The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Rev.21 7-8

Evangelical Universalism Arguments against Evangelical Universalism
#1

Hi all, I’ve been quiet for a while, as I’ve been reading ‘Hope Beyond Hell’ which I’m enjoying very much.
However, the following scripture was not dealt with in a convincing way for me. So I’d like to see what anyone here makes of it: Rev 21:7 He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son.
Rev 21:8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

Thank you, Craggs

#2

Until they overcome and come out from the beast and from his image and from his mark.

Verse 6 says that to those who thirst God Himself shall be giving gratuitously of the spring of the water of life. Those who are outside the New Jerusalem in the lake burning with fire and sulphur are the ones who are thirsting and needing healing and needing to rinse their robes; when they do, washing and drinking from the river of life that flows out of the never closed gates of the New Jerusalem, they obtain permission to enter the city and eat of the log of life and be healed by its leaves.

That information is spread out kind-of piecemeal in chapter 22 (and the rest of chapter 21), so it isn’t overly obvious how it fits together, but RevJohn isn’t an overly obvious text to say the least. :wink:

#3

Assuming that one interprets Revelation “Futuristically” and not from a Preterist, Historical, or Spiritual perspective, to me the lake of the fire and the brimstone represents the destruction of evil, evil within us - the second (other) death where we die to self! This highlights the challenge with Apocalyptic literature; it is wide open to various interpretations. Apocalyptic literature was not mean to be interpreted like a text book; rather, it should be interpreted like a painting or series of movie clips from “Lord of the Rings” or the “Matrix”. It’s meant to be inspirational and encouraging and as a warning but not as a road-map of what going to happen in the future, I think. Frankly, to me the Preterist perspective is the most solid, the Spiritual perspective is the most inspirational, and the Historical perspective is very encouraging. The Futuristic perspective, to me, is the most indistinct and open for widely differing interpretations.

#4

Thanks Jason, and Sherman, I’ll take some time to go through the chapters and process your comments. Cheers :slight_smile:

#5

If you’re in process of reading, I think you’ll find Gerry does deal with this question later. (It’s been a while since I read it, so I’m not sure where precisely he gets into this.) His argument about the second death seemed to me to make a great deal of sense. In addition to the things Jason and Sherman have said, I’ll add what I remember from HBH, though much in my own words and shortened of course.

Death is the last enemy to be destroyed. I don’t remember where that is, and whether it was Paul of John (or maybe Jesus?) who said it, but I’m sure you’ve read this. “Death” is not qualified – ie: not “The first death is the last enemy to be destroyed” – so it must apply to death, period. If there is a first death and a last death, and death is the last enemy destroyed, how can this refer ONLY to the FIRST death, leaving the second death intact and undestroyed? The LAST death must be the last enemy. I honestly don’t see any way around this conclusion, but I’m sure some exegete will find a way to say, “Oh no, it wasn’t meant THAT way.” All the same, it works for me. :wink:

#6

Death being the final enemy, is from the eschaton digression in the middle of 1 Cor 15; and it’s kind-of qualified as “the death”.

What it means for the direct article to be used there could be several things (it might mean Satan for example), but it certainly cannot mean the first death only since the context is about what happens during and after the resurrection, thus after the first death. The final enemy can hardly be the first death, since enemies of some sort still exist after the general resurrection (or there wouldn’t be a resurrection of the wicked as well as the good) over whom Christ is trampling and reigning until they submit to Him and so in Him are submitted to the Father etc. (Whatever that means. :wink: )