Heb 12:29
I have wondered about this quite a bit. God is a consuming fire. He was the literal pillar of fire by night, leading Israel. That is obviously symbolic as well but, could it be both at the time of the end? I think the stars will literally fall from the sky. At that time will we see all things, literal and spiritual? I may be being silly but, I think it may be so. 
Also, the beast, with all the technology is it possible? Then there is the Lamb slain, John saw Him like that in the vision. When the two realms begin to mesh, will literal and symbolic be the result of “meshed” vision? I kind of lean toward that idea. Not sure though, would love to hear more from others on it.
When should we decide to take things literal or figurative? Is it whenever we think something is too absurd to be real?
I’m not very firm on any of these questions because it’s hard to find a “it switches from literal to figurative here”. How do we know for sure?
Just talking with different religious people this has always been a hard one for me. (For example the Jehovah’s Witnesses I talked to claimed that the whole book of Revelation is figurative while other people take it totally literal.)
John 6:63
As for the LoF being a futuristic event, Has anyone concidered that prophecy fullfilled?
Revelation is translated from 4 significantly different perspectives - basicly.
- Preterist - it was fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem.
- Historically - Rev. was fulfilled in the rise and fall of Rome.
- Metaphorically - it speaks of the ongoing evil within us and within our cultures.
- Futuristically - speaks of end-time events
Why is it translated so variously? Because it is full of figurative language which lends itself to being widely translated and read into. Like any painting it can be interpreted from many different perspectives. Because of the dramatic, prophetic, pictorial and not didactic nature of Revelations, I do not appeal to it to establish doctrine, but to illustrate doctrine. From the UR perspective, the LoF is interesting in that before teh LoF the nations and the kings are anti-Christ; after the LoF the nations and kings are worshipping God and paying Him homage as subjects of His Kingdom.
Of course proponents of ECT will point to this painting, interpreting it from their perspective, and reading into it their beliefs. Annihilationists and Reconcilists will have the same tendency of interpreting this painting from their perspective.
What irritates me is when people appeal to the LoF as evidence of ECT AND refuse to consider any evidence to the contrary, and appeal to the LoF as being absolutely literal when they themselves interpret much of the rest of Revelation as being metaphorical. And relatively few futurists have even begun to consider the evidence supporting the other 3 views.
I bounce back and forth between your meshed idea and its all symbolic/spiritual.
Also, even considering the Lake of Fire from a futuristic point of view, when I studied it in context I came away with a very different understanding of it. Note:
- The LoF is in the presence of the Lamb and the presence of the angels. Where does Jesus, the Lamb sit? At the right hand of God. What surrounds the throne of God? Angels.
- Brimstone, theon (theo - God) means divine fire.
- Brimstone/sulfur was burnt as incense for both spiritual purification and physical healing by the Greeks and Romans.
- Brimstone/sulfur was also used as medicine, and even today is the foundation for many medicines.
- Torment, basanizo, was a word used to speak of the testing of precious metals for impurities. Such was part of the process of purification by fire.
- Nations and Kings before the Lake of Fire are always pictured as being anti-Christ; after the LoF, the Nations and Kings are pictured as worshipping God and paying Him homage.
- God is said to be a consuming fire.
When I consider these facts, the Lake of Fire takes on a very different meaning. It speaks of the volcanic lake of the fiery, purifying, healing presence of God! Those cast therein, well, have the hell burnt out of them!
yup
Now read 1Cor 3:10-15 and understand it as truth.
Exactly! I feel i am one of the few futurists that can see that… 
nevermind.
I have a better question for you.
Why is Revelation, an apocalyptic writing, THE most metaphorical work in the NT, and essentially one huge parable, is interpreted literally?
I have no idea why the ECT crowd interprets it literally. John did not say these were “literal” visions. And even tho they say its all literal, most know ALL of it isn’t. They know there isn’t a literal woman sitting upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns. 
They know that is not literal. I just cant understand how they seem to know that, yet make the Lake of Fire to be a literal fire. 
As for me, i do think a small portion of Revelation is literal, like i believe in a real man being the antichrist and people taking the mark of the beast in their right hand, not being able to buy or sell. Those things are literal to me, but outside of that, i don’t think too much is. I am still not sure if the new heaven and earth is literal or not. I’d like to think it is and i dont see going by other scriptures why it wouldn’t be… 
As for the plagues and angel pouring out their vials, I’m really not sure on that. I suppose some of it could really be natural disasters or nuclear bombs perhaps.
I’ve met people who took the entire thing literally. I asked about “what was up with the locusts and all?” and this guy went on to explain to me how they’re probably something like God’s helicopters. The guy takes the Bible literally from start to finish and is a YEC. Go figure.
I’m half-undecided as to whether Revelation hasn’t already occurred. We had the corrupt Church, people being murdered for not following it. We had wars, the Bubonic Plague…
The lake of fire is defined as the second death, and then it simply says “if anyone was not found written in the scroll of life, he was cast into the lake of fire” A very quick way to die, and all evil obliterated. From the unsaved perspective, they live a short life, die, appear before the White throne, are judged according to their acts, and then put to death by being cast into the lake of fire, and raised to life. It is not long drawn out. God gets it out of the way quickly for the unbeliever. Yes, I believe the lake of fire is as literal as the second death. An unbeliever dies twice, and death is not life according to the scriptures.
To me it seems clear that the LoF is an answer to the Bronze Laver that stood outside the Tabernacle. We are today cleansed by the washing of water of the word (and the Word), but if we refuse that gentle ablution, there is a harsher method available. I was just reading in Ezekiel today about how Jerusalem would become a smelting furnace with the metals melted in its midst and the dross removed, to purify God’s people from their violence and perversion. Not only that, but Jerusalem itself – the land, apparently – must be purified as it was defiled by its inhabitants. It is a pot so spoiled by filth that it must sit on the fire and be scorched until the scale is burned up and it is cleansed.
So . . . not a nice picture. But Abba had offered Judah the easy way and they had refused to let go their unfaithfulness and violence. Note they did not literally go into a furnace of fire; they went to Babylon, those who survived. The fire is a metaphor for purification and the brimstone for healing (though unpleasant) medicine. I would be surprised if the LoF is in fact anything other than the very presence of our Father, which the reconciled will find so pleasing and desirable, but the unreconciled will desire to avoid at all cost – until they are healed.
Just my opinion, of course, and others will disagree to one extent or another. Naturally I think I’m right 
Otherwise, I’d change my mind!
Love, Cindy
“And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment”
— Hebrews 9:27
It seems clear to me that humans only die once. The “Second Death” is then an “Other” Death. A different kind of death. A spiritual death or some other sort perhaps (because we’re already spiritually dead, I suspect it’s the death of Adam. Because not everyone finishes that process in this life, I suspect that we all, save the overcomers, must finish this death in the Lake of Fire). This second literal death, which your Concordant ilk, like Zender, tend to fancy, seems awfully redundant and trivial. What’s the point of putting someone to sleep momentarily? Your thoughts?
The unbeliever will not be conscious of the second death. From their standpoint they will be cast into eternal bliss. How is that redundant and trivial? In fact it seems trivial and redundant to judge a sinner at the white throne, and then to continue his ordeal for an entire eon. Remember the lake of fire does not burn out death, it is death. It is also the death of Christ that will save those who stand before the White throne, not their own suffering or purification process. I like what A.E. Knoch had to say “It has been pressed that the lake of fire is a purging process, a disinfecting agency, calculated to rid the sinner of his sin and make him fit for God’s presence. This, of course, is the purgatory of Roman Catholicism, with little modification” (The Unveiling of Jesus Christ)
‘WE ARE ALL BROTHERS’ refers to Hebrews 9.27 “And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgement” I would just ask what is the context of this passage? Is it not referring to the 'high priests? Also it can be argued that there is nothing in the word ‘once’ hapax to imply there won’t be a second time. Paul says in Phil 4.16 “you send once and twice to my need”
God bless!
Thanks Puddy. Please let me know if I sound antagonistic. I just want to tease out your idea because I can’t quite make sense of it. You said the unbeliever won’t even be conscious of this second death. Presumably this means they are put to death, and immediately revived? What do you think is the purpose of this death — what does it affect in the lives of the unbeliever? Is faith and repentance unnecessary for their ultimate restoration? Or is their restoration “decreed” by God, as per monergism?
I don’t quite understand the problem with “the purgatory of Roman Catholicism” (in the modern and reformed sense — little ‘r’). I don’t accept purgatory because it is a historical tradition in the western church, but nor would I reject any belief because it’s used by the Roman Catholic church. That seems equally odd.
No, Hebrews 9 is referring to the role of the High Priest (Christ) to atone for our sins. 9:27 is to note that because we face death and judgement only once, there is no need for Yeshua to offer up himself more than once for our sins. It seems strange that we would actually die twice, but I haven’t really thought this stuff through.
Hebrews 9.27 from the Concordant version “And, in as much as it is reserved to the men to be dying once, yet after this a judging…” seems to point to the actual high priests. Yet we know for another reason the passage isn’t saying all human beings will experience death. In These. 4.15 we read “For this we are saying to you by the word of the Lord, that we, the living, who are surviving to the presence of the Lord…” So it is clear not all men will die.
Concerning the casting of unbelievers into the Lake of fire, they are likely to be under the jurisdiction of the second death for a very long time. I believe the final eon ‘new heavens and new earth’ lasts for thousands of years. Yet from the perspective of the unbelievers, since they are dead, they will not be aware of the passage of time. In the scriptures death means death. In religion, death means life. When Christ responded to the Sadducees, he very quickly shut down their argument. The Sadducees denied a physical resurrection Matt. 22.23 and as far as I am aware only held to the writings of Moses. So Christ responded with the appropriate scripture to prove the resurrection. “Now concerning the resurrection of the dead, did you not read that which is declared to you by God, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? He is not the God of the dead but of the living.” Ironically, religion turns this passage on it’s head, and twists Christ’s own words to prove 'life after death Yet the context is the resurrection.
In conclusion since the dead are non existent, and unaware of time, the only experience between this life and an eternity of bliss for the unbeliever is the white throne judgement. It will be at the white throne that they will be judged according to their acts, but it will also be where they learn about the love of God. Yes, they will experience chastening, but they will finally understand who God is, and will believe in his goodness. To God be the glory!