and whoever receives (receives) the mark of his name.”

So what then are we to make of this?

First, there is no one-to-one correspondence between Isaiah 34:9-10 and Rev. 14:9-11 in either phraseology or contexts. Isaiah is about judgment on Edom. Revelation is about those who receive the mark of the beast.  Second, those who accept that mark will be tormented with fire and brimstone [differences in brown] in the presence of the holy angels and the Lamb forever, and they will have no rest day or night. It is in this context that the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever.  So, they are going to be in the presence of the angels and the Lamb while they are tormented (Rev. 14:10).  Since the angels and the Lamb are alive, it would make sense that the ones who are tormented are also alive; otherwise, how can they be tormented in their presence? Also, both the angels and the Lamb will live forever.  So, this would lend support to the wicked being tormented forever, as well.  Third, to say that Revelation is explained by Isaiah is exegetically risky. It is the New Testament that interprets the Old Testament – never the other way around. Certainly, the Old Testament can shed light on the New Testament, but the New Testament always interprets the Old Testament.  This means that the annihilationist approach is automatically suspect.  Fourth, if there are conditionalists who hold to the view that Revelation means the wicked are annihilated after a period of time of suffering in the presence of the angels and the Lamb before they are annihilated.  If that is the case, then why aren’t the wicked saved after fulfilling the Law’s required punishment?  And, to make things worse, if God annihilates the wicked after their period of suffering, then God is administering two punishments, one of suffering for a duration of time and the other being annihilationism.  Is this double jeopardy? See the article, If the sinner is punished and satisfies the law, then shouldn’t he go to heaven? The conditionalist position doesn’t work.

Objections answered

Revelation 14:9-11 is in reference to the future where the wicked will be totally destroyed and not exist, just like Edom.

This objection is raised out of the Isaiah 34 context where similar language is used regarding how Edom was destroyed by God. But to say that the wicked are totally destroyed by not existing anymore is to beg the question. The text does not say that. Nevertheless, John the apostle is using Old Testament illustrations to convey the concept that God’s work of judgment is permanent, as is the case of Edom. In Revelation, John the apostle said, “And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever; they have no rest day and night, those who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name,” (Rev. 14:11). If nonexistence is the issue then why does the text say that “they have no rest day and night” as the “smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever”? The natural reading of Revelation is to conclude that the wicked are going to be in torment eternally. It is only the conditionalists who import a non-literal meaning of Isaiah into Revelation and make it fit their assumptions. Furthermore, in the context of Revelation, that judgment illustration is expanded to include the statement that the wicked will “be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and the presence of the Lamb and the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever; they have no rest day and night,” (Rev. 14:10-11). To say that the language really means they don’t exist anymore does not make any sense.

Revelation 14:9-11 is in reference to the papists and eternal torment is everlasting punishment

“It is addressing papists who refuse to follow the truth.  “…their torment in fire and brimstone takes place in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. This is a powerful reason— the first of two— why this cannot be everlasting suffering in hell. Hell is in ‘outer darkness,’ (Matt 8: 12)…The ascent of the smoke forever and ever proves the judgment to be eternal destruction… The torment is eternal torment in the sense of everlasting punishment. We notice that these sinners have no rest day nor night while their suffering lasts nor any restoration from the blackness of darkness forever. This punitive destruction holds no rest for them.”¹Rethinking Hell: Readings in Evangelical Conditionalism (Kindle Locations 2650-2652). Cascade Books, an Imprint of Wipf and Stock Publishers. Kindle Edition. underline added

This interesting quote sees the Revelation passage as a judgment on the Roman Catholic Church. It is, after all, an apostate church. Nevertheless, to say that “the torment’s eternal torment in the sense of everlasting punishment,” is taking the phrase and drastically reinterpreting it. In light of this conditionalist eisegesis, eternal torment is not eternal torment.  It is everlasting punishment which, in the mind of the conditionalist, means nonexistence. So, eternal torment is really the nothingness of nonexistence. Therefore, when the conditionalist is done with the Scripture that speaks of eternal torment, it really means it’s not eternal torment.

The smoke in Revelation that is rising forever is figurative of destruction, not ongoing burning.

It’s begging the question to assume that the smoke rising forever in Revelation is figurative and not continuous. Yes, the Old Testament context is not a literal forever-burning fire, but when the continuationist extracts the OT non-literalness and imports it into the New Testament, he is risking an exegetical mistake. The text of Revelation needs to speak for itself before we look elsewhere. Nevertheless, as I previously answered, Revelation probably uses the imagery of the Old Testament destruction of Edom regarding the smoke and clarifies that those the wicked are undergoing punishment since they have no rest day and night and they are being tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the angels and of the Lamb (v. 10). John is using this imagery to convey the idea of eternal torment.  There is no hint of nonexistence or annihilation in such phraseology. It is only if one assumes the annihilationist position and reads into the text, that such a conclusion would be made.

If the smoke rises forever, the fire must continue burning forever. But, that is not what happened in Isaiah.

Revelation 14:9-11 is not Isaiah 34:9-10. Again, the illustration found in Revelation is probably taken from Isaiah 34 to demonstrate the severity of God’s judgment. It is Revelation that says that the wicked are “tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb,” (v. 10). It is Revelation that says “the smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever,” (v. 11). Revelation must first be interpreted in the context of its own phraseology, and not forcefully subjected to the phraseology of something elsewhere in Scripture to suit the preconceived ideas of the conditionalist. Again, let me clarify that the Old Testament definitely sheds light on the New Testament, but it is the New Testament that interprets the Old Testament.

Since the wicked know that annihilation awaits them, they currently have no rest day or night.

This is a complete misreading of the text. Furthermore, it flies in the face of a lot of conditionalists who affirm the ambiguous doctrine of soul sleep which, more or less, states that the person who physically dies ceases to have conscious awareness apart from his physical body. But for those annihilationists who believe that people are aware during the intermediate state between physical death and physical resurrection, it is still an assumption that annihilationism is the biblical position. Revelation 14:9-11, when reading in its own context, does not suggest annihilation.

Conclusion

John the apostle is probably using the similar language of Isaiah to illustrate the permanence and severity of God’s judgment upon the wicked in Revelation 14. But, the conditionalists erringly say the use of the figurative words in Isaiah means that the context of Revelation, therefore, must also be figurative. They transfer the imagery of judgment from Isaiah to Revelation and do not allow Revelation to interpret itself. Yes, Scripture interprets Scripture, and the similarities between Isaiah 34:9-10 and Revelation 14:9-11 should not be ignored, but there are also significant differences between the two passages. For example, it is only in Revelation 14:9-11 that the wicked worship the beast (Revelation 14:9), experience the wrath of God (v. 9), are tormented in the presence of the angels and of the Lamb (v. 10), and that the smoke of their torment ascends forever (v. 11). Such language strongly suggests ongoing conscious torment.  Furthermore, it is always the New Testament that interprets the Old Testament, not the other way around as the conditionalists often practice in their pursuit of annihilationist conclusions. In addition, when some annihilationists assert that the wicked will suffer and then be annihilated, they are risking double jeopardy in that they have the wicked receive two punishments: one is suffering according to their sin as it relates to the Law, and two, the additional punishment of annihilation. But, when they finish their initial punishment and satisfy the law, then shouldn’t they go to heaven? The conditionalist interpretation is inconsistent, problematic, and should be rejected.