So the fireballs in Jesus' eyes are not literal but the beast and the lake of fire are, right?

Answer 1

How about the beasts that come up out of the ground with the face of a man, mane of a lion and tails like a scorpion?
If we get to pick and choose, I want to see that one in action.

Answer 2

The picture of Christ is the book of Revelation is symbolic as are the Lake of Fire and the Beast. But you can get a sense of what is implied when you consider those symbols. The Beast is probably a man doomed to destruction who is a son of Satan and not of God. The Lake of Fire represents destruction and torment and eternal separation from God. Jesus' eyes that blaze like fire could represent His coming wrath and judgment on unrepentant, unbelieving sinners along with his divine nature and power.

Answer 3

Fireballs? oh boy....
God is described as "a consuming fire",
and its this fire that will cleanse the earth of all that is wicked. What folks misinterpret in Scripture for terrible tribulation, nuclear war, etc.. is simply Gods consuming fire that will burn away all of the evil elements, and only that which is good will remain unaffected
by it. The "beast" is a name given to Satan, but is really the system satan sets up in the end times - it will be a multi-headed political system run by satan himself, who will be pretending to be Jesus Christ.
The lake of fire is a one-time deal at the end of a 1000 yr period of teaching that commences when the true Christ returns.
No continual, eternal torture. Just a "turning to ashes from within" - quick, easy, gone.
Then the lake of fire will be done away with.
There are lots of symbology used for teaching purposes, in Scripture.
These three things you mention are literal.

Answer 4

If you read the description of Jesus in Revelation 1, it states that his eyes are LIKE burning fires. In the English language, the word "like" can be used to indicate a analogue between two objects. "Like" indicate that the the comparison is not literal.

When reading about the beast and the lake of fire, there is no "like" or other words to indicate an analogue, so there is no reason in the text not to take them literally.

Answer 5

The Bible tells us that God is an all-consuming fire so why wouldn't the fireballs in Jesus' eyes be literal. He does not have the same body as man.

Answer 6

Of course. Fireballs in someone's eyes would be illogical. Fire can only be safely contained in a lake.

Answer 7

Yes, this is what John saw, this is how Christ chose him to see Himself. There is a reason.
Notice that each church addressed by Christ was, in their letter, told about a certain part of the way He appeared to John. Dig into this...you'll find it.

And, about the other, yes. The beast is Satan though.

Answer 8

"Holy" texts are a smörgåsbord which even the most literal believer filters and interprets to suit themselves. If these things were unambiguous and self-evident Christians would not have divided, name-called and made war on each other on account of these texts. but of course these texts are as unambiguous as a side-show fortune-teller and a New York Post horoscope, but believers are so desperate for the false sense of security their unmerited beliefs provide that they will strain at gnats and swallow camels.

Answer 9

Christians get to pick and choose which bits are "literal" and which are not.

Part of the beauty of lying to oneself.

Answer 10

Oh my gawd, you've just put some very frightening and disturbing images of fireball226 and Jesus into my head. Curse you, Sho-Nuff!