NJK asked an important question and I think it deserves a thread of it’s own.


We read the Bible and mold our views to the light we currently have. So our view of predestination as Doug Batchelor express can only reflect our current understanding which overall we believe that the vast majority will burn in a literal lake of fire as written in Rev 20.

But I will appeal to you, that any understanding or view we currently possess or hear from others have to be tested against the TYPE that God gave to mankind in the Pentateuch.

In it lays all the foundation of God’s mind & heart concerning the plan of salvation. The prophets are tested according to this type and if they do not speak accordingly, then they are to be discarded as False prophets. When a Prophets speak and prophecy, it will always be an application of the Type. Prophets are not the TYPE and do not lay up new TYPE. God speak to them indirectly via dreams and visions whereas what was spoken to Moses was a clear direct statement as God explained to Aaron and Myriam in Num 12:6 "And he said, Hear now my words: If there be a prophet among you, [I] the LORD will make myself known unto him in a vision, [and] will speak unto him in a dream. 7. My servant Moses [is] not so, who [is] faithful in all mine house. 8. With him will I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently, and not in dark speeches; and the similitude of the LORD shall he behold: wherefore then were ye not afraid to speak against my servant Moses? "

God gaved to mankind ONE TYPE and there’s no other, and it is found in the Pentateuch.

I agree with EGW when she said, if there’s no TYPE there’s no truth. So the the TYPE is given to us so we can know the Truth.

Question : Do we have a TYPE in the Law of Moses to backup what we currently assume in regards to “the vast majority to die”? Or in another word, is the Hell fire doctrine Truth? In that doctrine we assumed that the lake of fire is literal? Why shouldn’t it be taken figuratively?

Let’s exercise to search from the foundation where God gave us His truth.

1. The altar of burnt offering links sin, sinners, and hellfire.
2. Unpardoned sinners were led out of the camp with the scapegoat on the day of atonement.

Limiting types to only the law of Moses is, as confirmed by exegesis, not accurate as even God’s dealings with, and the experiences of, Israel recorded in those books, as well as the rest of the OT, even NT with NT Israel, serves as types and examples (e.g., Early Rain, 70 A.D. destruction). E.g, 1 Cor 10:11 (“example” Greek typikos #5917a; cf. the uses of #5917b hyptypikos in e.g., 1 Cor 10:6; Rom 5:14; 1 Thess 1:7; 2 Thess 3:9; 1 Tim 4:12; Tit 2:7; 1 Pet 5:3).

I see that there are plenty of examples and legislations in the OT and 5 first books that the fate of those who will continue in sin will not only be an eternal consequence of death, but given the many alternative “humane” (i.e., painless) ways that I person could be put to death (e.g., secretly poisoning them just before they go to sleep), will also involve physical suffering along with inculcated mental anguish. (Just think of the anguish of seeing hundreds of people holding stones that they will soon hurl on you and as it won’t instantly kill you, you will physically feel each blow. Indeed they’ll only stop when it is manifest that you have finally, actually, died)

Also Jesus and other NT Writers understood the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah as a type of God’s final judgement on the wicked. (Lu 17:28-30; 2 Peter 2:6 = “a figure”; cf. Jude 1:7 “exhibited as a /[carbon copy]proof”; cf. Heb 8:5; 9:23 “copy”; James 5:10)

God’s other judgements in the Bible, some of them, when He directly did them, and no mercy was to be granted, by fire, and which were actually more severe when more light was available and rejected are also examples of the final judgement. (Cf. Luke 12:47, 48).

In which way? Are you thinking in terms of people dying the second death but not by fire?

Bumping this, as I am looking for Elle's response to your question.

I have been wanting to visit this site, yes, hell fire is in the types of the law of Moses, but more than just types, it is some of the most detailed and clearist texts about hell fire in the entire scriptures, and we run into trouble when we don't use these text to interpet the later texts. I need to look up even more references, but one very important one is Deuteronomy 4: 24 For the Lord They God is a consuuming fire, even a jealous God.

We find the fire on the burning bush. The saved will be like the bush, living in the fire but not consumed by it (while the lost are consummed by it)

The Pillar of fire by night is hell fire

The fire on Mt. Sinai when God gave the 10 commandaments is hell fire

Exodus 24:9-11 Moses Aaron, Nadab and Abihu and 70 elders entered hell fire, but not the full force as they must not have seen God's face, since Moses wanting to see even more in Exodus 33 and 34 33:20 says And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.

Through Santification we grow to the point where we can see God's face and live in heaven. At the end everyone, both the saved and the lost see the same thing that Moses saw from the cleft of the rock, except that we get to see God's face as well with the resulting consequenses of either being regenerated through Christ or expirencing this from a non-regenerated perspective.

Yes, the lake of fire is literal and symbolic, but we have made it something that is not what the Pentituch taught. We turn it into lava or what we get when we light a match and have it sepperate from God. This fire is a symbol of the literal, visible pressence of God in person. It is seeing Jesus not veiled by humanity.

It is not a place of torcture, some kind of divine spanking where God takes folk and roasts them and toasts them and they die in a big barbecue. God has been hiding, letting us only expirence enough of him to stay alive, and sometimes, like with prophets, a bit more, but as Moses was not yet able to see God's face and live, so God hid him in the cleft of the rock. God has limited his glory to where it would not kill us. At the end it will not be limited and veiled. We will either be consumed by this fire, or we will be like the bush in the fire but not consummed and Moses only that we will be able to see God's face.

Moses is and Aaron will enjoy the expirence of Exodus 24 again, but sadly it appears that Nadab and Abihu has changed for the worst and when they return to the Exodus 24 expirence they will find their response very different than it was in Exodus 24.
I hope this helps.

Kevin H, without going into specific details, given my, (according to my understanding), paramount Bible and SOP examples below, I don’t find your exposition above, in most parts, or as an entire whole, to be Biblically accurate/correct.

E.g., How does it reconcile with e.g., Jesus’ statement in Luke 12:47-50; and the (moreover, visionary) statements in the SOP such as:



The destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah is also an explicitly associated type of Hell, i.e., God’s Final Judgement on the wicked (Luke 17:28-30; 2 Peter 2:6 = “a figure”; cf. Jude 1:7) that does not point to something figurative.

Also it must be kept in mind that the use of fire is basically out of a concrete necessity to purify the earth of sin and sinners. Just like God needed to use a “violent wind” to forcefully bury the many bodies of humans and animals after the flood (PP 107.4-108.2), in order to avoid a disease outbreak, He will likewise need to expunge sin from the earth. (And, as normative with fire, it is the “smoke” from that burning that will linger in the universe for a while after that Rev 14:10, 11 e.g., the lingering smoke after the 9/11 WTC destruction, and also, in a “nuclear winter” scenario (i.e., following the detonation of many nuclear bombs over large cities, it is actually the smoke from the (instant) burning of various tangible flammable things in that city (e.g., buildings, vegetation, etc) that produce this ‘sunlight-obstructing cloud of smoke’.)

All this to say that God is not using fire merely for reasons of being as hurtful as possible, but because there is a tangible purifying necessity which He has to deal with and this is the best way to do so. However, He does also justly deal with the tangible reality of His wrath on sin and sinners at that time.

May I make reference to the last line of your quote from Mrs. White which is the essence: While God is to the wicked a consuming fire, He is to His people both a sun and a shield. Revelation 20:6; Psalm 84:11.

She also says "The Glory of him that is love will destroy the wicked"

Dr. Kenneth Hart from Loma Linda has a wonderful complatation of all he could find of what Mrs. White says about it. It is amazing how much she does have to say and the direction that it goes to.

Also read in Desire of Ages "It is Finished"

Once you start to notice this theam in Mrs. White you find that she is full of allusions towards the view of hell that we find in the Pentituch.

Yes, Sodom and Gomorrah is a type, but we find the other passessages the anti-type. God, God's beauty, God's love, God's glory is the eternal fire.

This is particularly my point in regards to having proper exegesis. EGW has just made a detailed exposition on the literalness in the destruction of the wicked, all summarized in her statement as depicted to her by God in vision: “while the earth was wrapped in the fire of destruction”, however you seemingly are not taking this into consideration to maintain this previous claim that:



You are incorrectly using that last statement to paint the previous literal statements, when that is not to be the exegetical case. The certain is always to define the less certain. So in this case, it is thus seen that the “glory of God” are being made in figurative/proverbial/theological terms, yet, as the Bible and SOP clearly reveal, the effectuation of this “figure” will be manifested in literal/tangible elements, in this case fire. So these “glory of God” statements are only indicative of “why” this destruction will take place (cf. e.g., Isa 48:9-11; 42:8) and not concretely to “how” and “by what means” it will be realized.



Do you have a specific link to that material, presumably, from his website?



In a related discussion, I have done an exposition on that entire chapter. See here (Post #132171). (Further comments are made in followup posts). I there also do not see/agree that this is either the tangible way in which God does this destruction, nor that such a “self-combustible” destruction is achievable in these 6000+ years of GC during which God’s counterbalancing presence, through His Spirit, has prevented the full maturing/blooming of sin to that needed “critical mass” stage.



In those plausible Pentateuch examples of “Hell fire” (which I actually merely see as ‘God’s control over fire that He uses’) that you cite, namely: the burning bush; the pillar of fire by night; the fire on Mt. Sinai during 10C; an actual, literal fire was used. The fact that it did not consume what it was lighted upon is merely due to the fact that God was causing it not to be consumed. Indeed, and contrary to what you had said, the wicked will varyingly live in Hell’s fire for a while, until God deems that they have paid the full penalty for their sins. Then they will be, at different times, consumed by that literal fire.

And “seeing the face of God” and/or “His (frontal) Glory” is symbolic of more clearly understanding God. (Cf. here (Post #131957) and in Post #132171). And only those who have lived righteous lives and have no remaining sins on their ledger, can have this fuller revelation/understanding and not have nothing to be held accountable. That concept is repeatedly seen in judicial settings, where a person may be cleared as innocent of their accusation(s) if they had acted in genuine ignorance of what the law was and/or did not actually do that wrong. (That “innocence” is what occurs when Jesus’s blood is allowed to be applied to the sinner).



The actual effectuation of Hell is the only anti-type to Hell. I.e., what it will actually be. Everyhting else is a type. (God’s “control of fire” when He makes use of it is a distinct issue). Passages which speak of ‘God’s beauty, love and glory’ are merely figurative indications as to why (i.e., what will justify) God will tangibly light that final Hell fire. Indeed it is because of His Beauty, Love (for the righteous), and Glory that the universe must ultimately be thoroughly purged from sin and sinners. Still, in doing this, God has to deal with concrete realities, and that is why the element of “fire” is the best option to do so, indeed for the same “realistic/tangible” reason why a Physical War was needed to, in a self-determined, objective manner, resolve the issue in Heaven and determine then who would occupy Heaven as a headquarter.*

*That decision is seen to be even more just and fair when it is taken into due/realistic consideration that they Devil and the cast out Angels literally have absolutely no place to live in this universe. (Perhaps only occasionally resting on asteroids until they disintegrate.) The Devil is called the prince and power of the air because he does have to constantly fly around the universe. So God afforded him a fair chance to have a concrete domain.

I understand much of the other to be Mrs. White's use of symbolic writing, maybe even from her sources, for a running natative and the phrases you see as symbolic I understand as her giving what the symbolic language symbolizes.

Now this has been a debate in the church since before we were born. Elder, I think his last name is Fifefield taught this. He was a friend of Mrs. White's and we do not have record of her correcting his error, but her in such as those phrases you see as more symbolic and I see her as explaining the symbolism, she appears to use her ideas. Lynn Harper Wood developed this in the 1920s. Paul Heubech was one of Wood's students and would teach this. Edwin Heppenstall could not decide between the two views. A number of our leading theologians in the 1950s held this view including some who contributed to the SDABC. And even before Adventism, while I have not seen enought to convince me, I've seen evidence and heard people argue that William Tyndal had a similar if not same view of hell fire as Fifefield, Wood, Heubech and others taught. We need to keep studying and be fair to our understanding of the Bible and Mrs. White.