As I share in the thread Lake of Fire = Dead Sea ([Lake of Fire = Dead Sea)) it is possible, even probable imo, that John actually saw in his vision the Dead Sea - the lake of the fire and the burning sulfur. The ash remains of Sodom and Gomorrah burnt with fire and brimstone are on its West banks. It, the Dead Sea, has tar, asphault, bubble up from it’s bottom. And geological surveys of the area indicate significant pockets of gas under the Dead Sea; when these vent it only takes a spark to have flames coming out of the water, like oil slicks that catch fire or gas burning on top of the water. The area also has significant quantities of sulfur, brimstone. And in Revelation, the beast and false prophet are cast into the lake of the fire and the burning brimstone after the battle of Armegedon which is relatively very near the Dead Sea. And this occurs before the scene of the New Heavens and the New Earth (whatever that means). It thus seems very likely to me that John saw in his visions the beast and false prophet, all wickedness and evil ultimately being cast into the Dead Sea.
A picture of evil being cast into the Dead Sea, a salt saturated body of water, is significantly different than things being cast into, let’s say, a volcanic lake of molten lava. The later would seem to be much more torturous, physically excruciating, and unbearable. Whereas things being cast into the Dead Sea would not speak of unbearable, unimaginable torture, would, to me, speak of things being cast aside as worthless and useless; and it would call to mind images of Moses, John, Elijah, and even Jesus being tried, tested in the barren desert wilderness of that area.
I think this reflects the biggest challenge of such apocalyptic literature, that being the very Subjective nature of it. Such artistic means of communication (visions, poetry, paintings, movie clips, etc.) are by their very nature open to a wide range of interpretations. What people see in such visions (movie clips) is often more of a reflection of what they already believe and feel, than of what the painter necessarily intended to communicate. And what the painter or director wanted to communicate through the moving picture is challenging to discern. The big messages are often pretty easily discerned, but the details may or may not have a meaning. They might just be filler.
I believe that the main message of John’s visions is that Jesus is in charge, the King of kings and Lord of lords. The visions Reveal who Jesus Is! He’s the one who is ultimately in charge, the Lamb and the Conquering King! The other details are almost just filler.
Anyway, it’s also significant to note that the word translated “second” in the “second death” does not necessarily mean “second in order” but can also be translated as “other”, the “other death”. The “first” death to be spoken of, and the one that shall ultimately come to an end is “physical” death. One day all dying shall cease. I think that the “other death” that is pictured here is a “death to self”, like where Jesus says that “whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will find it”, or becoming “dead to sin” as Paul calls it.
But then again, that’s the challenge of apocalyptic literature; it is open to a very wide range of interpretaions because it is very subjective. Just like people see paintings from different perspectives, resulting in different interpretations. So though I see UR in the visions of Revelation, such is definitely a reflection of my beliefs, not necessarily what Jesus intended to convey. But that same principle is true for anyone else’s interpretation of these series of moving pictures!
I don’t think we have to worry about it. I’m convinced we have people entering and leaving the Lake of Fire (see the Kings of the Earth thread) and we have countless texts describing an ultimate and universal reconciliation. How God will complete His plan is peripheral.