Revival,
Seems too shaky? How about impossible
Nope. Not impossible. Just that there seems to be a narrative break which probably means that John has shifted perspective to the world presently on Earth. That the “Bride” (the eschatological Body of Christ) is inviting people to “drink the water of life” which was just described as coming from the City certainly lends that view some credibility, just not enough that I would count it established or attempt to make a case there. But, still, the ground is no shakier than the exegetical ground on which literally any passage has been forced into the service of eternal torment.
since the evangelistic tone of Rev 22:16-17 is to the church toward people who are alive in the present world
Yeah, that’s probably right, but not absolutely so.
and not to people who have been handed an unpardonable penalty in the LOF.
And the reason it’s not absolutely so is because I refuse to read theology into the text, like that. When I see the people that were previously thrown into the Lake of Fire experiencing something that looks a lot like redemption–oh, I’m sorry. I didn’t go into quite enough detail. Let me try again. When I see entities named with names matching those of previously named entities, with no indications that they are, in fact, different entities and, moreover, pretty solid narrative continuity between the entities in question, who were, at one point, condemned, suddenly being redeemed and I have no real, solid exegetical evidence to conclude that they are different entities, the idea that the Lake of Fire is “unpardonable” suddenly seems like a theological contrivance rather than an exegetical conclusion. Then again, ECT as a whole seems like a theological contrivance rather than an exegetical conclusion.
