I'm confused by the above sentences. Did God create an actual "lake of fire" for the devil and his angels or is it imagery?
Worth mentioning is that the OT mentions no such thing.
I wouldn't say it doesn't mention it. Normally it talks about the righteous living forever with God while the wicked will be cut off.
1Sa 2:9 "He keeps the feet of His godly ones, But the wicked ones are silenced in darkness; For not by might shall a man prevail.
Psa 58:10-11 The righteous will rejoice when he sees the vengeance; He will wash his feet in the blood of the wicked. And men will say, "Surely there is a reward for the righteous; Surely there is a God who judges on earth!"
Psa 94:12-14 Blessed is the man whom You chasten, O LORD, And whom You teach out of Your law; That You may grant him relief from the days of adversity, Until a pit is dug for the wicked. For the LORD will not abandon His people, Nor will He forsake His inheritance.
Psa 145:20-21 The LORD keeps all who love Him, But all the wicked He will destroy. My mouth will speak the praise of the LORD, And all flesh will bless His holy name forever and ever.
At any rate, it's supposed to be scary, not necessarily a documentary fact.
If our Lord stated it, I think it's more than "scary".
I can't hep your confusion, HD. Maybe you can tell us just where this eternal lake of fire is supposed to be? If I remember well, the fire itself is burning sulfur. Eternally burning sulfur?
The verses referring to the lake of fire are metaphorical, but then I am sure there are some who take them literally.
Normally [the OT] talks about the righteous living forever with God while the wicked will be cut off
Judaism doesn't teach that. It is possible that you are misinterpreting their own scripture? According to Jewish Encyclopedia Sheol is
"a place beneath the earth, beyond gates, where both the bad and the good, slave and king, pious and wicked must go at the point of death."
Soteriology is unknown to Judaism. Therefore your assertion that the "righteous living forever with God" cannot come from the OT.
You've already have gone on record as not believing in the Old Testament and not believing in Paul's writings
That's a mischaracterization, HD. I never said I don't believe the OT. I just don't believe in it literally. I also believe that some of the Episles are writings of St. Paul. The way he is interpreted by Protestants is what I doubt. I also look at St.Paul as a necessary element in saving the church, which was literally evicted in Israel. There was no other choice but to go to the Gentiles.
Acts 13:46 speaks poignantly about this:
"It was necessary that the word of God be spoken to you first; since you repudiate it and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we are turning to the Gentiles."
Thus, Gentiles came to the Apostles as an afterthought, as Christ never suggested that they preach to the Gentiles. To the contrary, He told them to stay away from them! So, if it was God's intention to take His message to the Gentiles, it was not revealed while He was walking on easrth. To say that he revealed it to St. Paul is unconvincing because when He died he is quoted as saying "it is finished/accomplished."
Christ was God's full revelation to mankind. Further revelations simply don't make sense, which is why to me St. Paul's Epistles are not Gospels, and why the Book of Revelation is suspect. They both claim further revelation, which suggests that Christ's revealtion was incomplete.
If our Lord stated it, I think it's more than "scary". Psa 30:3 O LORD, You have brought up my soul from Sheol; You have kept me alive, that I would not go down to the pit
Again, you are proofing Christ with OT. Humanity was in the pit hopelessly until Christ came and offered everyone His hand.