The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Lake of Fire = Dead Sea

Evangelical Universalism
#1

I’ve always assume the Lake of Fire to be picturing a volcanic lake of lava, but recently I’ve run across evidence that indicates that “Lake of Fire” was another name for the “Dead Sea”.

The Dead Sea is located in the Jordon Rift Valley, a fault line with significant geological activity. The Ash remains of the 5 cities, including Sodom and Gomorrah, are on the West side of the Dead Sea, ash created by the burning of Limestone with Brimstone (sulfur). Their are significant amounts of gas, sulfur, and asphault that are under and around the Dead Sea. When these gases are released just a spark can ignite them. And though there is water it is toxic, 10 times more salty than ocean water. Pre 1700’s map makers show the Dead Sea with flames and smoke over it. Historians mention it being a land of fires, smoke, and brimstone. The Greeks called it Lake Asphaltites (spelling?).

Anyhow, if this is so and John saw in his vision the Dead Sea, though it be active with fire and smoke, how does this change one’s understanding of the visions?

To me the Dead Sea connotes being surrounded by death and destruction associated with the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, but does not speak of “torture” as in burning with fire. What do you think?

? on the Lake of Fire & Second Death
#2

Puts an extra spin on being salt in the Earth, that’s for sure. :laughing:

#3

“IF” John did see “The Dead Sea” in his visions, then how does this effect his/our understanding of his visions of the beast and the prophet being cast into it, Satan being cast there in, and the great white throne judgment where all evil works are cast there in, and where those given over to evil are cast there in?

I’m really wrestling with this.

To me, a person being cast into a volcanic lake of fire, lava, sulfur, outbursts of fire (how I’ve always pictured the lake of fire) is VERY different than a person being cast into the Dead Sea, a salt lake in a desert surrounded by tar pits, occasional outbursts of fire from the gasses and sulfur under and around the lake, the ash-remains of Sodom and Gomorrah on its banks. The former, lake of lava seems much more torturous, burning pain, unable to breath, etc. The later, the Dead Sea, is certainly a place of death, unlivable, but not nearly as “torturous” as the former. To me it even calls to mind the experience of Moses, Elijah, and Jesus in their wilderness experiences. Being surrounded by death moves one to desire to change.

Just pondering. Anyone want to ponder with me on this?

#4

The Bronze Laver may be what John was picturing for the LOF. The entire book is temple symbolism. Not that it couldn’t be both. The salt from the dead sea was extremely valuable, still is. Salt can lose its flavor from there because the minerals break down, the salt Jesus spoke of would have been from there.

#5

There is a major logical fallacy on basing one’s belief on pre-1700 maps because from 1400-1600 there was a major religious revival concerning the earth after the discovery of the America’s. If the maps were created around 100 AD or so, then there would be some credibility in calling the dead sea, the Lake of Fire.

Though I will look into it more since Gehenna and the Lake of Fire has been my area of study for the last 8 years.

#6

The maps are just one minor point. The primary point is the reality of the Dead Sea’s physical location and the geological activity of the area, the tar pits surrounding it, it being on a major fault line, Sodom and Gomorrah’s ash remains which were destroyed by fire and brimstone being on its shores, tar (asphault) bubling up from its depths, etc. The Greeks calls the Dead Sea, Lake Asphaltites. It’s also interesting that the Greek actually says “the lake of **the **fire of **the **burning in brimstone”, ( τὴν λίμνην **τοῦ **πυρὸς **τὴν **καιομένην ἐν θείῳ." which to me seems to much more clearly call to mind the burning of Sodom and Gomorrah with fire and brimstone than just “lake of fire”. The article “the” seems to signify a particular fire and brimstone, not just fire and brimstone in general.

As I’ve pondered this more, if “the lake of the fire and the burning in brimstone” does reference the Dead Sea, then this radically changes the picture. Instead of being an unimaginably toturous seen of burning lava, the Dead Sea is a place that, well, being a lake filled with undrinkable water surrounded by desert with an average temperature between 85 and 100 F would be a place that would create in one a tremendous thirst. And being it is a place of death and destruction, it would create in one a tremendous desire for life. And considering its association with the ash remains of Sodom and Gomorrah, it would speak of the fearsome judgment of God on evil. One can see it being a place that is certainly uncomfortable, a place for serious reflection, but not torturous as being cast into a lava lake. Anyone cast into the Dead Sea would soon come to a place of seeking relief, but would not be consumed totally.

#7

I don’t see a mutual exclusion between the Dead Sea acting up, and a volcanic lake of fire. Sodom and Gommorrah weren’t destroyed by thirst and privation. :wink:

It’s still a usage of literal images as metaphors for something greater on the way. The link between the Dead Sea and Jesus’ saying about salt becoming unsalty is quite interesting (and something I’ve long speculated about, so I’m glad to see a bit of confirmation), but Jesus’ most striking application of that imagery comes when saying that all shall be salted by the unquenchable fire of Gehenna.

Since I have never understood that promise to be merely a literal prophecy about dead bodies ending up in the valley of Hinnom sooner or later (or sooner and later), it certainly doesn’t throw me out any for the fire typified by Gehenna to be connected to salt typified from the Dead Sea (in lake of fire mode or otherwise). That would be like interpreting the warnings about the chaff being burned as though someday there will be wheat with chaff that has to be burned and then that prophecy will be fulfilled without looking for anything more later, the end.

Anyway, I very much like the idea. :slight_smile: I would be curious to see more discussion on it.

#8

Well so far, there’s been no mention of the actual scriptural definition of the lake of fire.

It’s the second death, the one after the first death. We’re told so little about the LOF. So we tend to try and fill in the gaps. What we ARE told is that it is the second death. It would be unlikely that John expected his readers to suddenly understand “death” to be something completely different to what they normally understand “death” to be.

So, at present, I’ll say that the lake of fire is (the second) death.

#9

Actually the word “second”, does not necessarily mean “second in order”; rather, it could simply mean “other”, “the other death”. If one interprets Revelation from a Spiritualist perspective, it’s easy to see that the lake of the fire and the burning with brimstone would be equivalent to dying to one’s self, where all that is worthless and unholy is burnt up by the fiery judgment of God. Judgment will burn the hell out of you; I know! And from a Futurist perspective it very well could be metaphorical of death-to-self (the other death) also. In encountering the righteous holy judgment of God we will certainly die-to-self. All of our selfishness with be exposed, we’ll be forced to see just how ugly we’ve been so that we can be forgiven. There must be a reconning with our sins for us to be forgiven and have our souls healed. We’s a sick bunch of people, needing our souls healed - like Isaiah experienced! Judgment lead to repentance which lead to forgiveness.

And Jason, concerning salt loosing it’s savor, from what I’ve read salt from the Dead Sea can go bad and “loose” it’s saltiness because of the high concentration of other chemical elements in it.

It’s also interesting that Herod built Masada in the Dead Sea region. Though it is a desert area, the pollen count is low, the barometric pressure and thus oxygen percentage is higher because of being below sea level, and the water, salt, and mud from the Dead Sea are valuable for their healing of various skin ailments. One can even sunbath safer because the UV rays are significantly reduced because of the lower elevation. So in this place, the Dead Sea, I can see the dual dynamics of Judgment (Sodom, Gomorrah, fire, brimstone) and healing. It’s a very interesting study.

For so long I’ve pictured the lake of the fire and the burning brimstone to be a volcanic lake of molten lava that it’s really challenging to picture it as the Dead Sea, even if the area becomes active again with outbursts of gas and flames from underneath or around the sea, or tar pits that catch fire and darken the skies with smoke. Selah!

#10

The more I’ve pondered this, the more I’ve come to think that John was speaking of the Dead Sea. It’s salt saturated, completely undrinkable, even poinsonous if consumed. Between the heat, not unbearable for some time, and the salt one would develope a powerful thirst. This could also be the wilderness area where Jesus was tempted. Desert areas in scripture are often where the people of God are tried and tempted, dealt with. The desert is where the children of Israel roamed for 40 years until they were ready to go into the promise land. It is there that as a people they learned their dependence upon God, to trust and obey Him.

Anyhow, visions of the Beast, false prophet, Satan, and people being cast into the Dead Sea is significantly different than visions of them being cast into a volcanic lava lake.

Of course, that’s one of the most challenging aspects of Revelations, it’s a series of visions, short movie clips, that some assume are sequential, others view them as different perspectives of the same thing; they can be interpreted in many different ways.