I think you really need to do a study of the Greek words used for death and thier use in scripture. It can refer to spiritual death or bodily death. It basically means a separation from. It does not mean to “exist no more”. The Greek word used in Revelation thanatos and does NOT mean lifeless. The Greek word nekros means lifeless and is NOT used in those passages.
Again, the word used for those who die the “second death” is thonatos.
Thonatos - the death of the body that separation (whether natural or violent) of the soul and the body by which the life on earth is ended with the implied idea of future misery in hell the power of death since the nether world, the abode of the dead, was conceived as being very dark, it is equivalent to the region of thickest darkness i.e. figuratively, a region enveloped in the darkness of ignorance and sin metaph., the loss of that life which alone is worthy of the name, the misery of the soul arising from sin, which begins on earth but lasts and increases after the death of the body in hell the miserable state of the wicked dead in hell in the widest sense, death comprising all the miseries arising from sin, as well physical death as the loss of a life consecrated to God and blessed in him on earth, to be followed by wretchedness in hell Lexicons - New Testament Greek Lexicon - New Testament Greek Lexicon - New American Standard – Thanatos
Using just the English words will not lead to understanding what scripture is saying.
>>The evidence truly is overwhelming that those that are not saved cease to exist for all eternity.<<
No it isn’t. The evidence is overwhelming that those who die the second death will suffer for eternity.
The evidence is overwhelming that those who die the second death will suffer for eternity.
And an important distinction for me: I don’t get doctrine from Revelation. I don’t believe that is that book’s function.
If I find myself constantly going to go to Revelation to get “proofs” for my doctrine - especially critical doctrine, I man need to consider what the rest of the Word says about that doctrine. And, frankly, the rest of the bible, regarding the fate of the lost, more closely matches the personality of the God of the bible.
Now, I think there is a special fate for Satan and his angels, but since none of us are angels, I read of it not trying to interpret the fate of any men. Satan and angels have more complete knowledge of the spiritual world than we do. It’s kinda like man doesn’t hold a child as accountable for a particular crime as it does a 30 year old man.
BTW, yes, I spend a lot of time in both the greek and hebrew Lexicons and compare the source scripture for both the KJV and NIV when those sources are different.
I only believed in eternal suffering when I just believed what I was told. When I studied the word, I changed my position. One reason was that as I matured in Christ it clearly diverged more and more from His personality.
Jesus saves me from death and destruction, not eternal, sadistic torture. My God is not a sadist. I come to the Lord out of appreciation for His gift, not fear that he’s a sadistic old fart that will torture me for all eternity otherwise. The latter does not describe the God of the bible but, sadly, is how a lot of people in the church see Him. It is also a wedge Satan uses to keep people from believing God is really capable of love for us. It is used to mock Christianity, and for good reason. Having studied the subject for a number of years now, I’m ashamed that I ever bought into the notion. I think this guy’s analogy demonstrates it best and shows the core problem of the spiritual cunnundrom it puts on us from here http://jeremyandchristine.com/articles/eternal.php
Suppose for a moment that a wonderful man—Mr. Right, if you will—offers a marriage proposal to the woman he loves. “Marry me,” he says, “and I will give you a life like you’ve never dreamed of before. You will be loved with the greatest commitment and passion that any woman has ever known. I will give you the finest house with all of the wonderful things you’ve ever wanted, and you will be happy for the rest of your days!”
Now suppose the woman is very flattered by the proposal, but is uncertain about whether or not she is ready for such a commitment. Asking for a few more days to think it over, Mr. Right answers, “You are welcome to take more time, but it’s only fair that I warn you what will happen if you decline my generous offer. Your only option, other than spending paradise with me, is to be thrown into my underground dungeon, have your eyes gouged from their sockets, and be subjected to unimaginable pain every hour, on the hour, for the rest of your long, miserable life.”
What do you suppose would be going through the young woman’s mind at a time like this? I imagine that would change the way she feels about the man considerably. She might have previously accepted Mr. Right’s proposal because of her love for him, but is there much chance of that now? Surely not. If she takes him seriously, she’ll undoubtedly marry him, but not as much for love as out of genuine terror at the alternative.
Is this God’s way of doing things? Does God want His people to turn to Him out of fear that they will be tortured otherwise? Where is the love in that? If everyone really believed in this doctrine, wouldn’t that properly tarnish their concept of the Savior? I would imagine some might even have a hard time calling Him “Savior” at all. How merciful can it be to create a never-ending torture pit for everyone and then save only a few from it?