The Lake of Fire

[Paige]

I thought it might be interesting to start a thread on the Lake of Fire.

1. What is (was) it?

2. Where did it occur?

3. Is it ongoing?

4. Did it replace hell, hades, sheol, etc...?

From my perspective, here is where I'm currently at:

1. The Lake of Fire was the destruction of the old covenantal Jerusalem. An interesting scripture to take note of concerning this event can be found in Joel 2 :1-3 (specifically vs.3):

" Blow the trumpet in Zion,
and sound an alarm in my holy mountain!
Let all the inhabitants of the land tremble,
for the day of Yahweh comes,
for it is close at hand:
2:2 A day of darkness and gloominess,
a day of clouds and thick darkness.
As the dawn spreading on the mountains,
a great and strong people;
there has never been the like,
neither will there be any more after them,
even to the years of many generations.
2:3 A fire devours before them,
and behind them, a flame burns.
The land is as the garden of Eden before them,
and behind them, a desolate wilderness.

In describing judgement, I find it interesting that the OT prophet describes a fire before them and behind them. Ever walked into a lake? How would you describe where the water is in reference to where you are?

2. Upon recognizing the "what", it becomes much easier to identify the "where". Since this was apocalyptic language being used to describe a physical happening, the location was that physical city that God destroyed, namely Jerusalem.

3. Is it ongoing? I like the way our friend Barry describes the permanent effect of what is no longer happening. The Lake of Fire swallowed up all that was left of the Old Covenant. It did its job. In using a fire to describe God's judgement, we have a picture of permanancy before us. If I throw a log into a fire, it burns until it is no more (unless the fire is extinguished prematurely). Once burned, it is gone. When I read the book of Rev., I get no message there of God extinguishing the fire before it has done its job. Therefore, I conclude that all constituent elements of the OC are gone. Forever.

4. Since I believe this to be a physical event, it is easy for me to see that it did not replace hades. God is not throwing dead people into a city that has long since expired.

Please bear in mind that these are my opinions. Feel free to jump in with your own. If you have scriptures that bear out what I've presented here or contradict, this is the place to bring them. We can respectfully discuss the issue and hopefully come to a place of better understanding. :) In discussing this, there are more attributes that can be brought out regarding judgement, fire, and the character of God, IMO. I'd love to hear your thoughts!

Paige

[davo]

Hi Paige, I've remixed some thoughts that I recently posted over at PP re the 'lake of fire':

Israel's AD70 'lake of fire' was her 'second death' – the permanent exile [death] of the Mosaic regime; there was NO resurrection for old covenant Israel from this second death – hence "second" or last or final. Israel's 'first death' was her 70-year exile [death] in Babylon from 587BC onwards. Being cast out of their Land meant being out of covenant, and being out of a covenant relationship with her God meant being in covenantal death, i.e., exile, thus theologically speaking "Israel's first death".

Yet there was in this death a promise of resurrection [Eze 37:1-14] out from their graves of covenant exile [death] and this national and covenantal resurrection is what Jesus and his first-fruit followers brought to fruition in and on behalf of their brethren, historic Israel. This had the preordained effect of reconciling the rest of creation back to God – Israel through her Messiah and His elect WERE God's means to God's ends – the restoration of man. THAT was the work of the elect – and those elect prior to the "this generation" saints were all part of what God was building towards in that "end of the ages" period.

Thus the lake of fire was the terminus of the old age – the 'lake of fire' fulfilled its role, it had and has NO perpetuity past its accomplished task. The lake of fire, historic Israel's 'second death' was relative to an age – that age. Israel's AD70 conflagration was the literal, temporal and corporeal outward manifestation of the greater covenantal reality – the final end of the old covenant world.

[Barry]

Davo said,

"Thus the lake of fire was the terminus of the old age – the 'lake of fire' fulfilled its role, it had and has NO perpetuity past its accomplished task. The lake of fire, historic Israel's 'second death' was relative to an age – that age. Israel's AD70 conflagration was the literal, temporal and corporeal outward manifestation of the greater covenantal reality – the final end of the old covenant world."

Agreed, but there is IMO a historical perpetuity Ezk. 16:53-63 that is misconstrued as a position of perpetuity. [Which answers to Matt. 12:32.]

Any thoughts?
Barry

[Paige]

Agreed, but there is IMO a historical perpetuity Ezk. 16:53-63 that is misconstrued as a position of perpetuity. [Which answers to Matt. 12:32.]

Barry, can you flesh this out a little for me?

:) Paige

[davo]

IOW Barry, the LoF is put forth as an endless "position" [place to be hereafter] as opposed to the perpetual historic witness or record that the LoF was concerning the judgment that came on all things "old".

[Barry]

Humanity is on a jouney IMHO.
There is pre end of age history and post end of age history.
The old covenant man is told two truths.
1) You will never be forgiven (Historical as in Jer. 20:11, 32:39-40).
2) I will reconcile you back to me.
Number one is historical. Number two is relationship (Is. 54:4, 64:9, Jer. 3:16, 31:34, ).
Number one is the history of eshcatology. Two, the character of the new age.

one is finished with but remembered historically. It must be.
two is present relationship reality wherein within relationship framework all is forgotten and everything is new.

Paul as a Hebrew spoke of his own life in similar terms.
Historical 1 Tim. 1:15
Present relationship 1 Tim 1:16

Barry

[Barry]

IOW Barry, the LoF is put forth as an endless "position" [place to be hereafter] as opposed to the perpetual historic witness or record that the LoF was concerning the judgment that came on all things "old".

That's for sure:)
Barry

[Paige]

Thanks guys! Very helpful.

[Barry]

Page, I think that all of these points can be merged together for the most part. Your comments on Joel 2 :1-3 (specifically vs.3) are excellent IMHO.
Davo's word study is very insightful.

A unified theory of quantum mechanics is next. :rofl::rofl::rofl:
Barry

[Paige]

I have to thank a friend for that insight into Joel 2. Can't claim my own thoughts there!

I agree that these points can be merged together. A big "thank you" to everyone who has helped me see these things!

Paige

[David Timm]

What are the differences, if any, between the old economy and the old covenant? What about hell and the LoF? I understand the old economy (though not a Biblical term) as the period from Adam's sin up until 70AD and it affected all humanity. I see the old covenant as being the core of the old economy and occuring from Mt. Sinai until 70AD. I see the judgment of hell as being specific to unbelieving Israel (old covenant) and yet being an aspect of the LoF which affected all unbelieving humanity (old economy). I see the new in a similar way. The new covenant was only for all Israel (Rom 11:27; Jer 31:31-32) and the firstfruits church, and because of it Israel was able to deliver the earth. The new economy thus encompasses all humanity and it's core is the new covenant. Any thoughts?

David

[Barry]

What are the differences, if any, between the old economy and the old covenant? What about hell and the LoF? I understand the old economy (though not a Biblical term) as the period from Adam's sin up until 70AD and it affected all humanity. I see the old covenant as being the core of the old economy and occuring from Mt. Sinai until 70AD. I see the judgment of hell as being specific to unbelieving Israel (old covenant) and yet being an aspect of the LoF which affected all unbelieving humanity (old economy). I see the new in a similar way. The new covenant was only for all Israel (Rom 11:27; Jer 31:31-32) and the firstfruits church, and because of it Israel was able to deliver the earth. The new economy thus encompasses all humanity and it's core is the new covenant. Any thoughts?

David

My present view is:
The old covenant began with Adam. This developed into the Law which took an official standing in the old covenant. The Law partly enables Israel to be a national Adam. The Adam of Genesis explained to Israel what had happened to them as a nation under the law.
Genesis 1 and 2 is covenantal creation of the old covenant.

Adam finds himself to be an exceptional being within nature (naming the animal for example). That is to say the "nature" that he can see and detect and feel and experience.
[The Hebrew writer is not interested in "nature" as a science but rather "nature" as to what man preserved it to be at this time. The physical to spiritual dichotomy that we may form is the result IMHO of misunderstanding the biblical term "nature" to mean the physical that we think of in our western thinking. The "natural" in the bible IMHO refers to the realm of human possibility as it then stood in it's natural order.]

The "order" of Genesis one is the "order" of the old covenant. (The new covenant does not need the sun as a light). The bible does not speak of "nature" as a science as westerners do but nature as a position of limited possibility as opposed to heavenly possibility.

So Adam finds himself a special being in nature made from the dust of the earth. Adam finds himself choosing to be fully that natural being.
The "serpent" and its wisdom is the wisdom of natural possibility. The serpent is the "form" of procreation for which then circumcision becomes an important "sign" and shadow of a covenantal removing of the flesh as a limited natural possibility.
The mark on the hand (right hand of human possibility) and the forehead (circumcision) placed the official old covenant being as a marked beast of nature, "bred for the slaughter". An unreasoning beast of tribe, ethnicity, sectarianism, gender, geneology, (flesh and blood).
So Israel finds itself reliving the Adam experience under the law. Israel "heads" the old covenant and now also the old covenant economy. It tells all it's neighbors that they are uncircumcised sinners.

Just a few thoughts,
Barry

[Amie]

From another post here at TG:


I remember when I really began to dig into the LoF stuff - it was about 3 years ago actually. My son asked me if people go to hell, and if he was in danger of it. I wanted to be sure to cross every "t" and dot every "i" in my power, before offering him that answer. I knew already that hades=grave, and that gehenna was a place.

I didn't have full understanding of the lake of fire until I got into the whole "iron furnace" study. The image that I once had was of a furnace made of iron, but that is NOT what the bible was referring to. It is (imo) talking about a furnace was used to purify iron. The "furnace" was generally made of stone, or actually was a stone if it had the right shape. Anyhow, if the iron melted, it created a pool - like a lake. Often though, the iron isn't heated to that temperature.

The image of the pool brought to my mind the imagry of the judgement of Jerusalem - Jerusalem actually being the furnace as prophesied. That will have created a pool, or a lake.

God compares Israel being brought out of Egypt with their being brought out of an iron furnace (IE De 4:20, 1 King 8:51).

There are different kinds of furnaces in the OT, yet all of them seem to be for the purpose of purification.

"Hades", translated "hell" is "sheol", or "the grave". The power of the grave was removed via the resurrection.

"Gehenna", translated "hell" is "the valley of Hinnom" and was the place that Israel sacrificed their babies to "Molech" (The god of the country in which they lived). By Jesus's day, it was used as a trash dump. It was seen as unclean and unworthy of anything else. The bodies of people who were considered unworthy of holy burial, or criminals in general, were thrown into a large pile for burning. They burned slowly because they were piled so high, so maggots still thrived ("the worm dieth not").

Gehenna was an example of what Old Jerusalem would become - and it did.

"Death" and "Hades" were cast into the Lake of Fire (Gehenna).


What are the differences, if any, between the old economy and the old covenant?

As I understand, "economy" has to do with the management of the "household". If the Old Covenant was a means of management, then they would be synonymous, but I'm not sure that it was. <-- Am interested in thoughts on that.

The Old Covenant was "consume knowledge and die". As Barry pointed out, the Mosaic Law was an increase of knowledge - a "ministry of death". Does knowledge exist today? (I think that we would agree that there is no more death)

Amie

[David Timm]

Israel's AD70 'lake of fire' was her 'second death' – the permanent exile [death] of the Mosaic regime; there was NO resurrection for old covenant Israel from this second death – hence "second" or last or final.

Davo, do you see the lake of fire as being exclusively for Israel or for all those who remained in the old until it dismiss. In Revelation 20 it seems like both those from hades (Israel) and the sea (Gentiles) who did not believe were thrown in.

Barry, thank you for your interesting reply. I apologize if I am way off here but here are some questions that are coming to mind.

Do you see Adam as the first covenant man or first man and is Genesis 1 also talking about the physical creation of the cosmos? I have also been wondering if there is any connection between the "create the heavens and establish the earth" of Isaiah 51:16 which concerns Israel coming out of Egypt and the creation in Genesis 1. Could they be exactly the same thing? This would make every detail of the Genesis creation figurative. If you are correct in saying that Genesis 1 is about the creation of the old covenant then it would also be true that the old covenant existed before the fall. The fall would then be Adam falling short of the demands of that covenant he was already a part of. The problem I have this view that the old covenant started in Genesis 1 is because of verses like Jeremiah 31:31-32.

Jer 31:31 "Behold, days are coming," declares the LORD, "when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah,
32 not like the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was a husband to them," declares the LORD.

but on the other hand...

Hos 6:7 But like Adam they have transgressed the covenant; There they have dealt treacherously against Me.

In this case the OC would have existed since Adam but did not belong to anyone until it was given to Israel.

David

[davo]

Davo, do you see the lake of fire as being exclusively for Israel or for all those who remained in the old until it dismiss. In Revelation 20 it seems like both those from hades (Israel) and the sea (Gentiles) who did not believe were thrown in.
I tend to see it as both/and as opposed to either/or -- just like the focus of redemption was Israel, yet its force was to envelop all. But you are correct IMO in reading "hades" and the "sea" in terms of Israel and Gentile, though it does not specifically say that "the sea" [gentiles] ended up in the LoF.

[Amie]

Hey I agree Davo. I'm thinking that universally, "all" (as in "all") were judged guilty against the perfect measuring stick via the Law.

Amie

[davo]

Well certainly "the condemnation" of the law [the stick] was against all, yet fortunately for us the judgment of guilt that came with it was met in Christ on behalf of all.

[Amie]

..the judgment of guilt that came with it was met in Christ on behalf of all.

Exactly. "All" were guilty and "all" were forgiven.

Amie